• Announcements

    • Zapata

      Abbreviated rules   07/28/2017

      Underdawg did an excellent job of explaining the rules.  Here's the simplified version: Don't insinuate Pedo.  Warning and or timeout for a first offense.  PermaFlick for any subsequent offenses Don't out members.  See above for penalties.  Caveat:  if you have ever used your own real name or personal information here on the forums since, like, ever - it doesn't count and you are fair game. If you see spam posts, report it to the mods.  We do not hang out in every thread 24/7 If you see any of the above, report it to the mods by hitting the Report button in the offending post.   We do not take action for foul language, off-subject content, or abusive behavior unless it escalates to persistent stalking.  There may be times that we might warn someone or flick someone for something particularly egregious.  There is no standard, we will know it when we see it.  If you continually report things that do not fall into rules #1 or 2 above, you may very well get a timeout yourself for annoying the Mods with repeated whining.  Use your best judgement. Warnings, timeouts, suspensions and flicks are arbitrary and capricious.  Deal with it.  Welcome to anarchy.   If you are a newbie, there are unwritten rules to adhere to.  They will be explained to you soon enough.  
Sign in to follow this  
Dog

Why the Left Can’t Let Go of Racism

Recommended Posts

8 hours ago, phillysailor said:

Not sure it's just gaining equality I'd be arguing is worth more of my tax dollars. But why do you think your freedoms are restricted by enlarging opportunities for others? There was that argument that slavery was an expression of the freedom of one group to subjugate another group to their domination, and restricting that right was violating the freedom of whites. I'm not there at all. I'm saying I'd give up some of my money to protect the nation against the greater costs of subjugating minorities and the poor to learned helplessness.

I actually think that income inequality, climate change and voting reform (gerrymandering, equal access to voting booths) are existential threats to America. ISIS is a sideshow, racial issues are symptoms. 

I appreciate the reply.

After I had posted, I actually was reflecting on how some religious republicans actually use religion to achieve a similar purpose.  Donate money or go to hell.  There's an old saying that locks are to keep honest people honest.  People do need some prodding to do what they know they should do.  That's probably the inherent weakness in the "freedom above all" model.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, frenchie said:

No, my discomfort doesn't lie anywhere in the article.  It's on-par with stuff I see every day.

My discomfort lies in the fact that Guy, of all people, thinks it's good. 

 

 

I totally whiffed :)  My bad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Simple questions relating to the OP and discussions of this sort @Dog

Many  of us have heard or read statements similar or identical to the following:

It's about time we got that nigger Muslim out of the White House

The questions:

1. In the most recent US Presidential election, for which political party do you believe those who make such statements have cast their votes? 

2. Is it fair to say the Republican Party is currently attracting the people who would make  the bolded statement? 

3. Is it fair to say the Democratic party has  recently acted in a manner that would drive out people inclined to make such a statement ?

4. Is it fair to say the Republican Party has been attracting racists and because of that fact has a PR problem? 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Gouvernail said:

Simple questions relating to the OP and discussions of this sort @Dog

Many  of us have heard or read statements similar or identical to the following:

It's about time we got that nigger Muslim out of the White House

The questions:

1. In the most recent US Presidential election, for which political party do you believe those who make such statements have cast their votes? 

2. Is it fair to say the Republican Party is currently attracting the people who would make  the bolded statement? 

3. Is it fair to say the Democratic party has  recently acted in a manner that would drive out people inclined to make such a statement ?

4. Is it fair to say the Republican Party has been attracting racists and because of that fact has a PR problem? 

 

 

The OP only references politics tangentially, it was not a political commentary but a social commentary. The writer was discussing how liberalism attracts whites because it purports to offer  absolution from racism and historic wrongs. Steele believes people are attracted to liberalism because they want to think of themselves as good. I know that there is at least some truth to that because at one point in my life I was one of them. To the extent that he's right it's a self interested attraction and there's nothing noble about it. It's a marketing strategy that relies on racism and why he contends that the left "can't let go of racism". 

The belief that liberalism is morally superior to conservatism is on full display here and implied in your own post. It's why we see so many baseless references to right wingers as "greedy" or "racist" and why so few remain.  In reality there is no moral distinction between left and right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Dog said:

The belief that liberalism is morally superior to conservatism is on full display here and implied in your own post. It's why we see so many baseless references to right wingers as "greedy" or "racist" and why so few remain.  In reality there is no moral distinction between left and right.

Oh but there is!

Right = Me me more for me and fuck the rest of you.

Left = Us us and fuck those greedy individuals who only care about themselves.

Those definitions apply to people, your political parties are all controlled by the same greedy cunts so people don't have a say in anything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, random said:

Oh but there is!

Right = Me me more for me and fuck the rest of you.

Left = Us us and fuck those greedy individuals who only care about themselves.

QED

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Dog said:

QED

You took the trouble to delete from my quote;

"Those definitions apply to people, your political parties are all controlled by the same greedy cunts so people don't have a say in anything. "

So I took the trouble to replace it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, random said:

Oh but there is!

Right = Me me more for me and fuck the rest of you.

Left = Us us and fuck those greedy individuals who only care about themselves.

Those definitions apply to people, your political parties are all controlled by the same greedy cunts so people don't have a say in anything.

Are you really trying to prove that dog was correct or did you just fuck up?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Those on the right believe that they shouldn't have to carry those that don't contribute.

those on the left believe it is there right to to not contribute because those on the right should carry them. 

Us centrists think you are both cunts.

we own the moral high ground. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dog said:

The OP only references politics tangentially, it was not a political commentary but a social commentary. The writer was discussing how liberalism attracts whites because it purports to offer  absolution from racism and historic wrongs. Steele believes people are attracted to liberalism because they want to think of themselves as good. I know that there is at least some truth to that because at one point in my life I was one of them. To the extent that he's right it's a self interested attraction and there's nothing noble about it. It's a marketing strategy that relies on racism and why he contends that the left "can't let go of racism". 

The belief that liberalism is morally superior to conservatism is on full display here and implied in your own post. It's why we see so many baseless references to right wingers as "greedy" or "racist" and why so few remain.  In reality there is no moral distinction between left and right.

