Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
BillB's racism credibility
32 views
Skip to first unread message
Robert Ladd
Apr 13, 2013, 9:57:51 AM4/13/13
to
I wonder how many others reading this group question how much real world
knowledge BillB has in the area of racism, especially the kind of racism
that he speaks of in the United States.
I'm pretty sure there are few, if any, that won't acknowledge that Bill is a
master of Google, Yahoo, Bing or whatever search engine he uses. Bill can
come across as quite competent in just about any subject by finding sources
for any of his positions. In my opinion that unfortunately doesn't
necessarily mean that Bill understands the subject.
When it comes to racism in America, BillB has shown an incredible lack of
knowledge in the area. Not that I would expect someone growing up and
living their entire life in lily-white Canada to be knowledgeable in the
USA's racial situations, but I only remark "incredible lack of knowledge"
due to his constant implication that he is an expert in the area.
Reading about racism and the statistics associated with it is somewhat like
a college graduate in almost any field of endeavor coming out of school.
They may have a base of knowledge to build upon, but until they experience
it in real life they don't really understand their subject.
Bill quite often cover's his lack of knowledge in USA's racism by creating
troll questions to "prove" his superiority. To the observant, this ploy is
quite thin. Replying to his troll threads only gives him the credibility he
desires. I'm not asking anyone to not reply to Bill's trolls, but I would
encourage all to think about his motivation for posting them.
Robert Ladd
knowledge BillB has in the area of racism, especially the kind of racism
that he speaks of in the United States.
I'm pretty sure there are few, if any, that won't acknowledge that Bill is a
master of Google, Yahoo, Bing or whatever search engine he uses. Bill can
come across as quite competent in just about any subject by finding sources
for any of his positions. In my opinion that unfortunately doesn't
necessarily mean that Bill understands the subject.
When it comes to racism in America, BillB has shown an incredible lack of
knowledge in the area. Not that I would expect someone growing up and
living their entire life in lily-white Canada to be knowledgeable in the
USA's racial situations, but I only remark "incredible lack of knowledge"
due to his constant implication that he is an expert in the area.
Reading about racism and the statistics associated with it is somewhat like
a college graduate in almost any field of endeavor coming out of school.
They may have a base of knowledge to build upon, but until they experience
it in real life they don't really understand their subject.
Bill quite often cover's his lack of knowledge in USA's racism by creating
troll questions to "prove" his superiority. To the observant, this ploy is
quite thin. Replying to his troll threads only gives him the credibility he
desires. I'm not asking anyone to not reply to Bill's trolls, but I would
encourage all to think about his motivation for posting them.
Robert Ladd
da pickle
Apr 13, 2013, 10:08:36 AM4/13/13
to
soon to begin to analyze the effect of just two new reports and it is
the weekend, but the demonstration of exactly how a "crap flood" hurts
the group was attempted and it may have a more lasting effect.
Your observations will also help. The denial of response has almost
completely shut down Beldin. I believe he had one "weak" squeak since
the last report ... it would be nice if he would return to the group,
perhaps with a different name ... and be an addition instead of his past
subtraction. He could do it.
BillB, after all the hysterics and his four serious screw ups, has
requested help from Paul ... that sort of admission of the need for help
cannot be anything but helpful to the group. Paul has been absent and
one hopes he made his trip to Vegas and is having a blast and will
return to his duties later.
Replies to trolls do not help anyone but the respondent, who cannot help
himself from time to time, and gives the troll-baiter the attention that
he desires so much.
Thanks for your comment ... it has been a while since you posted. This
is an interesting group, even if it would be better without the trolls.
There is a school of thought that it would die without the trolls ...
and there is a lot of support for that line of thinking.
Again, thanks for showing up.
brattt
Apr 13, 2013, 10:20:42 AM4/13/13
to
he had visited the Statue of Liberty
(not those exact words, but words to that effect)
---------------------------------------------------------
On Apr 11 2013 3:52 PM, VegasJerry wrote:
Bill Cosby is in the KKK
On Mar 20 2013 2:31 PM, VegasJerry wrote:
Try checking out North Dakota's new law. Women can't even get birth
control pulls.
Jerry wrote on: /Dec 18 2012
I'm willing to allow police to be the only people allowed to be armed, and
to give them the power to stop and search anybody at any time, and to get
warrants to search any home. I want the penalty of owning or carrying a
weapon to be life in prison. And I don't want any further discussion on
that. The time has come.
VegasJerry
Apr 13, 2013, 10:27:06 AM4/13/13
to
On Saturday, April 13, 2013 6:57:51 AM UTC-7, Robert Ladd wrote:
.
.> I wonder how many others reading this group question how much real world
> I'm pretty sure there are few, if any, that won't acknowledge that Bill is a
> master of Google, Yahoo, Bing or whatever search engine he uses.
One need not be a Master Searcher to find what he has.
> Bill can come across as quite competent in just about any subject
> by finding sources for any of his positions.
I'm sure he appreciates your accolades.
> In my opinion that unfortunately doesn't necessarily
> mean that Bill understands the subject.
Nor that he doesn’t does it?
> When it comes to racism in America, BillB has shown an incredible
> lack of knowledge in the area.
Really? Where? You've just admitted he's found what he's needed, and that he's rather good at it.
> Not that I would expect someone growing up and
> living their entire life in lily-white Canada to be knowledgeable in the
> USA's racial situations, but I only remark "incredible lack of knowledge"
> due to his constant implication that he is an expert in the area.
Seem 'incredible lack of knowledge' is in your corner; from "lily-white Canada," to previously admitting he's an expert in searching and finding virtually everything he already suspected. Where is your argument to the contrary?
> Reading about racism and the statistics associated with it is somewhat like
> a college graduate in almost any field of endeavor coming out of school.
> They may have a base of knowledge to build upon, but until they experience
> it in real life they don't really understand their subject.
Ah! You feel one must have actually lived in, experienced, and bleed, in order to understand? How desperate and wrong you are (other than this is a need you feel you must have). Other than the usual simple example of asking you if you've ever eaten shit in order to legitimately state it might not taste good; the very fact Bill is right about our racism shows you wrong. Unless - in your opinion - our country hasn't any racism…..
> Bill quite often cover's his lack of knowledge
Oops! This you're going to have to show…. Sorry…
> in USA's racism by creating troll questions to "prove" his superiority.
You feel his reason for posting is to "prove" his superiority? Or ss this your admitting he's superior? You're in the "I can't answer Bill's questions because the answer will embarrass me so I'll dodge by calling the questions trolling," group. Heh. All this is simply you, too, dancing at the end of Bill's string…..
> To the observant, this ploy is quite thin.
Not to those of us that answered his questions. So is it a ploy or a troll? Show your work.
> Replying to his troll threads only gives him the credibility he desires.
See? You had to dodge to "troll" again. Heh, Bill does, in fact, deserve the credibility you just given him.
> I'm not asking anyone to not reply to Bill's trolls,
Heh, and again….
> but I would encourage all to think about his motivation for posting them.
As compared to your motivation for posting this?
You're still at the end of his string…..
"I am a racist. I hate niggers and spics and slants. I should have included kikes and lesbos too."
-- Stupid Susan (SS) (11-21-12)
>
> Robert Ladd
.
.> I wonder how many others reading this group question how much real world
> knowledge BillB has in the area of racism, especially the kind of racism
> that he speaks of in the United States.
I don't question it. He's proven it. What is your question?
> that he speaks of in the United States.
> I'm pretty sure there are few, if any, that won't acknowledge that Bill is a
> master of Google, Yahoo, Bing or whatever search engine he uses.
> Bill can come across as quite competent in just about any subject
> by finding sources for any of his positions.
> In my opinion that unfortunately doesn't necessarily
> mean that Bill understands the subject.
> When it comes to racism in America, BillB has shown an incredible
> lack of knowledge in the area.
> Not that I would expect someone growing up and
> living their entire life in lily-white Canada to be knowledgeable in the
> USA's racial situations, but I only remark "incredible lack of knowledge"
> due to his constant implication that he is an expert in the area.
> Reading about racism and the statistics associated with it is somewhat like
> a college graduate in almost any field of endeavor coming out of school.
> They may have a base of knowledge to build upon, but until they experience
> it in real life they don't really understand their subject.
> Bill quite often cover's his lack of knowledge
> in USA's racism by creating troll questions to "prove" his superiority.
> To the observant, this ploy is quite thin.
> Replying to his troll threads only gives him the credibility he desires.
