BoatBanter.com - View Single Post

Keyser SÃ¶ze

On 1/3/16 4:52 PM, John H. wrote:
On Sun, 03 Jan 2016 16:30:17 -0500, wrote:

On Sun, 03 Jan 2016 16:16:00 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Sun, 03 Jan 2016 15:57:37 -0500, wrote:

On Sun, 03 Jan 2016 13:29:02 -0500, wrote:

On Sun, 3 Jan 2016 13:19:40 -0500, Justan Olphart
wrote:

On 1/3/2016 12:48 PM, John H. wrote:
On Sun, 3 Jan 2016 11:09:22 -0500, Justan Olphart wrote:

On 1/3/2016 9:46 AM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 1/3/16 9:10 AM, John H. wrote:

I looked again, but could find nothing approaching 'racism' in the
original question.
Does Democrat control of ghettos automatically spell racism in some
way? Perhaps some
of the other experts on 'racism' could chime in.
--

Blow that dog whistle, Herring.

Local democratic politicians presiding over every known large ghetto
area in America should not be construed to relate Democrats to racism.
It's just a coincidence.

Oh. I would think that fostering policies which keep the ghettos full *could* be
considered racism, especially if the ghetto occupants are black. I suppose Krause
considers use of the words ghetto and Democrat together is automatic 'racism'.
--

Ban idiots, not guns!

Probably Krause associates black and ghetto together. Whether that's
racist, I don't know.

Ironic since "ghetto" is an Italian word derived from latin

===

Ghettos at varios times and various places have been associated with a
lot of different ethnicities. One common definition goes like this:

---
A section of a city, especially a thickly populated slum area,
inhabited predominantly by members of an ethnic or other minority
group, often as a result of social or economic restrictions,
pressures, or hardships.
---

The word seems to imply an economic distinction more than racial or
ethnic. Since Democrats like to fancy themselves as champions of the
downtrodden, it makes sense that they would identify with ghettos. Of
course since the vast majority of working americans do not identify
with ghettos it would seem to put democrats somewhere out in left
field politically so to speak.

Well, I'm guessing that the answer to my question is, "No".

===

Harry's opinions are just that.

Which reminds me that opinions are like arse'ls, everybody has one.

Harry never showed the balls to answer the question.
--

Ban idiots, not guns!

Once again, it has nothing to do with balls or anything other than my
refusal to play your stupid trolling games.