You're ignorant as fuck aren't you?

"waah some white guy who thinks like i do made words for me!"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, TPG said:

You're ignorant as fuck aren't you?

"waah some white guy who thinks like i do made words for me!"

Steele is a black man.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Dog said:

Steele is a black man.

Oh, him, that just makes it much better!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder if it was the Left that banned Tom Sawyer because that character hung-out with a  black man?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, random said:

I wonder if it was the Left that banned Tom Sawyer because that character hung-out with a  black man?

It was Huckleberry Finn and not so much because he hung out but because the two characters actually spoke to each other in the language of the time.  Can't have that.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, cmilliken said:

It was Huckleberry Finn and not so much because he hung out but because the two characters actually spoke to each other in the language of the time.  Can't have that.

 

I read about that.  Sounds like a distraction.

I was listening to the radio on the way to sailing today.  Trip to the southern states of the US where the journalist said that many are still seething that a black man was president of their country.  I made the post because one of those interviewed was a women making a living out of selling banned books.  She said that many southern whites objected to the books because it had white boys making friends with blacks.  After hearing that, the claims that they are now out of favour because they use the word 'Nigger' is fucking bullshit.

Have you heard any rap music lately?  There appears to be a competition on how many times they can say that in 3.5 mins.  It has not been banned.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, random said:

  After hearing that, the claims that they are now out of favour because they use the word 'Nigger' is fucking bullshit.

Have you heard any rap music lately?  There appears to be a competition on how many times they can say that in 3.5 mins.  It has not been banned.

 

Culturally appropriate much?  You better check your privileged with that kinda speculation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, random said:

I read about that.  Sounds like a distraction.

I was listening to the radio on the way to sailing today.  Trip to the southern states of the US where the journalist said that many are still seething that a black man was president of their country.  I made the post because one of those interviewed was a women making a living out of selling banned books.  She said that many southern whites objected to the books because it had white boys making friends with blacks.  After hearing that, the claims that they are now out of favour because they use the word 'Nigger' is fucking bullshit.

Have you heard any rap music lately?  There appears to be a competition on how many times they can say that in 3.5 mins.  It has not been banned.

Some schools and libraries have banned Huck Finn because it's not PC. There is no national ban, at least not yet. The assault on Huck Finn is as stupid as removing confederate monuments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

" After hearing that, the claims that they are now out of favour because they use the word 'Nigger' is fucking bullshit."

Some years ago, I got dumped into teaching a "reading" class (not my certified area) in an inner city  middle school and tried to use Autobiography of Malcolm X as a reading source.  Despite the topic, which I thought would engage them, the use of the word nigger was so distracting that I had to drop the project.  My guess is that the book would be a lot easier to use as a teaching tool without the distraction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, learningJ24 said:

" After hearing that, the claims that they are now out of favour because they use the word 'Nigger' is fucking bullshit."

Some years ago, I got dumped into teaching a "reading" class (not my certified area) in an inner city  middle school and tried to use Autobiography of Malcolm X as a reading source.  Despite the topic, which I thought would engage them, the use of the word nigger was so distracting that I had to drop the project.  My guess is that the book would be a lot easier to use as a teaching tool without the distraction.

So why was that?  Have a think ... could it mean that the word is so inflammatory because racism is still rampant?  Like Basil Faulty "don't talk about the war" to Germans?

I think that is the case.  If we were all over it, everyone would ba capable of discussion using those terms and learning from them.  But we are not and that is a telling status assessment of where we are.

Teaching without the distraction, would be teaching without addressing the issue at hand, a whitewash of history.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/1/2017 at 9:19 PM, frenchie said:

No, my discomfort doesn't lie anywhere in the article.  It's on-par with stuff I see every day.

My discomfort lies in the fact that Guy, of all people, thinks it's good. 

 

Took a break for a while - realized that if I was getting pissed off by what some anonymous wanks on an internet site were saying, that I was taking their comments more seriously than I should.  

Here's the part of the article that I like and agree with:  
"

Discrimination Is Not the Biggest Problem for Minorities

In addition to failing to unify the nation, the president’s leadership philosophy has also failed to solve the underlying problems supposedly caused by discrimination. This is due to his failure to understand two critical truths: 1) Unequal outcomes do not constitute proof of discrimination. Thus policies attempting to produce equal results between groups through eliminating discrimination will accomplish nothing when the unequal outcomes are not caused by discrimination in the first place, and 2) While actual discrimination exists, most of the ills minorities face in today’s America are not caused by discrimination, but rather by factors such as complete family breakdown engendered by the welfare state and reduced employment prospects due to globalization, illegal immigration, and automation. So again, policies to remedy discrimination will do nothing to solve problems that are not caused by discrimination in the first place.. " 

If you disagree with this paragraph, I'm willing to hear ya out.  I don't think that the author provided much substance for his criticisms of Pres Obama - but, I do think that the attitudes he described aren't at all far from reality.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, A guy in the Chesapeake said:

Took a break for a while - realized that if I was getting pissed off by what some anonymous wanks on an internet site were saying, that I was taking their comments more seriously than I should.  

Well that's fair enough.  You have been getting a ridiculous amount of stupid nonsense of late.

Quote

Here's the part of the article that I like and agree with:  
"

Discrimination Is Not the Biggest Problem for Minorities

In addition to failing to unify the nation, the president’s leadership philosophy has also failed to solve the underlying problems supposedly caused by discrimination. This is due to his failure to understand two critical truths: 1) Unequal outcomes do not constitute proof of discrimination. Thus policies attempting to produce equal results between groups through eliminating discrimination will accomplish nothing when the unequal outcomes are not caused by discrimination in the first place, and 2) While actual discrimination exists, most of the ills minorities face in today’s America are not caused by discrimination, but rather by factors such as complete family breakdown engendered by the welfare state and reduced employment prospects due to globalization, illegal immigration, and automation. So again, policies to remedy discrimination will do nothing to solve problems that are not caused by discrimination in the first place.. " 

If you disagree with this paragraph, I'm willing to hear ya out.  I don't think that the author provided much substance for his criticisms of Pres Obama - but, I do think that the attitudes he described aren't at all far from reality.  