> I'm not asking anyone to not reply to Bill's trolls,
> but I would encourage all to think about his motivation for posting them.
You're still at the end of his string…..
"I am a racist. I hate niggers and spics and slants. I should have included kikes and lesbos too."
-- Stupid Susan (SS) (11-21-12)
>
> Robert Ladd
VegasJerry
Apr 13, 2013, 10:32:32 AM4/13/13
to
On Saturday, April 13, 2013 7:08:36 AM UTC-7, da pickle wrote:
.
.> I will post the Crap Report later this morning. It is, of course, too
Only Susan has answered:
.
.> I will post the Crap Report later this morning. It is, of course, too
> soon to begin to analyze the effect of just two new reports and it is
> the weekend, but the demonstration of exactly how a "crap flood" hurts
> the group was attempted and it may have a more lasting effect.
See, Robert? Now what? Is it a ploy or a troll or a "crap flood?" A rose, by any other name. You still can't answer to what it was: Questions you simply cannot bring yourself to answer.
> the weekend, but the demonstration of exactly how a "crap flood" hurts
> the group was attempted and it may have a more lasting effect.
Only Susan has answered:
VegasJerry
Apr 13, 2013, 10:36:57 AM4/13/13
to
On Saturday, April 13, 2013 7:20:42 AM UTC-7, brattt wrote:
> On Apr 13 2013 8:57 AM, Robert Ladd wrote:
> He said he knew more than I do about everyday racism in the USofA because
> he had visited the Statue of Liberty
>
> (not those exact words, but words to that effect)
Heh. You making up words and positions (lying) again, Just like you lying in your tag line:
> On Apr 13 2013 8:57 AM, Robert Ladd wrote:
> He said he knew more than I do about everyday racism in the USofA because
> he had visited the Statue of Liberty
>
> (not those exact words, but words to that effect)
> On Apr 11 2013 3:52 PM, VegasJerry wrote:
> Bill Cosby is in the KKK
Jerry 'n Vegas
Oh, and you're an admitted racist, too:
TruthSeeker
Apr 13, 2013, 11:22:10 AM4/13/13
to
On 13/4/13 7:57 AM, Robert Ladd wrote:
...
--
TruthSeeker
"On the Internet, no one knows you're a dog."
...
> Bill quite often cover's his lack of knowledge in USA's racism by creating
> troll questions to "prove" his superiority. To the observant, this ploy is
> quite thin. Replying to his troll threads only gives him the credibility he
> desires. I'm not asking anyone to not reply to Bill's trolls, but I would
> encourage all to think about his motivation for posting them.
I'll "take the pledge." I intend to do my part.
> troll questions to "prove" his superiority. To the observant, this ploy is
> quite thin. Replying to his troll threads only gives him the credibility he
> desires. I'm not asking anyone to not reply to Bill's trolls, but I would
> encourage all to think about his motivation for posting them.
--
TruthSeeker
"On the Internet, no one knows you're a dog."
BillB
Apr 13, 2013, 11:29:35 AM4/13/13
to
On 13/04/2013 7:20 AM, brattt wrote:
> He said he knew more than I do about everyday racism in the USofA because
> he had visited the Statue of Liberty
>
> (not those exact words, but words to that effect)
Sorry, I've never said anything remotely resembling that. You just made
> He said he knew more than I do about everyday racism in the USofA because
> he had visited the Statue of Liberty
>
> (not those exact words, but words to that effect)
it up out of thin air.
BillB
Apr 13, 2013, 11:45:19 AM4/13/13
to
I am slightly flattered you believe the googling part. No Robert, you're
wrong. I really am a walking encyclopedia. If I check google or
whatever, it's *usually* just to try to get specific numbers or facts
exactly right as often as possible. I assure you I have no special
googling skills. In fact, I've often told myself I really need to set
aside a few hours to teach myself about all the many special features
google has to offer that I've seen, but know nothing about. I'm really
quite lazy that way.
If you ever decide you'd like to discuss the multi-trillion dollar
racism problem, or any other issue under the sun, without personal
attacks or other ad hominem nonsense, I'm here for you. You say there
are things I don't understand, but you are mysteriously unwilling to say
exactly what they are. You're not alone in that phenomena. I have seen
this pattern repeated over and over and over with others as well, almost
always of a certain political persuasion. Being the natural born skeptic
I am, I'm afraid I have to believe "you've got nothing."
Can you show me all the examples of you accusing people you agree with
of "trolling?"
BillB
Apr 13, 2013, 11:57:24 AM4/13/13
to
On 13/04/2013 8:22 AM, TruthSeeker wrote:
> On 13/4/13 7:57 AM, Robert Ladd wrote:
> ...
>> Bill quite often cover's his lack of knowledge in USA's racism by creating
>> troll questions to "prove" his superiority. To the observant, this ploy is
>> quite thin. Replying to his troll threads only gives him the credibility he
>> desires. I'm not asking anyone to not reply to Bill's trolls, but I would
>> encourage all to think about his motivation for posting them.
>
> I'll "take the pledge." I intend to do my part.
Look, folks! It's junior high school all over again!
> On 13/4/13 7:57 AM, Robert Ladd wrote:
> ...
>> Bill quite often cover's his lack of knowledge in USA's racism by creating
>> troll questions to "prove" his superiority. To the observant, this ploy is
>> quite thin. Replying to his troll threads only gives him the credibility he
>> desires. I'm not asking anyone to not reply to Bill's trolls, but I would
>> encourage all to think about his motivation for posting them.
>
> I'll "take the pledge." I intend to do my part.
brattt
Apr 13, 2013, 11:53:17 AM4/13/13
to
Nov 9 2012, 7:50 pm BillB
I very much doubt you have been to more states than I have. It really
bothers you that I know a lot more about your country than you do, doesn't
it? I can tell.
brattt
Apr 13, 2013, 12:12:28 PM4/13/13
to
On Apr 13 2013 10:22 AM, TruthSeeker wrote:
> On 13/4/13 7:57 AM, Robert Ladd wrote:
> ....
> On 13/4/13 7:57 AM, Robert Ladd wrote:
> > Bill quite often cover's his lack of knowledge in USA's racism by creating
> > troll questions to "prove" his superiority. To the observant, this ploy
is
> > quite thin. Replying to his troll threads only gives him the credibility
he
> > desires. I'm not asking anyone to not reply to Bill's trolls, but I would
> > encourage all to think about his motivation for posting them.
>
> I'll "take the pledge." I intend to do my part.
ditto
> > troll questions to "prove" his superiority. To the observant, this ploy
is
> > quite thin. Replying to his troll threads only gives him the credibility
he
> > desires. I'm not asking anyone to not reply to Bill's trolls, but I would
> > encourage all to think about his motivation for posting them.
>
> I'll "take the pledge." I intend to do my part.
BillB
Apr 13, 2013, 12:13:53 PM4/13/13
to
On 13/04/2013 8:53 AM, brattt wrote:
> On Apr 13 2013 10:29 AM, BillB wrote:
>
>> On 13/04/2013 7:20 AM, brattt wrote:
>>
>>> He said he knew more than I do about everyday racism in the USofA because
>>> he had visited the Statue of Liberty
>>>
>>> (not those exact words, but words to that effect)
>>
>> Sorry, I've never said anything remotely resembling that. You just made
>> it up out of thin air.
>
> Your stated credentials -
>
> Nov 9 2012, 7:50 pm BillB
>
> I very much doubt you have been to more states than I have. It really
> bothers you that I know a lot more about your country than you do, doesn't
> it? I can tell.
Those were not "credentials" of any kind. You are lying again. It was
> On Apr 13 2013 10:29 AM, BillB wrote:
>
>> On 13/04/2013 7:20 AM, brattt wrote:
>>
>>> He said he knew more than I do about everyday racism in the USofA because
>>> he had visited the Statue of Liberty
>>>
>>> (not those exact words, but words to that effect)
>>
>> Sorry, I've never said anything remotely resembling that. You just made
>> it up out of thin air.
>
> Your stated credentials -
>
> Nov 9 2012, 7:50 pm BillB
>
> I very much doubt you have been to more states than I have. It really
> bothers you that I know a lot more about your country than you do, doesn't
> it? I can tell.
simply a factual and natural response to you saying to me, "Have you
even been out of Vancouver? I very much doubt it."
None of that bears any resemblance whatsoever to what you claimed. If
you have to lie, you've got nothing.
