Will The Scotus Declare Race-based Gerrymandering Unconstitutional?

[SkyBubble]

That might even make some sense to you. But I doubt it.

You do if you want to improve it, and he wanted to leave America better than he found it.

Closer to the truth to say it's what you choose to hear, to rationalize your own bigotry.

Sorry, but that was the plan all along.

 

[YDB95]

Sorry, but that was the plan all along.

Vilifying Obama for not pretending racism was dead? Yes, we know that was the plan all along.

 

[Sean Renaud]

Wrong. The government engaging in racism only perpetuates and expands racism.

History has proven otherwise.

 

[SkyBubble]

Vilifying Obama for not pretending racism was dead? Yes, we know that was the plan all along.

As usual, you are distorting what I said to fit your narrow little ideological agenda. He promoted ideas that divide people by race. Then whenever anyone opposed any of his policies, he screamed that it was racism.

Nobody is criticizing him for "not pretending racism was dead" but he did pretend we hadn't made any progress in regard to race, like it was the 1950s and segregation was still in force. He exploited the Henry Louis Gates incident, the Trayvon Martin incident, and other such things to promote an agenda that divided people. He ran as a racial healer andcould hve been one had he tried, but instead we went backwards.

Every poll showed people saying race relations were worse.

 

[SkyBubble]

History has proven otherwise.

No, history has proven my point.

 

[Sean Renaud]

No, history has proven my point.

The 13th, 14th and 15th amendments would live to have a word with you. So would the entire Civil Rights movement. Care to try again?

 

[SkyBubble]

Nothing in those amendment shas any relevance to any of what I said. The approach that has been taken to racial issues in the past 15+ years has been utterly contrary to the things that the civil rights movement stood for. It prioritizes race and identity and essentializes people, declaring that they must have certain experiences and beliefs based on their race. It also promotes separate facilities and events for different racial and identity groups. That's the very segregation the civil rights movement opposed. The woke folks who support that are essentially segregationists.

This completely upends Dr. King's vision that "one day, my four little children will be judged not by the color of their skin, but by teh content of their character." Today, judging them by the content of their character is considered "white supremacy."

These "white saviors" (self-proclaimed) implicitly promote the idea that minorities cannot make it without their "help." When a minority does, such as a black man who grew up in abject poverty in rural Georgia speaking a different language but rose to the Supreme Court or a kid from the projects in Detroit who rose to become the chief or pediatric neurosurgery at a major hospital, they are viciously attacked for doing so.

As Malcolm X said, the worst enemy of the black man is the white liberal. Justice Thomas has said something similar to that.

This is an actual conversation I had with a "woke" person who agrees with you:

"All black people experience racism every day."
"What do you say to those blacks who say they don't?"
"Well, they do."
"So you, as a white person, are going to whitesplain to those blacks what their lived experience is?"
"I'm not having this conversation."

Take the story Michelle Obama tells about the time she and a friend took their kids for ice cream and a white woman cut in front of them in the line. Mrs. Obama assumes that that's racism. I can't say if it is or isn't. It's undeniably rude, but we really don't know whether she does that to other people as well. We know only what happened in that one instance. To assume that it must be racially motivated is itself racially motivated. it might be; it might not be. But Mrs. Obama assumes it must be racism because the woman is white. She assumes motivation due to skin color, then projects that onto all whitefolk.

The worst thing you can do to a minority is to treat him/her as just another member of a group. But that's exactly what your side does. And I'm sorry to have to say this, but that only makes race relations worse.

 

[Sean Renaud]

Nothing in those amendment shas any relevance to any of what I said. The approach that has been taken to racial issues in the past 15+ years has been utterly contrary to the things that the civil rights movement stood for. It prioritizes race and identity and essentializes people, declaring that they must have certain experiences and beliefs based on their race. It also promotes separate facilities and events for different racial and identity groups. That's the very segregation the civil rights movement opposed. The woke folks who support that are essentially segregationists.

This completely upends Dr. King's vision that "one day, my four little children will be judged not by the color of their skin, but by teh content of their character." Today, judging them by the content of their character is considered "white supremacy."

These "white saviors" (self-proclaimed) implicitly promote the idea that minorities cannot make it without their "help." When a minority does, such as a black man who grew up in abject poverty in rural Georgia speaking a different language but rose to the Supreme Court or a kid from the projects in Detroit who rose to become the chief or pediatric neurosurgery at a major hospital, they are viciously attacked for doing so.

As Malcolm X said, the worst enemy of the black man is the white liberal. Justice Thomas has said something similar to that.

This is an actual conversation I had with a "woke" person who agrees with you:

"All black people experience racism every day."
"What do you say to those blacks who say they don't?"
"Well, they do."
"So you, as a white person, are going to whitesplain to those blacks what their lived experience is?"
"I'm not having this conversation."