I thought it was a poorly thought out hatchet job.  It's strawman after strawman after strawman... and that paragraph is no exception. 

Is there any evidence provided for this notion that Obama pursued equality of outcomes, as opposed to equality of opportunity?  Do you have any examples of Obama espousing equality of outcome?  'Cause I'm pretty damn sure he always made a point of differentiating equality of opportunity from equality of outcome. 

Example:

" Now, the premise that we’re all created equal is the opening line in the American story.  And while we don’t promise equal outcomes, we have strived to deliver equal opportunity -- the idea that success doesn’t depend on being born into wealth or privilege, it depends on effort and merit.  And with every chapter we’ve added to that story, we’ve worked hard to put those words into practice." 

https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2013/12/04/remarks-president-economic-mobility

 

As for the other point  -

 

"And then, if we're honest with ourselves, we'll admit that during the course of 50 years, there were times when some of us, claiming to push for change, lost our way. The anguish of assassinations set off self-defeating riots.

Legitimate grievances against police brutality tipped into excuse- making for criminal behavior. Racial politics could cut both ways as the transformative message of unity and brotherhood was drowned out by the language of recrimination. And what had once been a call for equality of opportunity, the chance for all Americans to work hard and get ahead was too often framed as a mere desire for government support, as if we had no agency in our own liberation, as if poverty was an excuse for not raising your child and the bigotry of others was reason to give up on yourself. All of that history is how progress stalled. That's how hope was diverted. It's how our country remained divided."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/transcript-president-obamas-speech-on-the-50th-anniversary-of-the-march-on-washington/2013/08/28/0138e01e-0ffb-11e3-8cdd-bcdc09410972_story.html?utm_term=.c9ce4c8308bf

 

and:

"Of all the rocks upon which we build our lives, we are reminded today that family is the most important. And we are called to recognize and honor how critical every father is to that foundation. They are teachers and coaches. They are mentors and role models. They are examples of success and the men who constantly push us toward it.

But if we are honest with ourselves, we’ll admit that what too many fathers also are is missing--missing from too many lives and too many homes They have abandoned their responsibilities, acting like boys instead of men. And the foundations of our families are weaker because of it.

You and I know how true this is in the African-American community. And the foundations of our community are weaker because of it."

http://www.ontheissues.org/Change_Believe.htm

 

and:

"A lack of economic opportunity among black men, and the shame and frustration that came from not being able to provide for one’s family, contributed to the erosion of black families--a problem that welfare policies for many years may have worsened. And the lack of basic services in so many urban black neighborhoods--parks for kids to play in, police walking the beat, regular garbage pickup, building code enforcement--all helped create a cycle of violence, blight and neglect that continues to haunt us."

http://www.ontheissues.org/Change_Believe.htm

 

and:

" If we’re serious about reclaiming that dream, we have to do more in our own lives, our own families, and our own communities. That starts with providing the guidance our children need, turning off the TV, and putting away the video games; attending thos parent-teacher conferences, helping our children with their homework, and setting a good example. It starts with teaching our daughters to never allow images on television to tell them what they are worth; and teaching our sons to treat women with respect, and to realize that responsibility does not end at conception; that what makes them men is not the ability to have a child but the courage to raise one. It starts by being good neighbors and good citizens who are willing to volunteer in our communities--and to help our synagogues and churches and community centers feed the hungry and care for the elderly. We all have to do our part to lift up this country. "

http://www.ontheissues.org/2008_NAACP.htm

 

and also:

"Over the last few decades, huge advances in technology have allowed businesses to do more with less, and made it easier for them to set up shop and hire workers anywhere in the world.  And many of you know firsthand the painful disruptions this has caused for a lot of Americans.    

Factories where people thought they would retire suddenly picked up and went overseas, where the workers were cheaper.  Steel mills that needed 1,000 employees are now able to do the same work with 100, so that layoffs were too often permanent, not just a temporary part of the business cycle.  These changes didn’t just affect blue-collar workers.  If you were a bank teller or a phone operator or a travel agent, you saw many in your profession replaced by ATMs or the internet.  Today, even higher-skilled jobs like accountants and middle management can be outsourced to countries like China and India.  And if you’re someone whose job can be done cheaper by a computer or someone in another country, you don’t have a lot of leverage with your employer when it comes to asking for better wages and benefits – especially since fewer Americans today are part of a union."

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2011/12/obamas-income-inequality-speech/334664/

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, frenchie said:

Well that's fair enough.  You have been getting a ridiculous amount of stupid nonsense of late.

I thought it was a poorly thought out hatchet job.  It's strawman after strawman after strawman... and that paragraph is no exception. 

Is there any evidence provided for this notion that Obama pursued equality of outcomes, as opposed to equality of opportunity?  Do you have any examples of Obama espousing equality of outcome?  'Cause I'm pretty damn sure he always made a point of differentiating equality of opportunity from equality of outcome. 

Example:

" Now, the premise that we’re all created equal is the opening line in the American story.  And while we don’t promise equal outcomes, we have strived to deliver equal opportunity -- the idea that success doesn’t depend on being born into wealth or privilege, it depends on effort and merit.  And with every chapter we’ve added to that story, we’ve worked hard to put those words into practice." 

https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2013/12/04/remarks-president-economic-mobility

 

As for the other point  -

 

"And then, if we're honest with ourselves, we'll admit that during the course of 50 years, there were times when some of us, claiming to push for change, lost our way. The anguish of assassinations set off self-defeating riots.