I think I recall offering to bet you any amount you could scrounge up
that I could demolish you on any comprehensive, side-by-side closed book
exam on the combined subjects of US law, politics, geography, history,
literature, culture, pop culture, sports or any other US-related subject
you want to throw in there. Do you really think many people here would
bet good money on you? I don't, but if you can find any, I'll cover
their action too. That's what I meant about knowing a lot more about
your country than you do. Obviously, you know more about the specifics
of your dreary day-to-day existence in Dogpatch. Nobody is disputing that.
Travel A
Apr 13, 2013, 1:10:33 PM4/13/13
to
Re: OT: Give me a straight answer
Group: rec.gambling.poker
Date: Tue, Apr 9, 2013, 7:25am
From: Travel A <nin...@webtv.net>
Bill Vanek wrote:
"Wouldn't we need to also ask the voters if they are racist? It's only
fair. How else can we know?"
I wrote:
You'd be voting for a Constitutional amendement which is solely
race-based. You'd be restricting free citizens' pursuit of happiness and
freedom based on their race. It's a racist vote, no matter how much you
try to obfuscate the matter.
And to Pickel: what difference does it make which races are involved, or
a need in "naming the races"? It's unconstitutional to ban interracial
marriage between any combination of races. It's also morally
objectionable for any person who supports individual freedom.
Did you you have a problem with Jeremiah Johnson marrying an Indian
woman?
Racist should be defined as making the decision on the basis of race,
however. "Racist" isn't necessarily a "hate" situation; it can be a
throw-back view of an "elitist" attitude; as in an aristocratic "class"
or "caste" system.
But, whatever the personal motive of the voter, it's still a race-based
(making it a racist vote) and unconstitutional.
In America, all citizens are to be treated equally.
What if the majority-demogahpics changed, and Hispanic voters and other
"liberals" voted-in a constitutional amendment banning white- Christian
people from marrying outside of their race, and that they -had- to learn
Spanish as as second language?
Thomas More wasn't the first to say it when he said that he'd give the
Devil the benefit of the law to protect himself.
Group: rec.gambling.poker
Date: Tue, Apr 9, 2013, 7:25am
From: Travel A <nin...@webtv.net>
Bill Vanek wrote:
"Wouldn't we need to also ask the voters if they are racist? It's only
fair. How else can we know?"
I wrote:
You'd be voting for a Constitutional amendement which is solely
race-based. You'd be restricting free citizens' pursuit of happiness and
freedom based on their race. It's a racist vote, no matter how much you
try to obfuscate the matter.
And to Pickel: what difference does it make which races are involved, or
a need in "naming the races"? It's unconstitutional to ban interracial
marriage between any combination of races. It's also morally
objectionable for any person who supports individual freedom.
Did you you have a problem with Jeremiah Johnson marrying an Indian
woman?
Racist should be defined as making the decision on the basis of race,
however. "Racist" isn't necessarily a "hate" situation; it can be a
throw-back view of an "elitist" attitude; as in an aristocratic "class"
or "caste" system.
But, whatever the personal motive of the voter, it's still a race-based
(making it a racist vote) and unconstitutional.
In America, all citizens are to be treated equally.
What if the majority-demogahpics changed, and Hispanic voters and other
"liberals" voted-in a constitutional amendment banning white- Christian
people from marrying outside of their race, and that they -had- to learn
Spanish as as second language?
Thomas More wasn't the first to say it when he said that he'd give the
Devil the benefit of the law to protect himself.
Travel A
Apr 13, 2013, 1:17:48 PM4/13/13
to
Re: Give me a straight answer
Group: rec.gambling.poker
Date: Wed, Apr 10, 2013, 3:01pm
From: Travel A <nin...@webtv.net>
Also, no one said that the 40% "not to repeal" was okay. What everyone
is saying is that by not stating the final vote totals, it's lying and
totally misrepresentating.
Note well: even though 60% of those voters voted to repeal the existing
law banning interracial marriage, BillB wants to call those well-meaning
people racists, ANYWAY!
Proven: BillB will call innocent people who are against racism, racists,
because he so desperately wants to fabricate false-evidence-to support
for his appalling race-baiting.
BillB is like a 17th century witchhunter.
Travel A
Apr 13, 2013, 1:30:06 PM4/13/13
to
All that's needed to "settle" this is my two definitive posts, above.
It could have been just a three post thread instead of (as it's looking
to becoming) a five thousand posts thread.
BillB is a crazed race-baiter who willfully and gladly accuses the
innocent, and the rest of you can't admit that voting to ban interracial
marrige of American citizens is indeed racist, and directly counter to
the individual freedom principles on which this country was founded.
It could have been just a three post thread instead of (as it's looking
to becoming) a five thousand posts thread.
BillB is a crazed race-baiter who willfully and gladly accuses the
innocent, and the rest of you can't admit that voting to ban interracial
marrige of American citizens is indeed racist, and directly counter to
the individual freedom principles on which this country was founded.
O-PGManager
Apr 13, 2013, 11:35:57 PM4/13/13
to
On Apr 13 2013 9:57 AM, Robert Ladd wrote:
> When it comes to racism in America, BillB has shown an incredible lack of
> knowledge in the area. Not that I would expect someone growing up and
> living their entire life in lily-white Canada to be knowledgeable in the
> USA's racial situations, but I only remark "incredible lack of knowledge"
> due to his constant implication that he is an expert in the area.
This whole post is kind of implying that you are far more versed in the
> When it comes to racism in America, BillB has shown an incredible lack of
> knowledge in the area. Not that I would expect someone growing up and
> living their entire life in lily-white Canada to be knowledgeable in the
> USA's racial situations, but I only remark "incredible lack of knowledge"
> due to his constant implication that he is an expert in the area.
area. What makes that so? Can you supply some of your expertise to this?
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/04/13/officer-accused-of-having-trayvon-martin-target/2080989/
Opie G. Manager
Rec.Gambling.Poker
Assistant Newsgroup Coordinator Emeritus (2009-2011)
BillB
Apr 13, 2013, 11:53:03 PM4/13/13
to
On 13/04/2013 8:35 PM, O-PGManager wrote:
> On Apr 13 2013 9:57 AM, Robert Ladd wrote:
>
>> When it comes to racism in America, BillB has shown an incredible lack of
>> knowledge in the area. Not that I would expect someone growing up and
>> living their entire life in lily-white Canada to be knowledgeable in the
>> USA's racial situations, but I only remark "incredible lack of knowledge"
>> due to his constant implication that he is an expert in the area.
>
> This whole post is kind of implying that you are far more versed in the
> area. What makes that so? Can you supply some of your expertise to this?
>
> http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/04/13/officer-accused-of-having-trayvon-martin-target/2080989/
And it follows logically from Robert's "argument" that he would, in
> On Apr 13 2013 9:57 AM, Robert Ladd wrote:
>
>> When it comes to racism in America, BillB has shown an incredible lack of
>> knowledge in the area. Not that I would expect someone growing up and
>> living their entire life in lily-white Canada to be knowledgeable in the
>> USA's racial situations, but I only remark "incredible lack of knowledge"
>> due to his constant implication that he is an expert in the area.
>
> This whole post is kind of implying that you are far more versed in the
> area. What makes that so? Can you supply some of your expertise to this?
>
> http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/04/13/officer-accused-of-having-trayvon-martin-target/2080989/
turn, defer to the expertise of a clear consensus of black activists and
scholars who have actually LIVED and studied and experienced the racism
problem for decades, and carefully assessed the economic and cultural
consequences that stem therefrom. Their views would, of course, contrast
diametrically with Robert's, and agree with mine. So we're back to
square one: I'm right and he's wrong.
But, somehow, that won't matter. Let's face it, Robert, believes
whichever reality fits most nicely into his narrow, simplistic,
right-wing politics, and he'll stubbornly carry that concocted reality
with him to the grave. It has NOTHING to do with "on the ground
experience." Don't make me laugh.
Pepe Papon
Apr 14, 2013, 1:22:54 AM4/14/13
to
On Sat, 13 Apr 2013 06:57:51 -0700, "Robert Ladd" <rla...@cox.net>
wrote:
>I wonder how many others reading this group question how much real world
>knowledge BillB has in the area of racism, especially the kind of racism
>that he speaks of in the United States.
>
>I'm pretty sure there are few, if any, that won't acknowledge that Bill is a
>master of Google, Yahoo, Bing or whatever search engine he uses. Bill can
>come across as quite competent in just about any subject by finding sources
>for any of his positions. In my opinion that unfortunately doesn't
>necessarily mean that Bill understands the subject.
