DISQUS

The District Weekly: PAT BUCHANAN FED UP WITH UNGRATEFUL NEGROES | The District Weekly

  • rdm24 · 1 year ago
    When I read "introduced to Christian salvation," I threw up a little.
  • Rachel Powers · 1 year ago
    OK, "enjoy" was a very creepy way for me to put it, I'll admit. Nonetheless:

    "Is Barack aware that black-on-white rapes are 100 times more common than the reverse?"

    Also, rich whites are very seldom the object of economic crime (theft, for example). The poor tend to rob from the poor.
  • lbresident · 1 year ago
    "Hear that Long Beach? Blacks are hustlers! Criminals! Underachievers! Stubbornly insistent on remaining poor! Rapists! Ungrateful to boot!"

    You come to the above conclusion but I didn't read that in any of the quotes from Pat B.

    Are his actual comments you quoted from him false? Did he make innacurate statements?
  • Dwight K Snider · 1 year ago
    Pat Buchanan is a smuck!
  • Rachel Powers · 1 year ago
    Lbresident:

    I think that you need to read his quotes more carefully.

    As for the *accuracy* of the statements: I can't speak directly to that, and I wasn't even attempting to comment on their validity. I found his *choice* of statistics interesting, however. Also his illustrative examples: He mentions Jena and Duke, and goes all the way back to the 80's to scrape the bottom of the barrel for Tawana Brawley, the result being a lot of sloppy, undisciplined implications: why Obama is being cast as the new Al Sharpton is beyond me. And I can come up with a few counter-examples: how about that black guy who got tied to the back of a truck by a couple of rednecks and dragged until his head came of and large chunks of flesh were scattered all over the road? If I can come up with 3 more examples, then have I proven that white America has declared a war on black America?

    I could quote you a *pile* of statistics about Jews and money and banking and political influence, not to mention media "infiltration," and they might all be accurate. But their selection would say more about my wacky opinions than they could ever say about reality.

    Pat Buchanan is a ridiculously sloppy thinker, too lazy to state a concrete thesis, and just adept enough at doing a google search to poke around for a few targeted statistics, tossed together and left to create a dozen different irresponsible impressions.
  • lbresident · 1 year ago
    He may be all of those things. I don't know much about him. My point was that I didn't come to the conclusion you did simply from the quotes you referenced. Seemed like he was implying given all the opportunities all people have in America today it's innapropriate to paint an entire segment of society as a victim.
  • Rachel Powers · 1 year ago
    Pat Buchanan is an ultra-conservative who has been running for president and putting his foot in his mouth for decades. His last scandal: he was denounced by everyone on the Right for arguing that the US never should have entered WWII. I don't know much about his reasoning, but I can guess: if you aren't going to commit to kicking Hitler's ass, then your only remaining options are appeasement and containment, both of which had been attempted by numerous world leaders for almost a decade, with little success. (You'd think he would have known that, but as I said, he's a pretty sloppy scholar.) Anyway, he was accused of being a closet anti-semite by other conservatives for his argument. I don't know about the anti-semite bit--although arguing that Hitler should be left to do as he pleases in Germany is odd.....then again, when the US did enter the war it certainly wasn't to save Jews.

    If Buchanan wanted to make the point that this is the land of opportunity, and that victimhood is an invalid claim, then he should have just said that. And he could have given examples: Colin Powell is always good, as is Oprah Winfrey. Barack Obama is another excellent example. He could have pointed out that in the very first post-civil war congressional election this nation got its first black congressman. He could have pointed out the racial balance of Bush's cabinet. But instead, in arguing that opportunity abounds in this country, he threw a snit about how there are more black criminals, and felt it necessary to remind everyone that black men enjoy raping white women more than white men enjoy raping black women. Never mind that most rapes are committed by white men, against white women.

    Another thing that makes me crazy about Buchanan's essay: to attempt to mitigate the enslavement--and rape, and torture, and murder--of millions by pointing out that they were repaid with "Christian salvation" is repulsive. How dare he? I'd like to point out that they could have been exposed to Christianity without the chains and whips and dislocation, thank you very much.