Legitimate grievances against police brutality tipped into excuse- making for criminal behavior. Racial politics could cut both ways as the transformative message of unity and brotherhood was drowned out by the language of recrimination. And what had once been a call for equality of opportunity, the chance for all Americans to work hard and get ahead was too often framed as a mere desire for government support, as if we had no agency in our own liberation, as if poverty was an excuse for not raising your child and the bigotry of others was reason to give up on yourself. All of that history is how progress stalled. That's how hope was diverted. It's how our country remained divided."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/transcript-president-obamas-speech-on-the-50th-anniversary-of-the-march-on-washington/2013/08/28/0138e01e-0ffb-11e3-8cdd-bcdc09410972_story.html?utm_term=.c9ce4c8308bf

 

and:

"Of all the rocks upon which we build our lives, we are reminded today that family is the most important. And we are called to recognize and honor how critical every father is to that foundation. They are teachers and coaches. They are mentors and role models. They are examples of success and the men who constantly push us toward it.

But if we are honest with ourselves, we’ll admit that what too many fathers also are is missing--missing from too many lives and too many homes They have abandoned their responsibilities, acting like boys instead of men. And the foundations of our families are weaker because of it.

You and I know how true this is in the African-American community. And the foundations of our community are weaker because of it."

http://www.ontheissues.org/Change_Believe.htm

 

and:

"A lack of economic opportunity among black men, and the shame and frustration that came from not being able to provide for one’s family, contributed to the erosion of black families--a problem that welfare policies for many years may have worsened. And the lack of basic services in so many urban black neighborhoods--parks for kids to play in, police walking the beat, regular garbage pickup, building code enforcement--all helped create a cycle of violence, blight and neglect that continues to haunt us."

http://www.ontheissues.org/Change_Believe.htm

 

and:

" If we’re serious about reclaiming that dream, we have to do more in our own lives, our own families, and our own communities. That starts with providing the guidance our children need, turning off the TV, and putting away the video games; attending thos parent-teacher conferences, helping our children with their homework, and setting a good example. It starts with teaching our daughters to never allow images on television to tell them what they are worth; and teaching our sons to treat women with respect, and to realize that responsibility does not end at conception; that what makes them men is not the ability to have a child but the courage to raise one. It starts by being good neighbors and good citizens who are willing to volunteer in our communities--and to help our synagogues and churches and community centers feed the hungry and care for the elderly. We all have to do our part to lift up this country. "

http://www.ontheissues.org/2008_NAACP.htm

 

and also:

"Over the last few decades, huge advances in technology have allowed businesses to do more with less, and made it easier for them to set up shop and hire workers anywhere in the world.  And many of you know firsthand the painful disruptions this has caused for a lot of Americans.    

Factories where people thought they would retire suddenly picked up and went overseas, where the workers were cheaper.  Steel mills that needed 1,000 employees are now able to do the same work with 100, so that layoffs were too often permanent, not just a temporary part of the business cycle.  These changes didn’t just affect blue-collar workers.  If you were a bank teller or a phone operator or a travel agent, you saw many in your profession replaced by ATMs or the internet.  Today, even higher-skilled jobs like accountants and middle management can be outsourced to countries like China and India.  And if you’re someone whose job can be done cheaper by a computer or someone in another country, you don’t have a lot of leverage with your employer when it comes to asking for better wages and benefits – especially since fewer Americans today are part of a union."

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2011/12/obamas-income-inequality-speech/334664/

 

It sounds like you agree with his observations on the state of racial division, the larger cause of "minority issues", but, disagree w/his assigning blame to Pres Obama for the decline?   I must admit ignoring most of the Obama-blaming slant of the article, while agreeing with his situational observations.  I would agree that most of his Obama bashing was baseless.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I posted a topic about this but now believe it is more appropriate to this thread.

 

Calremont-boy-injury-via-Facebook-800x43

" A group of white teens attacked an 8-year-old biracial boy and hanged him by a noose, his family says, and police in Claremont, NH are refusing to release information in the case.

The Root’s Angela Helm reported on Sunday that an 8-year-old biracial boy was hanged by a rope around his neck by other juveniles in what his grandmother said was a racist attack.

As the child was being flown by a medevac to Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, his mother Cassandra Merlin posted to Facebook, “So my son is being flown to Dartmouth after a 14 year old kid decided to hang him from a tree. I don’t care if this was a so called accident or not. My son almost died because of some little sh*t teenage kids.”

NH1.com said that Claremont Police Chief Mark Chase refused to comment on the case, but said the department is investigating the incident, which took place on Aug. 28. He said that because the perpetrators are juveniles, he is prevented from discussing the case publicly.

He said that unlike the adult judicial system, which is aimed at punishment, the juvenile justice system is designed to correct and rehabilitate aberrant behavior.

“These people need to be protected,” Chase said. “Mistakes they make as a young child should not have to follow them for the rest of their life.”

“Notice how he called these predators ‘young children,'” wrote Helm, “infantilizing the white teens. Conversely, teens like Trayvon Martin are made out to be hulking, menacing adults. Chief Chase seems to be centering the perpetrators feelings and futures, all but forgetting about the trauma of a little boy who had his so-called friends hang him from a tree to the point where he had to be medevaced to a hospital.”

According to the victim’s grandmother Lorrie Slattery, he was playing with a group of children and teens when they began to taunt him with racist epithets and throw sticks and rocks at him.

Someone stood on a picnic table and the group wrapped a rope from a nearby tire swing around the boy’s throat, then kicked him off the table.

The victim swung back and forth three times before he was able to free himself. None of the teens came to his aid.

NH1.com said Chief Chase refused to state whether the crime was racially motivated, although accounts of the incident make it clear the attack was based on the child’s race.

Slattery told Valley News it’s clear to her that the attack was racist because her grandson has been targeted for racist abuse from the same group of children and teens in the past.

Her grandson is recovering now and preparing for his first day of school on Tuesday.

Helm wrote, “Welcome to Donald Trump’s America. Say what you want, but when the U.S. president defends avowed white supremacists, one can’t be surprised when bullying takes on a decidedly racist tone as it did with an 8-year-old biracial boy who was hung from a tree in the year 2017. The climate has been set.”