>
>When it comes to racism in America, BillB has shown an incredible lack of
>knowledge in the area. Not that I would expect someone growing up and
>living their entire life in lily-white Canada to be knowledgeable in the
>USA's racial situations, but I only remark "incredible lack of knowledge"
>due to his constant implication that he is an expert in the area.
>
>Reading about racism and the statistics associated with it is somewhat like
>a college graduate in almost any field of endeavor coming out of school.
>They may have a base of knowledge to build upon, but until they experience
>it in real life they don't really understand their subject.
I can't help but wonder how on-the ground expertise is relevant to the
facts Bill bas posted, such as the average wealth of blacks being only
5% of the average wealth of whites. If Bill were to spend a year in
the ghetto, would the average wealth of blacks increase at all
relative to whites?
--
Pepe Papon
wrote:
>I wonder how many others reading this group question how much real world
>knowledge BillB has in the area of racism, especially the kind of racism
>that he speaks of in the United States.
>
>I'm pretty sure there are few, if any, that won't acknowledge that Bill is a
>master of Google, Yahoo, Bing or whatever search engine he uses. Bill can
>come across as quite competent in just about any subject by finding sources
>for any of his positions. In my opinion that unfortunately doesn't
>necessarily mean that Bill understands the subject.
>
>When it comes to racism in America, BillB has shown an incredible lack of
>knowledge in the area. Not that I would expect someone growing up and
>living their entire life in lily-white Canada to be knowledgeable in the
>USA's racial situations, but I only remark "incredible lack of knowledge"
>due to his constant implication that he is an expert in the area.
>
>Reading about racism and the statistics associated with it is somewhat like
>a college graduate in almost any field of endeavor coming out of school.
>They may have a base of knowledge to build upon, but until they experience
>it in real life they don't really understand their subject.
facts Bill bas posted, such as the average wealth of blacks being only
5% of the average wealth of whites. If Bill were to spend a year in
the ghetto, would the average wealth of blacks increase at all
relative to whites?
--
Pepe Papon
Robert Ladd
Apr 14, 2013, 1:53:54 AM4/14/13
to
"BillB" <bo...@shaw1.ca> wrote in message news:kkbud7$tpk$1...@dont-email.me...
hold your side of the conversation. You are an arrogant, self-centered,
egotistical know-it-all that will not accept someone else's views, even if
they are from valid experience, if they are different from yours. I've seen
and experienced your tactics quite a few times. I've concluded you don't
necessarily want to be correct, you just want to win the argument. And your
relentless pursuit of winning causes you to dredge up statistics and cites
that back your position while ignoring those that refute your position.
I don't have the energy nor the inclination to pursue the backing of my
position from other sources like you do, and I don't have that much concern
in "winning" the conversation. To engage in a conversation with you is like
getting into a bar parking lot fight with someone I don't care to actually
fight with, but knowing if I have him down, and decide to not beat him
senseless, he will keep coming back every time I let him up. You can't
accept losing when you've been shown wrong, so you flood with statistics and
cites until you and your sycophants claim you really showed your opponent in
the debate.
There is, and always will be racism in the U.S. And, you and your moronic
followers can keep saying over and over that the right wing people on the
group deny there is a racial problem in America, but the truth of the matter
is that everyone sees it everyday and knows it exists. It exists and will
continue to exist for the reason that the same issue exists in almost every
country in the world, but it has a different name when the conflicting
groups have the same race, but they are of different religions, or are even
of the same religion and different cultural backgrounds. There are many
intolerant people in the world and they will find excuses to reject someone
they find different. That is human nature. While some people can rise above
the differences and accept a person for whom they are before finding out
what the person is really like, there are many times when that approach
fails.
You are a prime example of that failure. You profess to being a non-racist,
yet you consistently group all Republicans as if they think as one, and you
represent all Tea Party people as being alike. I've asked you on a few
occasions to explain to me how your grouping people who have some base
similar beliefs and calling them all racists is any different than saying
that all black people are lazy. You've ignored that request. It's how you
operate. You flood with statistics and cites to your side of a discussion
while ignoring answering a valid point when you're shown to be wrong.
Most people that don't respond to your polls or questions understand that in
most cases you don't really want to know what their opinion is, but you just
want to get them on record so that you can call them out as racists and then
overwhelming them with your statistical flooding, while all the time having
no clue as to what their opinions stem from.
No, I won't have a racism discussion with you, because you don't have the
real world experience to discuss it intelligently. All you have are
articles, cites, and statistics from people that are in many instances just
as ignorant of the differences in racial culture as you are.
Robert Ladd
Robert Ladd
Apr 14, 2013, 3:21:29 AM4/14/13
to
"O-PGManager" <ad6...@webnntp.invalid> wrote in message
news:tpkp3ax...@news.ezprovider.com...
> On Apr 13 2013 9:57 AM, Robert Ladd wrote:
>
>> When it comes to racism in America, BillB has shown an incredible lack of
>> knowledge in the area. Not that I would expect someone growing up and
>> living their entire life in lily-white Canada to be knowledgeable in the
>> USA's racial situations, but I only remark "incredible lack of knowledge"
>> due to his constant implication that he is an expert in the area.
>
> This whole post is kind of implying that you are far more versed in the
> area. What makes that so? Can you supply some of your expertise to this?
>
I grew up surrounded by black people. I shopped, rode buses, played with,
>
>> When it comes to racism in America, BillB has shown an incredible lack of
>> knowledge in the area. Not that I would expect someone growing up and
>> living their entire life in lily-white Canada to be knowledgeable in the
>> USA's racial situations, but I only remark "incredible lack of knowledge"
>> due to his constant implication that he is an expert in the area.
>
> This whole post is kind of implying that you are far more versed in the
> area. What makes that so? Can you supply some of your expertise to this?
>
and talked to black people every day. I went to a grade school that was 90%
black. On summer vacation days I swam in public pools that had very few
white faces. Many of the teachers I had were black.
I worked a few years in areas that were almost totally surrounded by black
people. I often walked to lunch to local restaurants through black
neighborhoods and ate at black owned businesses. I grew up talking and
dealing with black people, and I'm supposed to believe that BillB's
occasional encounter with his Ethiopian neighbor puts us on level ground
understanding racism?
He hasn't a clue, but being BillB, he'll take any insight from me that is
black-negative and turn it into painting me a racist. It is not worth the
effort dealing with his prolific posting energy and narrow-minded view to
defend my knowledge of what it was like living in that situation and dealing
with people that in BillB's opinion has only a skin pigment difference.
He has little understanding of the cultural differences and when he
occasionally acknowledges that those differences may exist, he attributes
them solely to white people's hate and racism without even considering that
the same irrational behavior come from black people too.
My guess is that he sees All in the Family's Archie Bunker as a realistic
white person, but sees The Jefferson's George Jefferson as a figment of some
Hollywood writer's imagination. George Jefferson can't be racist, he's
black.
Robert Ladd
Robert Ladd
Apr 14, 2013, 3:32:43 AM4/14/13
to
"BillB" <bo...@shaw1.ca> wrote in message news:kkd91f$ql1$1...@dont-email.me...
> On 13/04/2013 8:35 PM, O-PGManager wrote:
>> On Apr 13 2013 9:57 AM, Robert Ladd wrote:
>>
>>> When it comes to racism in America, BillB has shown an incredible lack
>>> of
>>> knowledge in the area. Not that I would expect someone growing up and
>>> living their entire life in lily-white Canada to be knowledgeable in the
>>> USA's racial situations, but I only remark "incredible lack of
>>> knowledge"
>>> due to his constant implication that he is an expert in the area.
>>
>> This whole post is kind of implying that you are far more versed in the
>> area. What makes that so? Can you supply some of your expertise to
>> this?
>>
>> http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/04/13/officer-accused-of-having-trayvon-martin-target/2080989/
>
> And it follows logically from Robert's "argument" that he would, in turn,
> defer to the expertise of a clear consensus of black activists and
> scholars who have actually LIVED and studied and experienced the racism
> problem for decades, and carefully assessed the economic and cultural
> consequences that stem therefrom. Their views would, of course, contrast
> diametrically with Robert's, and agree with mine.
>
How can you have such arrogance to state that their views agree with yours?
