A Search for National Anthem Consistency

[Nepperhan]

Again, you failed to answer a straight up single question.

You should understand that a rhetorical question needs no answer. It is a statment. Plus, I will not be forced to address an irrelevant suggestion.

Can we get back to the thread subject?

 

[Odilon]

How do you know? Has the EEOC gone out of business? 70% of its charges have to do with racial discrimination.

Seen any “colored” only drinking fountains lately? Are “poll taxes” now in vogue? Are black people now not allowed to buy their house of choice? Engage in their profession of choice? Most of those things ever happen anymore as no country has done more to right the wrongs of past racial discrimination has than America. I know the facts won’t sway you as seem to have the need to bring up a few of the wrongs that still continue to exist.

 

[Odilon]

Well. a federal court in NC said that the state’s new voting rules targeted minorities ‘with surgical precision’ when no vote fraud had been found previously. A solution without a problem. That’s the new Jim Crow for you.

The Law in question.

“North Carolina’s bill extended beyond requiring a state-issued photo ID at the polls”.

"The law cut early voting days. (Not a big problem as far as I can see, the “early voting days” were ended for EVERBODY)

“and banned same-day voter registration” (Again, not a problem for me. This kind of law eliminates people being “bused in” from other states to register and then vote - such a thing has happened elsewhere).

"eliminated straight-ticket voting (Okay, that was a bad move. I have no problem with “straight ticket” voting).,

“and introduced more restrictions on casting provisional ballots”. (Again, the restrictions applied to everyone, not just black voters).

“It prohibited pre-registration for 16- and 17-year-olds, who previously were allowed to indicate their intent to vote when applying for a driver’s license”. (What’s the point of allowing 16 and 17 year old’s to “pre-register” if they are not allowed to vote? Again, the law applies to all 16 and 17 year old’s, not just those of that age who are black)

“The law also allowed for more poll watchers and made it easier to challenge voters or their ballots”. (What’s the matter with having more “poll watchers” provided that the poll watchers are made up equally of people from both parties? Such a thing would help to keep those working at the polls honest).

Any attempt to keep the system honest and give the nation a “free and fair” election process seems to be a bad thing in your eyes. I disagree wholeheartedly with your opinion. Voter registration and a valid ID should be required of every voter. That plus the things I have highlighted above seems to me to be nothing but a “common sense” approach to voting. So in the end, I disagree with the Federal Court ruling that’s for sure.

 

[Nepperhan]

Are “poll taxes” now in vogue?

Yes. They are now called ‘voter id laws’. Maybe you did not know that the federal courts just threw out FL’s laws concerning payment of fines before voting based on the constitutional amendment barring the poll tax. That was this year. So, once again a rhetorical question was answered in a way you did not intend.

You seem to equate YOUR failure to observe any de jure discrimination (or lynchings) as evidence that no racial discrimination exists.

From this month:

" Executives in every industry are confronting their diversity track records, pressed by a national reckoning over racial justice. But Wall Street’s task is taller: Finance remains stubbornly white, even after years of lip service paid to the need to recruit and retain people of color, and millions of dollars spent on the effort.

Nowhere is that more apparent than at the top. The chief executives of the biggest American banks are white men, as are the bulk of leaders of the asset managers, private-equity firms and hedge funds that pull the levers of power on Wall Street.

Go another level down, and the picture is much the same. Of the roughly 100,000 executives at financial firms in 2018, only 2,644 were Black and 3,682 were Hispanic, according to the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.

Overall less than 10% of nonclerical and nonlaborer workers at U.S. financial firms were Black or Hispanic, well below their share of the broader population. The numbers haven’t budged since 2009, despite a decade in which banks hired diversity czars and made changes to their recruiting and promotion rules. "

https://www.morningstar.com/news/do...treet-falls-short-on-race-despite-pledges-wsj

So in the end, I disagree with the Federal Court ruling that’s for sure.

Tell it to the judge. I guess you know better.

 

[Odilon]

Yes. They are now called ‘voter id laws’.

Please don’t give me such garbage. In every state that has enacted Voter ID laws, a state ID is free to every person in the state. That’s right, FREE I SAID. GRATIS. LIKE IN NO CHARGE! In some states, they even went into local neighborhoods in a mobile unit to give them out. The bottom line is this, YOU do not want a secure voting system, you want a system that is susceptible to fraud in any number of ways, with this new “mail-in” voting one of the worst offenders.

 

[Odilon]

Tell it to the judge. I guess you know better.

Yes. Like I know that the “Dred Scott” decision was inherently wrong, but apparently the Supreme Court at the time thought it was just fine. So don’t hold up these Judges, or any Judges for that matter as the be all and end all of what is right.

 

[Nepperhan]

The bottom line is this, YOU do not want a secure voting system …

Tell it to the judge.

So don’t hold up these Judges, or any Judges for that matter as the be all and end all of what is right.

Do you have any idea what the PROVEN impetus was for the new laws? This is a fact whether the laws are upheld or not. The laws affect only voter impersonation of which we saw maybe 31 instances in over a billion votes cast over a number of years.

Now, that sounds like a solution without a problem to me. The new laws are intended to suppress votes, nothing else.

 

[Odilon]

The new laws are intended to suppress votes, nothing else.

Well I disagree. The fact is, your reluctance to have a secured voting system is intended to allow fraud, nothing else.

 

[Nepperhan]

Well I disagree. The fact is, your reluctance to have a secured voting system is intended to allow fraud, nothing else.