Since Donald Trump’s election, hate crimes have spiked dramatically in the U.S., particularly in the area of hate-related murders.

http://www.rawstory.com/2017/09/new-hampshire-police-refuse-to-discuss-apparent-lynching-of-8-year-old-biracial-boy/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, A guy in the Chesapeake said:

It sounds like you agree with his observations on the state of racial division, the larger cause of "minority issues", but, disagree w/his assigning blame to Pres Obama for the decline?   I must admit ignoring most of the Obama-blaming slant of the article, while agreeing with his situational observations.  I would agree that most of his Obama bashing was baseless.  

Okay.  That makes A LOT more sense. 

And no, I don't agree with his observation.  I don't think we're more divided than we were before Obama.  Having a black man in the white house brought all kinds of stuff to the surface, for everybody, on both sides.  I think we're just talking about it more openly.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, A guy in the Chesapeake said:

Took a break for a while - realized that if I was getting pissed off by what some anonymous wanks on an internet site were saying, that I was taking their comments more seriously than I should.  

Here's the part of the article that I like and agree with:  
"

Discrimination Is Not the Biggest Problem for Minorities

In addition to failing to unify the nation, the president’s leadership philosophy has also failed to solve the underlying problems supposedly caused by discrimination. This is due to his failure to understand two critical truths: 1) Unequal outcomes do not constitute proof of discrimination. Thus policies attempting to produce equal results between groups through eliminating discrimination will accomplish nothing when the unequal outcomes are not caused by discrimination in the first place, and 2) While actual discrimination exists, most of the ills minorities face in today’s America are not caused by discrimination, but rather by factors such as complete family breakdown engendered by the welfare state and reduced employment prospects due to globalization, illegal immigration, and automation. So again, policies to remedy discrimination will do nothing to solve problems that are not caused by discrimination in the first place.. " 

If you disagree with this paragraph, I'm willing to hear ya out.  I don't think that the author provided much substance for his criticisms of Pres Obama - but, I do think that the attitudes he described aren't at all far from reality.  

sure, I see the Right orthodoxy of the "complete family breakdown engendered by the welfare state" but disagree with it's core premise. The welfare state is there to catch them after the failure. It doesn't cause the failure. 

The logic above is fatally flawed. On the one hand, denying causation that unequal results comes from discrimination (which I agree with BTW)  but then CLAIMING causation where the safety net "causes" the social breakdown.

 

About the only thing I DO agree with in that snippet is that the ongoing demographic shift, off-shoring and tech change is battering the poor disportionately.  Since being poor is correlated very strongly with race, it sure seems like Race is a factor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, badlatitude said:

I posted a topic about this but now believe it is more appropriate to this thread.

 

Calremont-boy-injury-via-Facebook-800x43

" A group of white teens attacked an 8-year-old biracial boy and hanged him by a noose, his family says, and police in Claremont, NH are refusing to release information in the case.

The Root’s Angela Helm reported on Sunday that an 8-year-old biracial boy was hanged by a rope around his neck by other juveniles in what his grandmother said was a racist attack.

As the child was being flown by a medevac to Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, his mother Cassandra Merlin posted to Facebook, “So my son is being flown to Dartmouth after a 14 year old kid decided to hang him from a tree. I don’t care if this was a so called accident or not. My son almost died because of some little sh*t teenage kids.”

NH1.com said that Claremont Police Chief Mark Chase refused to comment on the case, but said the department is investigating the incident, which took place on Aug. 28. He said that because the perpetrators are juveniles, he is prevented from discussing the case publicly.

He said that unlike the adult judicial system, which is aimed at punishment, the juvenile justice system is designed to correct and rehabilitate aberrant behavior.

“These people need to be protected,” Chase said. “Mistakes they make as a young child should not have to follow them for the rest of their life.”

“Notice how he called these predators ‘young children,'” wrote Helm, “infantilizing the white teens. Conversely, teens like Trayvon Martin are made out to be hulking, menacing adults. Chief Chase seems to be centering the perpetrators feelings and futures, all but forgetting about the trauma of a little boy who had his so-called friends hang him from a tree to the point where he had to be medevaced to a hospital.”

According to the victim’s grandmother Lorrie Slattery, he was playing with a group of children and teens when they began to taunt him with racist epithets and throw sticks and rocks at him.

Someone stood on a picnic table and the group wrapped a rope from a nearby tire swing around the boy’s throat, then kicked him off the table.

The victim swung back and forth three times before he was able to free himself. None of the teens came to his aid.

NH1.com said Chief Chase refused to state whether the crime was racially motivated, although accounts of the incident make it clear the attack was based on the child’s race.

Slattery told Valley News it’s clear to her that the attack was racist because her grandson has been targeted for racist abuse from the same group of children and teens in the past.

Her grandson is recovering now and preparing for his first day of school on Tuesday.

Helm wrote, “Welcome to Donald Trump’s America. Say what you want, but when the U.S. president defends avowed white supremacists, one can’t be surprised when bullying takes on a decidedly racist tone as it did with an 8-year-old biracial boy who was hung from a tree in the year 2017. The climate has been set.”

Since Donald Trump’s election, hate crimes have spiked dramatically in the U.S., particularly in the area of hate-related murders.

http://www.rawstory.com/2017/09/new-hampshire-police-refuse-to-discuss-apparent-lynching-of-8-year-old-biracial-boy/

stop it, we know discrimination is no longer a problem, FOX said so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Raz'r said:

sure, I see the Right orthodoxy of the "complete family breakdown engendered by the welfare state" but disagree with it's core premise. The welfare state is there to catch them after the failure. It doesn't cause the failure. 

The logic above is fatally flawed. On the one hand, denying causation that unequal results comes from discrimination (which I agree with BTW)  but then CLAIMING causation where the safety net "causes" the social breakdown.

 

About the only thing I DO agree with in that snippet is that the ongoing demographic shift, off-shoring and tech change is battering the poor disportionately.  Since being poor is correlated very strongly with race, it sure seems like Race is a factor.

Well, you expect logic?

"Laws against discrimination have been ineffective, so we should remove them"

"Discrimination is not the major problem" wait I thought laws against discrimination were ineffective, considering that when those laws were initiated Jim Crow was the almost universal practice in the US (yes in the North too) then if discrimination is not a major problem then....... what happened, exactly?