>> On Apr 13 2013 9:57 AM, Robert Ladd wrote:
>>
>>> When it comes to racism in America, BillB has shown an incredible lack
>>> of
>>> knowledge in the area. Not that I would expect someone growing up and
>>> living their entire life in lily-white Canada to be knowledgeable in the
>>> USA's racial situations, but I only remark "incredible lack of
>>> knowledge"
>>> due to his constant implication that he is an expert in the area.
>>
>> This whole post is kind of implying that you are far more versed in the
>> area. What makes that so? Can you supply some of your expertise to
>> this?
>>
>> http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/04/13/officer-accused-of-having-trayvon-martin-target/2080989/
>
> And it follows logically from Robert's "argument" that he would, in turn,
> defer to the expertise of a clear consensus of black activists and
> scholars who have actually LIVED and studied and experienced the racism
> problem for decades, and carefully assessed the economic and cultural
> consequences that stem therefrom. Their views would, of course, contrast
> diametrically with Robert's, and agree with mine.
>
You have no right to claim a view that they can agree with. You've used
their view or someone else's as your own and then claim they agree with you.
Do you not see why I wouldn't discuss this with you? You don't have any
experience to have a view that you can refer back to, to realistically
discuss this subject.
Robert Ladd
BillB
Apr 14, 2013, 5:09:15 AM4/14/13
to
girls and women in Afghanistan? I suppose you'd defer to the opinion of
a Taliban leader, given his vastly superior "on the ground" experience
dealing with dem bitches?
We get it, Robert. You have s00per sekret information about black
people; you just don't want to tell us what it is. I totally understand.
Let us know if you ever change your mind, k?
Robert Ladd
Apr 14, 2013, 11:40:20 AM4/14/13
to
"BillB" <bo...@shaw1.ca> wrote in message news:kkdri9$ern$1...@dont-email.me...
that area so don't act stupid to try and trap me, but I also understand that
I'm not there. I know that I don't have any clue about how prevalent and
vicious the "dealing with dem bitches" is. When the reports come out of
there, they are created and dispensed by humans that have an agenda. In a
perfect world that agenda would be to report the news and let the chips fall
where they may. But we don't have a perfect world.
People will slant what happens, they will inflate the numbers, they will
portray their reporting to achieve the message they want to send. I'm not
saying that it's not an accurate portrayal, I'm saying that I'm not there
and I don't know if how they present the facts are true.
>
> We get it, Robert. You have s00per sekret information about black people;
> you just don't want to tell us what it is. I totally understand. Let us
> know if you ever change your mind, k?
your "s00per sekret" implication that I'm hiding something because I want to
pretend like I know something that I don't.
I've been there and experienced living around and near black ghetto people
and your conclusions in most instances demonstrate that you don't really
have a clue. People's attitudes and actions are not always about the color
of people's skin. But you wouldn't consider that people form their opinions
based upon experiences when those experiences are not what is portrayed in
someone's truth altering agenda. And that's because you think you know all.
Robert Ladd
Robert Ladd
brattt
Apr 14, 2013, 11:57:48 AM4/14/13
to
On Apr 14 2013 10:40 AM, Robert Ladd wrote:
> I've been there and experienced living around and near black ghetto people
> and your conclusions in most instances demonstrate that you don't really
> have a clue. People's attitudes and actions are not always about the color
> of people's skin. But you wouldn't consider that people form their opinions
> based upon experiences when those experiences are not what is portrayed in
> someone's truth altering agenda. And that's because you think you know all.
But he's been to the Statue of Liberty don't forget.
> I've been there and experienced living around and near black ghetto people
> and your conclusions in most instances demonstrate that you don't really
> have a clue. People's attitudes and actions are not always about the color
> of people's skin. But you wouldn't consider that people form their opinions
> based upon experiences when those experiences are not what is portrayed in
> someone's truth altering agenda. And that's because you think you know all.
VegasJerry
Apr 14, 2013, 1:42:19 PM4/14/13
to
.> If you ever decide you'd like to discuss the multi-trillion dollar
> racism problem, or any other issue under the sun, without personal
> attacks or other ad hominem nonsense, I'm here for you.
You're inviting him to a conversation? I suggest you visit his thread titled, "Engaging in conversation with Jerry," first.
> attacks or other ad hominem nonsense, I'm here for you.
Jerry 'n Vegas
VegasJerry
Apr 14, 2013, 2:00:37 PM4/14/13
to
On Saturday, April 13, 2013 10:53:54 PM UTC-7, Robert Ladd wrote:
.
.> I won't discuss racism with you because you don't have the experience
.
> to hold your side of the conversation.
WHOA! Is that the non sequitur attack you accuse me of in your "Engaging in Conversation with Jerry" thread?
> You are an arrogant, self-centered, egotistical know-it-all that will not
> accept someone else's views, even if they are from valid experience,
> if they are different from yours.
> To engage in a conversation with you is like getting into a bar
> parking lot fight with someone I don't care to actually fight with
> No, I won't have a racism discussion with you….
Oh, gee, better go back to watching TV.
Or back to, "Engaging in Conversation with Jerry," and apologize.
Jerry 'n Vegas
VegasJerry
Apr 14, 2013, 2:04:27 PM4/14/13
to
And in the end, it's simply Robert Ladd's inability to answer Bill's simple questions….
Jerry
BillB
Apr 14, 2013, 2:45:37 PM4/14/13
to
On 14/04/2013 8:40 AM, Robert Ladd wrote:
>> Do you have any views or opinions at all on the Taliban's treatment of
>> girls and women in Afghanistan? I suppose you'd defer to the opinion
>> of a Taliban leader, given his vastly superior "on the ground"
>> experience dealing with dem bitches?
>>
> You're not so stupid as to believe that I don't have some view or
> opinion in that area
That's good to hear. What are your general views and opinions on the
>> Do you have any views or opinions at all on the Taliban's treatment of
>> girls and women in Afghanistan? I suppose you'd defer to the opinion
>> of a Taliban leader, given his vastly superior "on the ground"
>> experience dealing with dem bitches?
>>
> You're not so stupid as to believe that I don't have some view or
> opinion in that area
treatment of women under the Taliban?
Would your views be overridden if a Taliban leader told you nobody in
the world treats their women better than they do? After all, Taliban
leaders would have vastly more "on the ground" experience than you do.
How many Taliban women do you personally know? These Taliban men grew up
around Afghan women. I think they know what they're like a little better
than you do.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taliban_treatment_of_women
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/9f/Taliban_beating_woman_in_public_RAWA.jpg
>so don't act stupid to try and trap me,
to tell you, Robert, so far it's not looking good at all, but I'm trying
to keep an open mind.
risky biz
Apr 14, 2013, 10:34:30 PM4/14/13
to
to validate what he says.
Pepe Papon
Apr 14, 2013, 11:05:50 PM4/14/13
to
On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 08:40:20 -0700, "Robert Ladd" <rla...@cox.net>
wrote:
>
research about a situation if we haven't lived in it first-hand. So,
when I see that a study showed that employers are more likely to
discard resumes submitted by people with black-sounding names, I
should draw no conclusions about the effects of racism. When the
study showed that, when black and white candidates with equal
qualifications applied for jobs, the white applicants were more likely
to be hired, this should not tell me anything about the reason blacks
tend to be have higher unemployment rates than whites. I can only
understand such things if I have on-the-ground experience and the
author of the peer-reviewed study could be lying.
Is that a pretty accurate summary of your logic or am I making up a
position for you?
--
Pepe Papon
wrote:
>
>My information isn't super secret, and don't start trying to frame me using
>your "s00per sekret" implication that I'm hiding something because I want to
>pretend like I know something that I don't.
>
>I've been there and experienced living around and near black ghetto people
>and your conclusions in most instances demonstrate that you don't really
>have a clue. People's attitudes and actions are not always about the color
>of people's skin. But you wouldn't consider that people form their opinions
>based upon experiences when those experiences are not what is portrayed in
>someone's truth altering agenda. And that's because you think you know all.
So, basically, you're saying that we should ignore statistics and
>your "s00per sekret" implication that I'm hiding something because I want to
>pretend like I know something that I don't.
>
>I've been there and experienced living around and near black ghetto people
>and your conclusions in most instances demonstrate that you don't really
>have a clue. People's attitudes and actions are not always about the color
>of people's skin. But you wouldn't consider that people form their opinions
>based upon experiences when those experiences are not what is portrayed in
>someone's truth altering agenda. And that's because you think you know all.
research about a situation if we haven't lived in it first-hand. So,
when I see that a study showed that employers are more likely to
discard resumes submitted by people with black-sounding names, I
should draw no conclusions about the effects of racism. When the
study showed that, when black and white candidates with equal
qualifications applied for jobs, the white applicants were more likely
to be hired, this should not tell me anything about the reason blacks
tend to be have higher unemployment rates than whites. I can only
understand such things if I have on-the-ground experience and the
author of the peer-reviewed study could be lying.