Take the story Michelle Obama tells about the time she and a friend took their kids for ice cream and a white woman cut in front of them in the line. Mrs. Obama assumes that that's racism. I can't say if it is or isn't. It's undeniably rude, but we really don't know whether she does that to other people as well. We know only what happened in that one instance. To assume that it must be racially motivated is itself racially motivated. it might be; it might not be. But Mrs. Obama assumes it must be racism because the woman is white. She assumes motivation due to skin color, then projects that onto all whitefolk.

The worst thing you can do to a minority is to treat him/her as just another member of a group. But that's exactly what your side does. And I'm sorry to have to say this, but that only makes race relations worse.

Honestly its really hard to take people seriously who cut out that one quote from Dr. King while ignoring the entire rest of the speech. But thanks for giving a long handed speech proving my point.

 

[SkyBubble]

Taht quote supports my argument. It doesn't support yours, as I showed, so of course you just dismiss it.

 

[YDB95]

As usual, you are distorting what I said to fit your narrow little ideological agenda. He promoted ideas that divide people by race. Then whenever anyone opposed any of his policies, he screamed that it was racism.

"No Drama Obama" never screamed about anything, certainly not about this. (Probably at least in part because he knew as a Black man, he'd be less able to get away with it than anyone else.)

And no, he did not "promote ideas that divide people by race"; he simply acknowledged that racial divisions still were a thing, and people like you interpreted it as you state here. Which says more about you than about Obama.

Nobody is criticizing him for "not pretending racism was dead" but he did pretend we hadn't made any progress in regard to race, like it was the 1950s and segregation was still in force.

Nonsense. In fact, he even got some heat from the far left for not being far enough from that.

He exploited the Henry Louis Gates incident, the Trayvon Martin incident, and other such things to promote an agenda that divided people.

Only in the eyes of racists like yourself. Gates was arrested for the "crime" of forgetting his house key, Martin was murdered for walking while Black, and Obama simply acknowledged the reality that these still were (and still are, a decade later) facts of life that too many Americans have to live with.

He ran as a racial healer andcould hve been one had he tried, but instead we went backwards.

I, for one, do not believe for one moment that there's anything he could have done that you would have interpreted as "racial healing". What he did do was acknowledge that we as a society have work left to do.

Nothing in those amendment shas any relevance to any of what I said. The approach that has been taken to racial issues in the past 15+ years has been utterly contrary to the things that the civil rights movement stood for. It prioritizes race and identity and essentializes people, declaring that they must have certain experiences and beliefs based on their race. It also promotes separate facilities and events for different racial and identity groups. That's the very segregation the civil rights movement opposed. The woke folks who support that are essentially segregationists.

Well, they would be if your claims about them were anywhere near the truth. But they're not.

This completely upends Dr. King's vision that "one day, my four little children will be judged not by the color of their skin, but by teh content of their character." Today, judging them by the content of their character is considered "white supremacy."

No it isn't, and as Sean Renaud has already pointed out, you are missing the point of your favorite MLK quote completely like all your fellow wingnuts do.

These "white saviors" (self-proclaimed) implicitly promote the idea that minorities cannot make it without their "help." When a minority does, such as a black man who grew up in abject poverty in rural Georgia speaking a different language but rose to the Supreme Court or a kid from the projects in Detroit who rose to become the chief or pediatric neurosurgery at a major hospital, they are viciously attacked for doing so.

No one attacked Clarence Thomas or Ben Carson for being successful. What we have criticized them for - among other things - is the idea that they made it all on their own by the sweat of their brow. It wasn't only Affirmative Action; Thomas also had a rich grandfather who sent him to the best private school Black kids had access to in those days - but it certainly made a difference. Also, I have never heard anyone self-proclaim themselves to be a white savior. Not a single time, and I run in plenty of the kind of circles where you undoubtedly think it happens.

As Malcolm X said, the worst enemy of the black man is the white liberal. Justice Thomas has said something similar to that.

And yet if it weren't for white liberals, Justice Thomas would probably be sweeping the floor somewhere.

This is an actual conversation I had with a "woke" person who agrees with you:

"All black people experience racism every day."
"What do you say to those blacks who say they don't?"
"Well, they do."
"So you, as a white person, are going to whitesplain to those blacks what their lived experience is?"
"I'm not having this conversation."

I wouldn't try to reason with you about that either. But yes, all Black Americans experience racism every day. Those who say they don't, I don't consider it my place to contradict them, but I'd love to hear what other Blacks have to say about it.

Take the story Michelle Obama tells about the time she and a friend took their kids for ice cream and a white woman cut in front of them in the line. Mrs. Obama assumes that that's racism. I can't say if it is or isn't. It's undeniably rude, but we really don't know whether she does that to other people as well. We know only what happened in that one instance. To assume that it must be racially motivated is itself racially motivated. it might be; it might not be. But Mrs. Obama assumes it must be racism because the woman is white. She assumes motivation due to skin color, then projects that onto all whitefolk.