"Family breakdown engendered by the welfare state" well first off the welfare state has no existed since the mid 1990s. Maybe the news is slow getting out. And this is not a logical reason to overturn laws against discrimination, either.

The cat is really out of the bag when they say that affirmative action is prejudice against whites.

-DSK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/11/2017 at 3:24 PM, Raz'r said:

stop it, we know discrimination is no longer a problem, FOX said so.

I can't help but wonder what they will call it when a group of teen age black boys decides to hang an 8-year-old white boy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That kid having a rope tied around his neck is a travesty - and I hope that the little shits that did that to him are punished as harshly as law can permit.  There is absolutely no excuse for such behavior - and that HAD to come from their parents, who should be held culpable as well.  

That aside - how would affirmative action quotas have prevented those ignorant racist shits from hurting that kid in such a manner?   What law would have prevented the hate and disregard for the value of that kid's life and well being?  In all sincerity - If there's a new law that someone thinks would make a difference - I'm very interested in hearing it.  My disagreement with such things isn't an indication of wanting to see anyone held back  - it's a different thought about the best way to enable individual success. 

IMHO, A large part of where we are now is a result of a focus on trying to legislate attitudes, while doing too little to address the real causal factors that create the divide and exacerbate the economic plight of so many in the minority community.   It's not "every white guy hates non-whites", as much as so many of you want to assert that it is, and THAT was the main point that I took from the article poops shared. 

I think that we'd all be better served in discussing how to institute a shift in societal attitudes than in continuing to do what we've been doing since 1965.   Are the collective you satisfied with the current state of things? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, A guy in the Chesapeake said:

That kid having a rope tied around his neck is a travesty - and I hope that the little shits that did that to him are punished as harshly as law can permit.  There is absolutely no excuse for such behavior - and that HAD to come from their parents, who should be held culpable as well.  

That aside - how would affirmative action quotas have prevented those ignorant racist shits from hurting that kid in such a manner?   What law would have prevented the hate and disregard for the value of that kid's life and well being?  In all sincerity - If there's a new law that someone thinks would make a difference - I'm very interested in hearing it.  My disagreement with such things isn't an indication of wanting to see anyone held back  - it's a different thought about the best way to enable individual success. 

IMHO, A large part of where we are now is a result of a focus on trying to legislate attitudes, while doing too little to address the real causal factors that create the divide and exacerbate the economic plight of so many in the minority community.   It's not "every white guy hates non-whites", as much as so many of you want to assert that it is, and THAT was the main point that I took from the article poops shared. 

I think that we'd all be better served in discussing how to institute a shift in societal attitudes than in continuing to do what we've been doing since 1965.   Are the collective you satisfied with the current state of things? 

I think you should refresh yourself in the meaning of travesty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, A guy in the Chesapeake said:

I'd like to blame autocorrect - but, the truth is that I was multi-tasking and typed that instead of "Tragedy" - appreciate the correction, BL. 

A natural mistake, it remains a travesty of justice.. of sorts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, A guy in the Chesapeake said:

That kid having a rope tied around his neck is a travesty - and I hope that the little shits that did that to him are punished as harshly as law can permit.  There is absolutely no excuse for such behavior - and that HAD to come from their parents, who should be held culpable as well.  

That aside - how would affirmative action quotas have prevented those ignorant racist shits from hurting that kid in such a manner?   What law would have prevented the hate and disregard for the value of that kid's life and well being?  In all sincerity - If there's a new law that someone thinks would make a difference - I'm very interested in hearing it.  My disagreement with such things isn't an indication of wanting to see anyone held back  - it's a different thought about the best way to enable individual success. 

IMHO, A large part of where we are now is a result of a focus on trying to legislate attitudes, while doing too little to address the real causal factors that create the divide and exacerbate the economic plight of so many in the minority community.   It's not "every white guy hates non-whites", as much as so many of you want to assert that it is, and THAT was the main point that I took from the article poops shared. 

I think that we'd all be better served in discussing how to institute a shift in societal attitudes than in continuing to do what we've been doing since 1965.   Are the collective you satisfied with the current state of things? 

Ah yes.... a guy who wants to remove laws against discriminaton by race calling for a shift of attitudes.... now that is refreshing.

Please provide some data where somebody said "every white guy hates non-whites" that's really one of the sorryest straw men I've ever seen put up.

Why don't we remove the laws against robbery and murder too, 1- they're not working because we still have robbery and murder and 2- what we NEED to focus on is making sure everybody has a positive attitude about respecting others.

To answer your question, I am NOT satisfied with the current state of things and am in no way willing to sit idly by and watched them get pushed back toward Jim Crow.

-DSK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Steam Flyer said:

Ah yes.... a guy who wants to remove laws against discriminaton by race calling for a shift of attitudes.... now that is refreshing.

Please provide some data where somebody said "every white guy hates non-whites" that's really one of the sorryest straw men I've ever seen put up.

Why don't we remove the laws against robbery and murder too, 1- they're not working because we still have robbery and murder and 2- what we NEED to focus on is making sure everybody has a positive attitude about respecting others.

To answer your question, I am NOT satisfied with the current state of things and am in no way willing to sit idly by and watched them get pushed back toward Jim Crow.

-DSK

Once again w/the mis-characterization, deflection and tangents, while ignoring the main points.  It's what ya do when your only basis for your position is emotion, What laws against discrimination did I say that I wanted to remove?  Quotas aren't anti-discrimination laws, they are a poor measure that tries and fails to establish that an entity's hiring/acceptance/admissions decisions are compliant with anti-discrimination laws.  

What quota/new law would address and correct the hatefulness that resulted in that poor kid being lynched? 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, A guy in the Chesapeake said:

Once again w/the mis-characterization, deflection and tangents, while ignoring the main points.  It's what ya do when your only basis for your position is emotion, What laws against discrimination did I say that I wanted to remove?  Quotas aren't anti-discrimination laws, they are a poor measure that tries and fails to establish that an entity's hiring/acceptance/admissions decisions are compliant with anti-discrimination laws.  