    I could say a lot more...
  • Andrew Williams · 1 year ago
    I'm no fan of Buchanan--I agree with you he's a sloppy thinker--but I don't see where he says that black men enjoy raping white women more than white men enjoy raping black women. As to the actual statistic he quoted about blacks targeting whites for assaults: that's because they know where the money is--with rich white folks. If you're a criminal, that's just common sense.
  • Kelson · 1 year ago
    I suppose those pesky Native Americans were all pretty grateful to have been given the "Good News" as well. Thank god we haven't been lucky enough to see a Native American Presidential candidate, or else we'd be hearing about how tired white folk are about making things so easy on "them".
  • lbresident · 1 year ago
    Rachel I see your point. His position could be communicated more effectively with better messaging. Your paragraph above is a good example.
  • Andrew Williams · 1 year ago
    Duh, Rachel, I *know* that. But on average white folks make more than black folks, no matter how hard they work (or don't).That's the disparity I was talking about.
  • Rachel Powers · 1 year ago
    Duh, Andy, I knew that too. So I'm not quite sure why you disagree with me. Look at burglary rates across zip codes. Poor neighborhoods get hit far more than wealthy, or even middle class neighborhoods. That's all I was saying: the poor are targeted for crime, for whatever reason, far more than the well-off. That's why I responded to your statement: "about blacks targeting whites for assaults: that’s because they know where the money is–with rich white folks. If you’re a criminal, that’s just common sense."
  • lbresident · 1 year ago
    White people do not make more than black people when apples to apples are compared. That's a broad statement. Are you suggesting that is for every job. Waiters, union electricians, CEOs, athletes? It really annoys me to hear those type of victim statements.

    Poor neighborhoods have higher crime rates because the neighborhoods have more criminals.
  • Rachel Powers · 1 year ago
    Christ, nobody actually reads what I write.

    "White people do not make more than black people when apples to apples are compared."

    Look, all that I said is that whites make more than blacks. Just as men make more than women. I didn't claim that there weren't other factors at work--education levels, time taken off to rear children--I just stated a fact. A fact that is true.

    That said, one could easily claim that the disparity holds up when comparing apples to apples. For example:

    http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p_mla_apa_resea...

    "That’s a broad statement. "

    yes, it is. Because that particular point was (a) a given, and (b) totally ancillary to the discussion at hand, so I didn't feel the need to pull out the caveats, charts and graphs.

    "Are you suggesting that is for every job. Waiters, union electricians, CEOs, athletes?"

    no, not at all. Do you think that I am stupid? I would say that in any field where pay levels/scales are set, there will be parity. Minimum wage for a black man is the same as minimum wage for a white man. Any field which is staffed by union workers is going to see parity. But in fields where salaries for specific job titles are not set in stone--ie, any job where the hire can negotiate terms ("how big is my signing bonus? Will you pay for my relocation? Microsoft is offering me $$$, can you guys at Google do any better?")--will, for the most part, illustrate the wage disparities that you can find documented anywhere, including government websites.

    "It really annoys me to hear those type of victim statements. "

    Not really sure what this means. As a white overly-educated middle-class female I don't feel particularly victimized. So I'm certainly not making these claims from a place of feeling disadvantaged. Still, in this world, some people get screwed. It can be big ("God, why did I have to be born in Darfur?") or not so big ("Did they give that promotion to that guy because he's black? I've been here twice as long."). It is a proven fact that tall people make more money than short people, and attractive people make more money than unattractive people. No one is asking you to fork over your hard-earned tax dollars to pay for bone-lengthening surgeries or nose jobs. And sure, in this country there is no disadvantage that hasn't been overcome by many, many people. Still, there are disadvantages to begin with. Why this is such an infuriating truth to some people, I'll never understand.

    "Poor neighborhoods have higher crime rates because the neighborhoods have more criminals."

    Whatever. I never claimed to know the reason. All I said was that rich neighborhoods are obviously not the draw that they are assumed to be. That's it.

    You can also look here:

    http://www.businessweek.com/1999/99_48/b3657067...

    the title is "The Racial Wage Gap is Shrinking"--which is awesome news. But there is a gap.

    also:

    http://www.epi.org/content.cfm/webfeatures_snap...
  • danmaloney · 3 weeks ago
    The problem with 80% of the black americans raping white women,robbing,bullying WHITE CHILDREN,shooting each other and stupid WHITES...is the NEGROES themselves.
    If the blacks really knew how many sophisticated firearms that Whites have and know how to use..they would cease their activities and surrender to the AUTHORITIES.