It wouldn't kill you to ask why she jumped to that conclusion. Could it be because she has been experiencing microaggressions like that all her life and some of them definitely were racially motivated? What you're really displaying here is a classic case of white privilege.

The worst thing you can do to a minority is to treat him/her as just another member of a group. But that's exactly what your side does. And I'm sorry to have to say this, but that only makes race relations worse.

No, our side does not just treat them as members of a group; we simply acknowledge that they are members of that group and while that shouldn't matter, we as a society are not yet at the point where it doesn't.

 

[SkyBubble]

More of your distortions and misstatements. You're just regurgitating your cult's BS.

 

[YDB95]

More of your distortions and misstatements. You're just regurgitating your cult's BS.

Then you ought to be able to debunk my points. If you're not even going to try, that tells us all we need to know. As does your insistence that I'm involved with a cult. No one on our side ever said Obama or Biden or Harris was ordained by God, nor have we ever compared them with superheroes.

 

[Sean Renaud]

Taht quote supports my argument. It doesn't support yours, as I showed, so of course you just dismiss it.

It does. That's why you use it but you don't use the entire speech and taking one line without any context is fucked up. I wish you guys would stop focusing on that.

 

[Bray123]

At a time when the President of the US has adjudications for racist policies regarding rental properties, uses 'Pocahontas' as a racial slur, refers to undocumented migrants as 'animals', retitles military bases after people who fought to keep slavery legal, bans the teaching of racist history in public schools, people still pretend that there is no racism in the US.

 

[Lazaran]

At a time when the President of the US has adjudications for racist policies regarding rental properties, uses 'Pocahontas' as a racial slur, refers to undocumented migrants as 'animals', retitles military bases after people who fought to keep slavery legal, bans the teaching of racist history in public schools, people still pretend that there is no racism in the US.

The MAGAts’ shameless / endless gaslighting about legacy racism in the US being a thing of the past is beyond deplorable and beyond farcical.



The MAGAts shameless / endless gaslighting about DonOld’s sex crimes and other criminality being "hoaxes" is also beyond deplorable and beyond farcical



We. Told. Them. So.

 

[YDB95]

At a time when the President of the US has adjudications for racist policies regarding rental properties, uses 'Pocahontas' as a racial slur, refers to undocumented migrants as 'animals', retitles military bases after people who fought to keep slavery legal, bans the teaching of racist history in public schools, people still pretend that there is no racism in the US.

Oh, they think there is racism...but only against whites.

 

[Rebel5soul]

The Who's Who of racialists all in one thread. *chuckle*

 

[ll74]

Racialism is a an excuse word for racists.

Either you're racist or you're not.

 

[Rebel5soul]

Racialism is a an excuse word for racists.

Either you're racist or you're not.

Oh, it's real. A label applied to cultists that only see the superficial.

 

[ll74]

Oh, it's real. A label applied to cultists that only see the superficial.

Racism is real.

If you feel a race is either superior or inferior.because of their characteristics (cultural or otherwise), you're a racist.

That includes their poverty level, father abandonment levels...etc.

If you are this person and you blame others for it, racialist is a term you use.

 

[Rightguide]

Those gains weren't due to gerrymandering, they were because the Republican brand is poison in most of California.

Yes they were. The Democrats have been racially gerrymandering congressional districts for the last 50 years. In the next few months to a year we are going to see the political collapse of the nation's oldest political organization. Their popularity is at an all time low. It was 19% in June. The DNC is borrowing money just to keep the lights on.

CNN Poll: Democratic Party Approval at 19%, Only 16% See Strong Leadership; Jeffries Responds to Trump Administration Actions​

Authors

Published Jun 1, 2025, 07:26 AM

https://deepnewz.com/us-elections/c...16-see-strong-leadership-jeffries-to-acf9d17e

 

[Sean Renaud]

I find it very curious that you would post this article RightGuide. How long have several of us on the Left said the Democrats aren't effective and don't have strong leadership. That they need to be willing to absolutely burn the fucking house because that is the only thing the right responds to. Shut down the government by say fleeing the state. Absolutely run scorched Earth.

Its not the policies that people don't like its that what's the point in voting for them if they can't accomplish the things we send them there to do? We're sick and fucking tired of centrist. We're sick and fucking tired of negotiating .

 

[Rightguide]

This is how the Democrats have rigged the congressional districts in their favor:

Click on Show More

https://twitter.com/x/status/1952896857283146202

 

[Sean Renaud]

This is how the Democrats have rigged the congressional districts in their favor:

Click on Show More

https://twitter.com/x/status/1952896857283146202

Which means absolutely fuck all.

 

[Rightguide]

Which means absolutely fuck all.

If it were reversed, like it soon will be in Texas, you'll be one of its biggest bashers.