What quota/new law would address and correct the hatefulness that resulted in that poor kid being lynched? 

 

You keep saying this, why can't you accept the facts about your own posts? Possibly because you are in denial about your own inner attitudes?

I quoted you directly, as I always do.

Frankly I don't know of any laws that will prevent crimes. I certainly don't know of any laws that will change attitudes. The "conservative" attitude that I grew up with is that the state should not attempt to legislate morality.

The incident you're referring to is truly deplorable but it isn't really a lynching, although it certainly seems to refer to / inspired by lynching. I think it is a hate crime and should be prosecuted as such.

FWIW if a group of blacks lynched a white, it is fully possible that such an incident would also be a hate crime under the intent of those laws, IMHO

-DSK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A_Guy has asked a question which is impossible to answer. He will therefore be pleased by all responses. 

Hate and racism are legal. Acting on them with a feeling of impunity or justification is a result of attitudes learned at home, at church, in schools, on the job or playground. There is no quota or law that can address all these areas of influence, or the myriad sources I've neglected to mention.

Now, on a different subject. How would you, A_guy, improve the racial and socioeconomic diversity at schools of higher learning? How would you reduce the impact racial profiling has on the streets and in the courts?

Please reply quickly, because we value your input and don't want you to let us all down. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Steam Flyer said:

You keep saying this, why can't you accept the facts about your own posts? Possibly because you are in denial about your own inner attitudes?

I quoted you directly, as I always do.

Frankly I don't know of any laws that will prevent crimes. I certainly don't know of any laws that will change attitudes. The "conservative" attitude that I grew up with is that the state should not attempt to legislate morality.

The incident you're referring to is truly deplorable but it isn't really a lynching, although it certainly seems to refer to / inspired by lynching. I think it is a hate crime and should be prosecuted as such.

FWIW if a group of blacks lynched a white, it is fully possible that such an incident would also be a hate crime under the intent of those laws, IMHO

-DSK

Aside from your accusation of me being in denial, I can agree with all this - you're making my point for me:  if we can't legislate attitudes, and we agree that attitudes need to change, then shouldn't we be talking about the best ways to make that happen on all sides?  I contend that much of the basis for racist attitudes is simply ignorance, and a side effect of that ignorance is the need to blame some external thing for our perceived plight rather than seeking the awareness of how what *we* did contributed to our being in that condition.  This ignorance exists on all sides of the discussion - those who hate minorities, those minorities who hate everyone who's not.  

How do you fix it?   The first step is to stigmatize anti-social behavior. You can't expect a change in behavior unless there's some perceived personal benefit to that change.   The benefit in this case wold be acceptance - think about MADD and the campaign to eradicate drunk driving.  When I was a kid?  DUI was something that everyone "knew was wrong", but, it wasn't "really" wrong, and unless nobody'd gotten hurt?  Most folks looked the other way.  It wasn't until the MADD campaign spun up that the idea of DUI being grave irresponsibility came into acceptance.   We need to re-establish the expectation of appropriate behaviors, and discouraging inappropriate behaviors, not thru more laws and incarceration, but, by social pressure.   This isn't going to be quick, it's not going to fix anything by itself, but, it will, I think contribute greatly to kids coming up avoiding the behaviors that are certain to impede their ability to take advantage of whatever opportunities they decide to pursue. 

The second is to start looking more at behaviors instead of racial demographics in our attempt to understand and correct the factors that are causal to economic desperation and the divides that are exacerbated by that desperation.  I don't believe that the things we're discussing are caused by racism - though when present, it can indeed exacerbate those things.  There are a plenty of poor white people doing the same wrong things that happen in the minority urban neighborhoods - with quite similar results.  I think that focusing on the behaviors and the ramifications of those behaviors rather than focusing on the demographic disparities would have a better chance at correcting those behaviors.  

We need to quit using cops and courts as revenue generation facilities - I'd love to see a community service option to fines in civil/non-violent criminal cases.  That approach has the additional benefits of stigmatizing the behavior that got them on the detail in the 1st place, while eliminating the de-criminalizing being unable to afford the fines. 


 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, A guy in the Chesapeake said:

Aside from your accusation of me being in denial, I can agree with all this - you're making my point for me:  if we can't legislate attitudes, and we agree that attitudes need to change, then shouldn't we be talking about the best ways to make that happen on all sides?

Why I believe that the state should make laws regarding objective facts and real-world actions. I do not believe in having the government become the thought police.

How do you fix it?   The first step is to stigmatize anti-social behavior. You can't expect a change in behavior unless there's some perceived personal benefit to that change.   The benefit in this case wold be acceptance - think about MADD and the campaign to eradicate drunk driving.  When I was a kid?  DUI was something that everyone "knew was wrong", but, it wasn't "really" wrong, and unless nobody'd gotten hurt?  Most folks looked the other way.  It wasn't until the MADD campaign spun up that the idea of DUI being grave irresponsibility came into acceptance.   We need to re-establish the expectation of appropriate behaviors, and discouraging inappropriate behaviors, not thru more laws and incarceration, but, by social pressure.   This isn't going to be quick, it's not going to fix anything by itself, but, it will, I think contribute greatly to kids coming up avoiding the behaviors that are certain to impede their ability to take advantage of whatever opportunities they decide to pursue. 

So the government should start a "Mothers Against Racism" campaign? Why? Wouldn't your attitude about that pretty much be the same as your attitude about Obama and Black Lives Matter and Antifa?

OTOH the government can and should punish landlords who refuse to rent to minorites, or businesses who refuse to hire blacks, or publicly-funded universities who practice similar discrimination.

The second is to start looking more at behaviors instead of racial demographics in our attempt to understand and correct the factors that are causal to economic desperation and the divides that are exacerbated by that desperation.  I don't believe that the things we're discussing are caused by racism - though when present, it can indeed exacerbate those things.  There are a plenty of poor white people doing the same wrong things that happen in the minority urban neighborhoods - with quite similar results.  I think that focusing on the behaviors and the ramifications of those behaviors rather than focusing on the demographic disparities would have a better chance at correcting those behaviors.  