The new laws can only affect voter impersonation, to be exact. You know how many demonstrated cases of that have been found? A miniscule amount out of millions of votes cast. Don’t tell me how stopping voter impersonation will lead to a secure voting system – its not a problem. But we know what the new laws will affect and whom.

" The Brennan Center’s seminal report on this issue, The Truth About Voter Fraud , found that most reported incidents of voter fraud are actually traceable to other sources, such as clerical errors or bad data matching practices. The report reviewed elections that had been meticulously studied for voter fraud, and found incident rates between 0.0003 percent and 0.0025 percent. Given this tiny incident rate for voter impersonation fraud, it is more likely, the report noted, that an American “will be struck by lightning than that he will impersonate another voter at the polls.”"

Debunking the Voter Fraud Myth | Brennan Center for Justice

 

[Odilon]

Of course they would come up with that conclusion. The Brennen center is a liberal, leftist, and an extreme “progressive” organization named after one of the most left winged Justices ever t o sit on the Supreme Court.

The left always comes up with these schemes such as “ballot harvesting”, “same day registration”, “early voting”, “motor voter” and the newest one “vote by mail” - they are all nothing but invitations to fraud. At the same time they decry any attempt at cleaning up the voter registration rolls of dead people and those who have moved from the state as “voter suppression”.

Well, I am not fooled in any way by that specious claim. You are the one’s who do not want a free and fair voting system only by eligible citizens. One single fraudulent vote negates my vote and that fraudulent vote is one too many. I don’t care if it comes from my side or the other side, such things should not be allowed to happen and all Americans should be against such things happening.

 

[Nepperhan]

Of course they would come up with that conclusion. The Brennen center is a liberal, leftist, and an extreme “progressive” organization named after one of the most left winged Justices ever t o sit on the Supreme Court.

Now that you’ve finished the ad hominem, do you realize that federal courts have come to the same conclusion?

Can you refute the post?

 

[Nepperhan]

If you think that the “Negro National Anthem” was someting, are you familiar with what Sojourner Truth wrote? After the Civil War she wrote (dictated, actually, since she could not write) a black version of the 'Battle Hymn of the Republic":

"WE are coloured Yankee soldiers who’ve enlisted for the war;
We are fighting for the Union, we are fighting for the law;
We can shoot a rebel farther than a white man ever saw,
As we go marching on.

Look there above the center, where the flag is waving bright;
We are going out of slavery, we are bound for freedom’s light;
We mean to show Jeff Davis how the Africans can fight,
As we go marching on.

We are done with hoeing cotton, we are done with hoeing corn;
We are coloured Yankee soldiers just as sure as you are born.
When the rebels hears us shouting, they will think it’s Gabriel’s horn,
As we go marching on.

They will have to pay us wages, for the wages of their sin;
They will have to bow their foreheads to their coloured kith and kin;
They will have to give us house-room, or the roof will tumble in,
As we go marching on.

Glory, glory, hallelujah!
Glory, glory, hallelujah!
Glory, glory, hallelujah, as we go marching on.

We hear the proclamation, rebels, crush it as you will;
The birds will sing it to us, hopping on the cotton hill;
The possum up the gum tree couldn’t keep it still,
As he went climbing on.

Abraham has spoken, and the message has been sent;
The prison doors have opened, and out the prisoners went
To join the sable army of African descent,
As we go marching on."

http://www.post509.com/lyrics_sojourners_battle_hymn.htm

Now that’s radical! Not even many black people have heard those verses. You see how she talks about reparations in 1878? "Sweet Honey in the Rock’ recorded the song in the 1980’s.

 

[WingedHussar]

I will see that and raise you a song about men defending home and hearth.

 

[Nepperhan]

I will see that and raise you a song about men defending home and hearth.

At Gettysburg and Ft. Sumter they were defending their homes? I don’t think so! They were fighting for the continuation and the spread of slavery.

 

[WingedHussar]

Letting Fort Sumter stand would have allowed a foreign military to control the harbor, an unacceptable outcome.

Gettysburg was an attempt to relieve pressure elsewhere and convince the North to sue for peace.

 

[Mister_Friscus]

At Gettysburg and Ft. Sumter they were defending their homes? I don’t think so! They were fighting for the continuation and the spread of slavery.

This is either incorrect or a lie, take your pick.

We need more honest discussion about history, not some proven incorrect yet awarded NYT 1619-style misinformation.

 

[Nepperhan]

This is either incorrect or a lie, take your pick.

Nevermind. I’m not going to chase that rabbit.

Gettysburg was an attempt to relieve pressure elsewhere and convince the North to sue for peace.

Gettysburg was an invasion for northern booty. Why do you think they chose that area? It was for shoes. That’s not protecting southern hearth and home.

 

[WingedHussar]

The best defense is a good offense. Too poor to own shoes means you are too poor to own a slave. Reminds me of that Confederate soldier, shoeless and captured by the Union. They asked him why he was fighting since he was clearly too poor to own a slave. “I’m fighting because you are down here.”

 

[1cthlctrth]

c4csp:

There is no systemic racism in America

Yes. There is.

19 unarmed whites and only 10 unarmed blacks were killed by police in 2019. And, more than half were attacking the police just prior to being killed.

Not exactly “systematic racism”.

 

[27lw]

And how many cops killed in 2019?
48

https://www.fbi.gov/news/pressrel/p...forcement-officers-killed-in-the-line-of-duty