Is that a pretty accurate summary of your logic or am I making up a
position for you?
--
Pepe Papon
Pepe Papon
Apr 14, 2013, 11:11:22 PM4/14/13
to
On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 00:32:43 -0700, "Robert Ladd" <rla...@cox.net>
wrote:
>> And it follows logically from Robert's "argument" that he would, in turn,
>> defer to the expertise of a clear consensus of black activists and
>> scholars who have actually LIVED and studied and experienced the racism
>> problem for decades, and carefully assessed the economic and cultural
>> consequences that stem therefrom. Their views would, of course, contrast
>> diametrically with Robert's, and agree with mine.
>>
>How can you have such arrogance to state that their views agree with yours?
>You have no right to claim a view that they can agree with.
Well, there's always the possibility that he's read quotes from these
people. Perhaps the quotes have expressed views that are similar to
his own views. It could even be that the quotes in question helped
lead him to form the views he holds.
--
Pepe Papon
wrote:
>> And it follows logically from Robert's "argument" that he would, in turn,
>> defer to the expertise of a clear consensus of black activists and
>> scholars who have actually LIVED and studied and experienced the racism
>> problem for decades, and carefully assessed the economic and cultural
>> consequences that stem therefrom. Their views would, of course, contrast
>> diametrically with Robert's, and agree with mine.
>>
>How can you have such arrogance to state that their views agree with yours?
>You have no right to claim a view that they can agree with.
people. Perhaps the quotes have expressed views that are similar to
his own views. It could even be that the quotes in question helped
lead him to form the views he holds.
--
Pepe Papon
BillB
Apr 14, 2013, 11:11:58 PM4/14/13
to
On 14/04/2013 11:45 AM, BillB wrote:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taliban_treatment_of_women
By the way, just for the record, I found the above link by typing
*taliban treatment women* into the google search box. It was the first
result. It took less than three seconds, and I can assure everyone that
no extraordinary googling skills were involved, whatsoever.
The information is out there, Robert. Finding it really isn't the problem.
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taliban_treatment_of_women
By the way, just for the record, I found the above link by typing
*taliban treatment women* into the google search box. It was the first
result. It took less than three seconds, and I can assure everyone that
no extraordinary googling skills were involved, whatsoever.
The information is out there, Robert. Finding it really isn't the problem.
Pepe Papon
Apr 14, 2013, 11:28:17 PM4/14/13
to
On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 00:21:29 -0700, "Robert Ladd" <rla...@cox.net>
wrote:
>>
There were plenty of black people at the public schools I attended due
to the court-mandated busing back in the '60s. I was bused to a
school miles from my home so that blacks could attend the school 3
blocks from where I lived. A lot of the experience I had with those
kids was less than pleasant.
But none of that is particularly relevant, as it says nothing about
the causes of the unpleasant behavior. What seemed reasonable to
believe as a kid growing up seems rather simplistic and misguided to
an adult who's learned a little about history, psychology, and
sociology, among other things. Those statistics and studies you want
to ignore actually do have significance. They can enlighten us to
facts that were not at all apparent from our on-the-ground
experiences.
>My guess is that he sees All in the Family's Archie Bunker as a realistic
>white person, but sees The Jefferson's George Jefferson as a figment of some
>Hollywood writer's imagination. George Jefferson can't be racist, he's
>black.
Your guess demonstrates that you've failed to understand what Bill has
been saying, as he's never said anything resembling that.
--
Pepe Papon
wrote:
>>
>> This whole post is kind of implying that you are far more versed in the
>> area. What makes that so? Can you supply some of your expertise to this?
>>
>I grew up surrounded by black people. I shopped, rode buses, played with,
>and talked to black people every day. I went to a grade school that was 90%
>black. On summer vacation days I swam in public pools that had very few
>white faces. Many of the teachers I had were black.
>
>I worked a few years in areas that were almost totally surrounded by black
>people. I often walked to lunch to local restaurants through black
>neighborhoods and ate at black owned businesses. I grew up talking and
>dealing with black people, and I'm supposed to believe that BillB's
>occasional encounter with his Ethiopian neighbor puts us on level ground
>understanding racism?
>
>He hasn't a clue, but being BillB, he'll take any insight from me that is
>black-negative and turn it into painting me a racist. It is not worth the
>effort dealing with his prolific posting energy and narrow-minded view to
>defend my knowledge of what it was like living in that situation and dealing
>with people that in BillB's opinion has only a skin pigment difference.
>
>He has little understanding of the cultural differences and when he
>occasionally acknowledges that those differences may exist, he attributes
>them solely to white people's hate and racism without even considering that
>the same irrational behavior come from black people too.
You're certainly not the only person who grew up around black people.
>> area. What makes that so? Can you supply some of your expertise to this?
>>
>I grew up surrounded by black people. I shopped, rode buses, played with,
>and talked to black people every day. I went to a grade school that was 90%
>black. On summer vacation days I swam in public pools that had very few
>white faces. Many of the teachers I had were black.
>
>I worked a few years in areas that were almost totally surrounded by black
>people. I often walked to lunch to local restaurants through black
>neighborhoods and ate at black owned businesses. I grew up talking and
>dealing with black people, and I'm supposed to believe that BillB's
>occasional encounter with his Ethiopian neighbor puts us on level ground
>understanding racism?
>
>He hasn't a clue, but being BillB, he'll take any insight from me that is
>black-negative and turn it into painting me a racist. It is not worth the
>effort dealing with his prolific posting energy and narrow-minded view to
>defend my knowledge of what it was like living in that situation and dealing
>with people that in BillB's opinion has only a skin pigment difference.
>
>He has little understanding of the cultural differences and when he
>occasionally acknowledges that those differences may exist, he attributes
>them solely to white people's hate and racism without even considering that
>the same irrational behavior come from black people too.
There were plenty of black people at the public schools I attended due
to the court-mandated busing back in the '60s. I was bused to a
school miles from my home so that blacks could attend the school 3
blocks from where I lived. A lot of the experience I had with those
kids was less than pleasant.
But none of that is particularly relevant, as it says nothing about
the causes of the unpleasant behavior. What seemed reasonable to
believe as a kid growing up seems rather simplistic and misguided to
an adult who's learned a little about history, psychology, and
sociology, among other things. Those statistics and studies you want
to ignore actually do have significance. They can enlighten us to
facts that were not at all apparent from our on-the-ground
experiences.
>My guess is that he sees All in the Family's Archie Bunker as a realistic
>white person, but sees The Jefferson's George Jefferson as a figment of some
>Hollywood writer's imagination. George Jefferson can't be racist, he's
>black.
been saying, as he's never said anything resembling that.
--
Pepe Papon
Robert Ladd
Apr 15, 2013, 12:22:45 AM4/15/13
to
news:2eKat.483670$kp4....@newsfe09.iad...
So what? I wasn't talking about nor did I come close to discussing the
Taliban's treatment of women. If you say you are not very good at Googling,
then I might NOW have to agree with you. When you google a subject, you
might just want to put a keyword or two about the correct subject into the
search box.
We were talking about why I do not want to have a discussion with you about
racism in America. You don't discuss, you bury the person you are
discussing the subject with in statistics and other people's opinions
because you can't discuss it from a first person point of view. That's ok,
I don't know a damn thing about racism in Canada, or hockey, or brutality in
Darfur. But then, I don't inundate the group with statistics in hockey as
if I knew anything about it or any of those other subjects.
And again, your joy in burying someone in statistics about racism in America
is quite bizarre. We all know there is racism here. We all know that it's
rampant in some areas, and less viral in other places. We understand that it
shouldn't continue. But we are HUMANS. That's how humans are. It's
something that has gone on from the cave man days and will continue until
this planet is hit by a huge meteor and all life is wiped out. We have made
some inroads and will make more as time goes on. A little over a hundred
years ago, the Irish and the Italians were looked down upon as scum of the
Earth here in America but today they are just part of the landscape.
People are flawed. They worry that someone that is different from them
wants to change them, make fun of them, enslave them, kill them, eat them or
probably any of a hundred other fears. It goes on all over the planet and
is practiced in many different forms, from religious to racial to cultural
to sexual and many other forms. If you don't see that the problem isn't
just racial, then you don't see what the problem is.