We need to quit using cops and courts as revenue generation facilities - I'd love to see a community service option to fines in civil/non-violent criminal cases.  

That is already being done in many cases.

That approach has the additional benefits of stigmatizing the behavior that got them on the detail in the 1st place, while eliminating the de-criminalizing being unable to afford the fines. 


 

In the past, you have said that you want to remove anti-discrimination laws. These have worked relatively well at punishing racism; however they have not done as well at changing attitudes. Witness the many people who have said things like "I wasn't prejudiced until Obama."

IMHO the best medicine against racism is full desegregation of schools. When kids grow up mixed in with kids who are white, pink, brown, yellow, rich, poor, skinny, whatever, then they see & experience every day life with those "other" kinds of people and are less likely to demonize them. If I were Maximum Overlord I would leave all the affirmative action & anti-discrimination laws in place, because crime should be prosecuted and punished; and to reduce the underlying attitudes I would ensure all schools for kids up to 22 were not segregated on any basis whatever.

51 minutes ago, phillysailor said:

A_Guy has asked a question which is impossible to answer. He will therefore be pleased by all responses. 

Hate and racism are legal. Acting on them with a feeling of impunity or justification is a result of attitudes learned at home, at church, in schools, on the job or playground. There is no quota or law that can address all these areas of influence, or the myriad sources I've neglected to mention.

Now, on a different subject. How would you, A_guy, improve the racial and socioeconomic diversity at schools of higher learning? How would you reduce the impact racial profiling has on the streets and in the courts?

Please reply quickly, because we value your input and don't want you to let us all down. 

Good answer. When I'm elected Complete and Total Boss of Everything, I will put you in charge. :rolleyes:

-DSK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, phillysailor said:

A_Guy has asked a question which is impossible to answer. He will therefore be pleased by all responses. 

Hate and racism are legal. Acting on them with a feeling of impunity or justification is a result of attitudes learned at home, at church, in schools, on the job or playground. There is no quota or law that can address all these areas of influence, or the myriad sources I've neglected to mention.

Now, on a different subject. How would you, A_guy, improve the racial and socioeconomic diversity at schools of higher learning? How would you reduce the impact racial profiling has on the streets and in the courts?

Please reply quickly, because we value your input and don't want you to let us all down. 

Yup - you can only make ACTING on that hate/racism illegal. Those laws are well established and from my personal observations, widely accepted. 

To your question - (sorry if I didn't reply quickly enough, I know you're hovering over the keyboard with your reply already formed) - I don't know that diversity in and of itself ought to be an ultimate goal.  Ensuring that there are no barriers that would prevent it? Yeah man - absolutely. I think that the larger goal should be to ensure that the students who will comprise the bodies of those institutions of higher learning are properly prepared, and that if we're successful in that, that the diversity issue will take care if itself.  The economics of higher education are separate discussion - I'm not rich, but, I'm probably never going to "retire" due to the educational debt we've taken on to help our kids. It seems like there's a lot of financial assistance for higher education if you're dirt poor, but, if you own a house?  yeah - forget about it. 

Reducing the impact of racial profiling in the streets?  I think I touched on that in my response to Steamer - I don't know that profiling as a tool in policing is necessarily a bad thing, unless the profile is misused as a pretext for initiating a stop.  If a 250lb Samoan punches someone at the bus stop, the cops oughta be looking for 250lb Samoans, and not 5', 135lb asians w/gang tats.   In the courts?  I think I touched on that a little in my reply to Steamers. I don't know that it's a racial thing in the courts as much as it is an economic thing - and I don't think that being poor ought to be a crime, or to compound the results of being caught committing a crime.  There are several people I know in the small southern Indiana town where I went to HS who got caught in the same net:  Get popped for something fairly minor, can't pay the fine, get stopped again later and there's an arrest warrant, which adds to the penalties and they end up in jail, job lost (if they had one), and their future prospects decidedly dimmed.   

If we can't discuss behaviors because of a group's racial demographics?  Then we've created a "more equal" group, ala animal farm.  Likewise, ignoring instances of discriminatory behavior in a desire to pretend everything is OK fosters hate and resentment that are compounded by the lack of acknowledgement.  We should tolerate neither thing. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/13/2017 at 1:00 PM, A guy in the Chesapeake said:

Yup - you can only make ACTING on that hate/racism illegal. Those laws are well established and from my personal observations, widely accepted. 

There are racial disparities in how races are treated in the courts. Witness the NH Sheriff who stated that those white boys 'needed to be protected' from the lasting stigma of having done something stupid as a kid. WTF? If they were black kids who targeted whites, that sheriff would sing a different tune, apply the laws differently. It is the LEGAL application of hate and racism that is a scourge in America. Because it is the powerful, the elites, the government which is applying racism, the tools used to rectify the problem may not resemble those used to change societal beliefs, such as DUI. You limit the creativeness of a representative democracy to find effective solutions if you say all tools used must be of a particular type or nature. You can say that Affirmative Action has not succeeded in eradicating racism, but you cannot say it hasn't made a difference to many people. It's hard to prove a negative, and it's hard to prove what would have happened without laws used to rectify structural inequality.

 

If we can't discuss behaviors because of a group's racial demographics?  Then we've created a "more equal" group, ala animal farm.  Likewise, ignoring instances of discriminatory behavior in a desire to pretend everything is OK fosters hate and resentment that are compounded by the lack of acknowledgement.  We should tolerate neither thing.  

You start your conversation from the perspective of someone who looks around and sees no inequality. For your point to make sense, there can be no current systemic bias against blacks. Statistics and studies have shown you are incorrect. Ignoring the current state of affairs, saying it is not flawed, "fosters hate and resentment that are compounded by the lack of acknowledgement.  We should tolerate neither thing."

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm pretty sure that violence against black folks started long before affirmative action. I am less certain that resentment of affirmative action is The cause of violence. It may well be A factor. 

Drag the focus back a bit and look at who benefits from poor white folks and poor black folks resenting, distrusting and hating each other, and I think you will get to the heart of the problem faster. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this