Racist USA? 7% of Marriages "Interracial"

Including "sell-outs" Clarence Thomas... and Julian Bond and former U.S. Sen. Carol Moseley Braun. Nadir constantly reminds us that according to some website our own Westland, MI is the US capital of the KKK. Yet though I've never seen any sheets or burning crosses here (or even heard of any), every day I see "interracial" couples and children. How does the supposedly racist US public view this trend? "Opinion polls show overwhelming popular support, especially among younger people, for interracial marriage."


Hepzibah The Watchman said...

I enjoyed reading your blog - I too am a reformed leftist. May God bless you, indeed.

uptownseteve said...

Now Hue is trying to associate Julian Bond and Carole Moseley Braun with Slappy Thomas as being regarded as "sellouts" (presumably by black people) because they married whites.

Nonsense as usual.

The contempt for Thomas among most blacks has nothing to do with his marriage and you know.

Most blacks I know don't really give a crap and have been far more progressive on interracial relationships for a lot longer than most whites.

Do you honestly believe that most black/white couples during the 60s and 70s lived in white neighborhoods??

Be for real.

BTW Hue, my youngest brother is married to a white woman. They are both New Jersey policemen and I'm godfather to one of their daughters.

One last thing.

Guys like you are always railing out of one side of your mouth that blacks are overly sensitive and paranoid about race and then out of the other side of your mouth you boldly rant about how screwed up and pathological black people are.

You can't have it both ways.

Paul Hue said...

I very often hear blacks disparaging Clarence Thomas as a "sell-out" / "uncle tom" making note of his wife's racial categorization, and those assigning these names to Tom Sowell either wondering if his wife's a honkey, or "betting" that she is. Same for Ward Connerly.

Thus I point out here that some devoted black lefties have cracker mates. I do realize, as you correctly surmised, that the hatred that so many blacks have for these black "conservatives" has nothing to do with their spouses' "race"; to the contrary, I surmise myself that these critics only care about the marital racial composition because they hate these guys for their views.

I think that some black folks and white folks both have on average multiple problems. I don't understand how articulating these problems constitutes "talking out of two sides of my mouth." I think that blacks and whites who wanted to fire Imus are overly sensitive; I think that black and white people who are born into poverty and respond by making poor choices are "screwed up". I believe that logically these two assessments can come from the front of my mouth.

Paul Hue said...

Steve: If your brother and his wife decide to vote in favor of low tax rates and school vouchers, will you call them names according to their "races"? One an "uncle tom" the other a "racist"?

uptownseteve said...

paul hue

We've had this conversation before on the RepBro blog.

Being perceived as an Uncle Tom has nothing to do with conservative views. I hold many myself.

An Uncle Tom slanders and disparages his own people for the pleasure of white bigots.

Uncle Toms refelxively side with whites when whites commit injustices against blacks.

Uncle Toms never acknowledge the tremendous success of the black community in a nation that has never had our best interests at heart.

Uncle Toms, AMAZINGLY, feel that when whites like you unload their litany of anti-black venom (anti-academic, victimhood, pro-criminal) that the whites are referring to all other blacks except THEM.

"I think that black and white people who are born into poverty and respond by making poor choices are "screwed up". I believe that logically these two assessments can come from the front of my mouth."

This is all cute and self serving but you once said that if blacks expect white people to shed their prejudices against blacks that blacks "need to get their acts together".

You didn't specify poor blacks or ghetto blacks, or black criminals.

You just said blacks.

Now spin that.

uptownseteve said...

One more thing regarding "free speech".

Imus, David Duke, Jared Taylor, David Horowitz or whomever is free to write their racist screeds, give speeches and make appearances to their heart's content.

I could care less.

But they don't have the right to spew that filth over the SCC regulated public airways.

I keep wondering,if there is this so-called liberal media bias, why blatant white racists like Imus, Limbaugh and Michael Savage were given cable talk shows in the first place.

They all eventually got fired (if Imus was just on the radio nothing would have happened to him) for stepping over the line of of tolerated bigotry by just being their odious selves.

But how come no black demagogues are given the same shot, at least for some semblance of "balance".

If ESPN felt they could hire Rush Limbaugh to do football commentary then I feel that AL Sharpton should've had seat on the other side of the panel.

Paul Hue said...

None of the people who you call "uncle toms" meet your definition. Stating facts, such as black men compose 6% of the US population but commit 50% of the murders is not racist. Neither is recognizing that on standardized tests, in GPAs, in selecting rigorous courses and majors, black averages fall significantly below whites, and whites significantly below Asians. Nor is recognizing that the fraction of blacks born out-of-wedlock is about 50%, and much higher than for whites, and whites much higher than for Asians.

The blacks who "need to get their acts together" are the ones choosing not study in school, choosing to commit crimes, and choosing to have children out of wedlock at young ages. I myself have made each of these poor choices in my life, and to some extent "got my act together". When I made these poor choices, I contributed to the statistics that place honkies below Asians in these categories.

I have stated here and on various other blogs that huge numbers of blacks, and a very sizable fraction of blacks, have their acts together. As a consequence, a huge population of very affluent black folks exists in this country. I am a very sociable person, with lots of friends, and I attend many social affairs. About 99% of the people that I socialize with, and have always socialized with, are black. These people are all very affluent; I have my own "act together" to a much lesser extent than most of my friends; they set an example for me.

My daily life is constantly punctuated with black people, nearly all of whom are affluent. I go months without even interacting in any appreciable way with anybody (aside from work mates) except for people who are black and affluent, and some of the relatives of my youngest daughter, at her great-grandmother's house. This woman had about 10 kids. Half of them are super-successful; two have huge houses in Detroit's richest subburb, West Bloomfield.

My mind does not contain any notion that "black people" represent a single type of people, and that type "needs to get its act together". However, my mind does contain facts. And some of those facts indicate that when it comes to averages, different groups are producing different levels of success. In areas of crime, academic achievement, and teen pregnancy, Asians are outperforming whites, and whites are out performing blacks.

As for Rush Limbough, he started as a sports broadcaster. So if you want a liberal pundit to get hired by Monday Night Football, then you should perhaps nominate Kieth Olberman, who I propose as the liberal alternative to Rush. I'm unaware of any black socio-political pundit who has sports broadcasting experience.

I agree with you that blacks don't get equal shots yet as cable news talk hosts. That could explain why no black sports nerds from ESPN have broken into newstalk, like Olberman did. But we must remember in analyzing these numbers that blacks compose 12% of the US population, so we should expect one of 8 such shows should have a black host, and one in two should have a chick host.

I can find no reason other than racism and sexism to explain why this is not yet the case.

Nadir said...

Westland is home of the American Nazi Party, not specifically the KKK. Get it straight.

Paul Hue said...

Oh, it's the Nazis, not the KKK. Just goes to show you: whichever claims this as their headquarters, they make no impression or influence on residents. "To have no effect and to not exist is the same thing."

uptownseteve said...

"Stating facts, such as black men compose 6% of the US population but commit 50% of the murders is not racist."

YES IT IS. Because you're play word games and attempting to associate race with crime.

There are 19 million black men in America and 50% of the murders would come to about 4000.

So an honest person would say that the murders are intramural carnage between young impoverished ghetto gangbangers and drug dealers.

Race is the least significant factor.

Except to people like you.

Paul Hue said...

I'm not playing word games, just pointing out that you calling Rush "racist" for simply stating a statistical fact is ludicrous. Only very uneducated people with poor reasoning skills would discern from this fact black men in general are likely to be murderers.