But I will digress, probably for about the 6th time, I'll ask you this
question (though I'm still not sure why every time before, this question
always ended without you responding): How is it different when you call
"all Tea Party people racists", from someone saying "all black people are
lazy"? Please explain that to me.
Robert Ladd
Taliban's treatment of women. If you say you are not very good at Googling,
then I might NOW have to agree with you. When you google a subject, you
might just want to put a keyword or two about the correct subject into the
search box.
We were talking about why I do not want to have a discussion with you about
racism in America. You don't discuss, you bury the person you are
discussing the subject with in statistics and other people's opinions
because you can't discuss it from a first person point of view. That's ok,
I don't know a damn thing about racism in Canada, or hockey, or brutality in
Darfur. But then, I don't inundate the group with statistics in hockey as
if I knew anything about it or any of those other subjects.
And again, your joy in burying someone in statistics about racism in America
is quite bizarre. We all know there is racism here. We all know that it's
rampant in some areas, and less viral in other places. We understand that it
shouldn't continue. But we are HUMANS. That's how humans are. It's
something that has gone on from the cave man days and will continue until
this planet is hit by a huge meteor and all life is wiped out. We have made
some inroads and will make more as time goes on. A little over a hundred
years ago, the Irish and the Italians were looked down upon as scum of the
Earth here in America but today they are just part of the landscape.
People are flawed. They worry that someone that is different from them
wants to change them, make fun of them, enslave them, kill them, eat them or
probably any of a hundred other fears. It goes on all over the planet and
is practiced in many different forms, from religious to racial to cultural
to sexual and many other forms. If you don't see that the problem isn't
just racial, then you don't see what the problem is.
But I will digress, probably for about the 6th time, I'll ask you this
question (though I'm still not sure why every time before, this question
always ended without you responding): How is it different when you call
"all Tea Party people racists", from someone saying "all black people are
lazy"? Please explain that to me.
Robert Ladd
Pepe Papon
Apr 15, 2013, 12:31:13 AM4/15/13
to
On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 21:22:45 -0700, "Robert Ladd" <rla...@cox.net>
wrote:
>"BillB" <bo...@shaw1.ca> wrote in message
>news:2eKat.483670$kp4....@newsfe09.iad...
>> On 14/04/2013 11:45 AM, BillB wrote:
>>
>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taliban_treatment_of_women
>>
>> By the way, just for the record, I found the above link by typing *taliban
>> treatment women* into the google search box. It was the first result. It
>> took less than three seconds, and I can assure everyone that no
>> extraordinary googling skills were involved, whatsoever.
>>
>> The information is out there, Robert. Finding it really isn't the problem.
>>
>So what? I wasn't talking about nor did I come close to discussing the
>Taliban's treatment of women. If you say you are not very good at Googling,
>then I might NOW have to agree with you. When you google a subject, you
>might just want to put a keyword or two about the correct subject into the
>search box.
>
>We were talking about why I do not want to have a discussion with you about
>racism in America. You don't discuss, you bury the person you are
>discussing the subject with in statistics and other people's opinions
>because you can't discuss it from a first person point of view. That's ok,
>I don't know a damn thing about racism in Canada, or hockey, or brutality in
>Darfur. But then, I don't inundate the group with statistics in hockey as
>if I knew anything about it or any of those other subjects.
Typically, when one discusses a sociological issue from an educated
point of view, one uses statistics to analyze situations and to
support one's arguments. You seem to be suggesting that anecdotal
evidence is the preferred method of gathering information. I doubt
that anyone knowledgeable in the field would agree with that.
--
Pepe Papon
wrote:
>"BillB" <bo...@shaw1.ca> wrote in message
>news:2eKat.483670$kp4....@newsfe09.iad...
>> On 14/04/2013 11:45 AM, BillB wrote:
>>
>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taliban_treatment_of_women
>>
>> By the way, just for the record, I found the above link by typing *taliban
>> treatment women* into the google search box. It was the first result. It
>> took less than three seconds, and I can assure everyone that no
>> extraordinary googling skills were involved, whatsoever.
>>
>> The information is out there, Robert. Finding it really isn't the problem.
>>
>So what? I wasn't talking about nor did I come close to discussing the
>Taliban's treatment of women. If you say you are not very good at Googling,
>then I might NOW have to agree with you. When you google a subject, you
>might just want to put a keyword or two about the correct subject into the
>search box.
>
>We were talking about why I do not want to have a discussion with you about
>racism in America. You don't discuss, you bury the person you are
>discussing the subject with in statistics and other people's opinions
>because you can't discuss it from a first person point of view. That's ok,
>I don't know a damn thing about racism in Canada, or hockey, or brutality in
>Darfur. But then, I don't inundate the group with statistics in hockey as
>if I knew anything about it or any of those other subjects.
point of view, one uses statistics to analyze situations and to
support one's arguments. You seem to be suggesting that anecdotal
evidence is the preferred method of gathering information. I doubt
that anyone knowledgeable in the field would agree with that.
--
Pepe Papon
Robert Ladd
Apr 15, 2013, 12:45:26 AM4/15/13
to
"Pepe Papon" <hitme...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:s2fkm8536v3rd1sus...@4ax.com...
The only reason he's not as much a part of the problem as any other average
white person is that he's tucked away in Canada and can point his finger and
say shame on you bad people. Since he doesn't have any, as you called it,
"on-the-ground expertise", he can't know about what may or may not continue
to fan the flames of discord. His statistics reports don't contain any
information about gang-banger murders in the hood, they don't point out the
flash mob attacks. Google "attacks in chicago"... see what that gets you.
Do you think that gives people a warm feeling? Bill doesn't see those
reports unless he acknowledges those problems exist and goes out to find
them. Maybe then he might just get something of a clue as to what gives
people cause to be concerned about racial harmony in the US.
Robert Ladd
BillB
Apr 15, 2013, 1:37:55 AM4/15/13
to
On 14/04/2013 9:22 PM, Robert Ladd wrote:
>
> "BillB" <bo...@shaw1.ca> wrote in message
> news:2eKat.483670$kp4....@newsfe09.iad...
>> On 14/04/2013 11:45 AM, BillB wrote:
>>
>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taliban_treatment_of_women
>>
>> By the way, just for the record, I found the above link by typing
>> *taliban treatment women* into the google search box. It was the first
>> result. It took less than three seconds, and I can assure everyone
>> that no extraordinary googling skills were involved, whatsoever.
>>
>> The information is out there, Robert. Finding it really isn't the
>> problem.
>>
> So what? I wasn't talking about nor did I come close to discussing the
> Taliban's treatment of women. If you say you are not very good at
> Googling, then I might NOW have to agree with you. When you google a
> subject, you might just want to put a keyword or two about the correct
> subject into the search box.
Come on, Robert, don't play dumb. It's so unbecoming. I already said I
>
> "BillB" <bo...@shaw1.ca> wrote in message
> news:2eKat.483670$kp4....@newsfe09.iad...
>> On 14/04/2013 11:45 AM, BillB wrote:
>>
>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taliban_treatment_of_women
>>
>> By the way, just for the record, I found the above link by typing
>> *taliban treatment women* into the google search box. It was the first
>> result. It took less than three seconds, and I can assure everyone
>> that no extraordinary googling skills were involved, whatsoever.
>>
>> The information is out there, Robert. Finding it really isn't the
>> problem.
>>
> So what? I wasn't talking about nor did I come close to discussing the
> Taliban's treatment of women. If you say you are not very good at
> Googling, then I might NOW have to agree with you. When you google a
> subject, you might just want to put a keyword or two about the correct
> subject into the search box.
brought up the Taliban in order to test your logic in an analogous
situation, one in which you weren't so personally invested (biased). So
let's try again, shall we?
You say you have an opinion on the treatment of women by the Taliban.
That's good. That demonstrates you have at least some awareness of the
world around you, outside that itty bitty little bubble you live and
move around in. Based on your previous comments, I presume you formed
this opinion about the Taliban treatment of women from at least some
"on-the-ground" experience in Afghanistan and living among the Taliban
women, walking through Taliban neighborhoods, patronizing Taliban
businesses, attending Taliban schools, etc. However, as impressive as
that experience may be, would you agree that Taliban men who were born
and raised in Afghanistan have far more "on-the-ground" experience
dealing with Taliban women than you? Would you therefore defer to
experience of a Taliban leader if he told you that the Taliban DO NOT
mistreat women (as you expect me to defer to your extensive experience
living among the blacks)? If not, why not? Is it because the statistics
would prove the Taliban leader is a shameless fucking liar, and a
God-awful one at that?
> We were talking about why I do not want to have a discussion with you
> about racism in America. You don't discuss, you bury the person you are
> discussing the subject with in statistics and other people's opinions
> because you can't discuss it from a first person point of view.
and ask people for their view on what caused that particular state of
affairs.
That's
> ok, I don't know a damn thing about racism in Canada, or hockey, or
> brutality in Darfur.
But then, I don't inundate the group with
> statistics in hockey as if I knew anything about it or any of those
> other subjects.
you, you should.
> And again, your joy in burying someone in statistics about racism in
> America is quite bizarre. We all know there is racism here. We all
> know that it's rampant in some areas, and less viral in other places. We
> understand that it shouldn't continue. But we are HUMANS. That's how
> humans are.
costing trillions of dollars, ruining lives, and causing immeasurable
suffering. It needs to be acknowledged, analyzed, and solved. Racism
prevents that from happening.
It's something that has gone on from the cave man days and
> will continue until this planet is hit by a huge meteor and all life is
> wiped out. We have made some inroads and will make more as time goes
> on. A little over a hundred years ago, the Irish and the Italians were
> looked down upon as scum of the Earth here in America but today they are
> just part of the landscape.
mistreatment. It's interesting that you can be so cavalier about it. I
bet you'd feel a little different about it if you were the victim.
> People are flawed. They worry that someone that is different from them
> wants to change them, make fun of them, enslave them, kill them, eat
> them or probably any of a hundred other fears. It goes on all over the
> planet and is practiced in many different forms, from religious to
> racial to cultural to sexual and many other forms. If you don't see
> that the problem isn't just racial, then you don't see what the problem is.
willing to brush away and ignore simply because "they exist everywhere"?
Is that really good public policy??
"pfffft...child rape exists everywhere! Don't worry about it!"
> But I will digress, probably for about the 6th time, I'll ask you this
> question (though I'm still not sure why every time before, this question
> always ended without you responding): How is it different when you call
> "all Tea Party people racists", from someone saying "all black people
> are lazy"? Please explain that to me.
sense, because I haven't interviewed every Tea Party supporter. I always
make sense. Not sure why you'd put that in quotes when I've specifically
said otherwise, many times over. In fact, I've gone over the opinion
polls of people who identify with the Tea Party, and given that data
provided my estimations on the percentage who, in my opinion, harbor
significant racial animosity. It was never 100%.
da pickle
Apr 15, 2013, 10:55:34 AM4/15/13
to
On 4/14/2013 11:22 PM, Robert Ladd wrote:
> But I will digress, probably for about the 6th time, I'll ask you this
> question (though I'm still not sure why every time before, this question
> always ended without you responding): How is it different when you call
> "all Tea Party people racists", from someone saying "all black people
> are lazy"? Please explain that to me.
>
> Robert Ladd
Perhaps, you should change your personal opinion of BillB ... based on
> But I will digress, probably for about the 6th time, I'll ask you this
> question (though I'm still not sure why every time before, this question
> always ended without you responding): How is it different when you call
> "all Tea Party people racists", from someone saying "all black people
> are lazy"? Please explain that to me.
>
> Robert Ladd
your personal observation.
Travel A
Apr 15, 2013, 1:46:38 PM4/15/13
to
So, Poupon is saying that real life experience doesn't count unless it's
Poupon's own real life experience, supporting Poupn's own assertions.
Have I got Poupon's "logic" just about right?
Poupon's own real life experience, supporting Poupn's own assertions.
Have I got Poupon's "logic" just about right?
Pepe Papon
Apr 16, 2013, 1:11:49 AM4/16/13
to
On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 21:45:26 -0700, "Robert Ladd" <rla...@cox.net>
wrote:
>>>Reading about racism and the statistics associated with it is somewhat
>>>like
>>>a college graduate in almost any field of endeavor coming out of school.
>>>They may have a base of knowledge to build upon, but until they experience
>>>it in real life they don't really understand their subject.
>>
>> I can't help but wonder how on-the ground expertise is relevant to the
>> facts Bill bas posted, such as the average wealth of blacks being only
>> 5% of the average wealth of whites. If Bill were to spend a year in
>> the ghetto, would the average wealth of blacks increase at all
>> relative to whites?
>> --
>>
>> Pepe Papon
>
>OK! So, if he's got a solution then he should bring that solution forward.
He's already done that. His proposal has been widely ignored on RGP.
It's an exercise in futility to propose a solution to people who deny
that there's even a problem.
>The only reason he's not as much a part of the problem as any other average
>white person is that he's tucked away in Canada and can point his finger and
>say shame on you bad people. Since he doesn't have any, as you called it,
>"on-the-ground expertise", he can't know about what may or may not continue
>to fan the flames of discord. His statistics reports don't contain any
>information about gang-banger murders in the hood, they don't point out the
>flash mob attacks. Google "attacks in chicago"... see what that gets you.
>Do you think that gives people a warm feeling? Bill doesn't see those
>reports unless he acknowledges those problems exist and goes out to find
>them. Maybe then he might just get something of a clue as to what gives
>people cause to be concerned about racial harmony in the US
Are you sure he's never posted statistics about ghetto crime? Not
that it matters, since such statistics certainly wouldn't refute any
of his arguments. From what I've seen, he's most certainly
well-aware of the crime problem in poor, black neighborhoods. It's
a well-known and important part of the overall problem he keeps trying
to talk about.
--
Pepe Papon
wrote:
>>>Reading about racism and the statistics associated with it is somewhat
>>>like
>>>a college graduate in almost any field of endeavor coming out of school.
>>>They may have a base of knowledge to build upon, but until they experience
>>>it in real life they don't really understand their subject.
>>
>> I can't help but wonder how on-the ground expertise is relevant to the
>> facts Bill bas posted, such as the average wealth of blacks being only
>> 5% of the average wealth of whites. If Bill were to spend a year in
>> the ghetto, would the average wealth of blacks increase at all
>> relative to whites?
>> --
>>
>> Pepe Papon
>
>OK! So, if he's got a solution then he should bring that solution forward.
It's an exercise in futility to propose a solution to people who deny
that there's even a problem.
>The only reason he's not as much a part of the problem as any other average
>white person is that he's tucked away in Canada and can point his finger and
>say shame on you bad people. Since he doesn't have any, as you called it,
>"on-the-ground expertise", he can't know about what may or may not continue
>to fan the flames of discord. His statistics reports don't contain any
>information about gang-banger murders in the hood, they don't point out the
>flash mob attacks. Google "attacks in chicago"... see what that gets you.
>Do you think that gives people a warm feeling? Bill doesn't see those
>reports unless he acknowledges those problems exist and goes out to find
>them. Maybe then he might just get something of a clue as to what gives
>people cause to be concerned about racial harmony in the US
that it matters, since such statistics certainly wouldn't refute any
of his arguments. From what I've seen, he's most certainly
well-aware of the crime problem in poor, black neighborhoods. It's
a well-known and important part of the overall problem he keeps trying
to talk about.
--
Pepe Papon
Travel A
Apr 16, 2013, 3:20:53 PM4/16/13
to
And the weight of a Poupon opinion could lift and carry an armada of hot
air balloons across the Pacific.
air balloons across the Pacific.
VegasJerry
Apr 16, 2013, 4:16:53 PM4/16/13
to
Take a hike. You've no credibility here.
Jerry 'n Vegas
VegasJerry
Apr 16, 2013, 4:20:06 PM4/16/13
to
On Sunday, April 14, 2013 9:45:26 PM UTC-7, Robert Ladd wrote:
.
.> OK! So, if he's got a solution then he should bring that solution forward.
> The only reason he's not as much a part of the problem as any other average
> white person is that he's tucked away in Canada and can point his finger and
> say shame on you bad people. Since he doesn't have any, as you called it,
> "on-the-ground expertise", he can't know about what may or may not continue
> to fan the flames of discord.
This shows how little you know about Vancouver…..
> white person is that he's tucked away in Canada and can point his finger and
> say shame on you bad people. Since he doesn't have any, as you called it,
> "on-the-ground expertise", he can't know about what may or may not continue
> to fan the flames of discord.
Jerry 'n Vegas
O-PGManager
Apr 18, 2013, 1:11:32 PM4/18/13
to
interactions with Bill enough to have any sort of comment on your
criticisms.
0 new messages