More from stuff Black People Dont like

Two Commercials asking for Donations that Explain Racial Differences

A commercial for aid that is difficult to watch

We just got done talking about veterinarians and the overwhelming propensity for these animal doctors to be white (save in film). In a recent conversation with a friend we discussed the tendency for professions in America to be in violation of Black Run America’s (BRA) rules if they have a dearth of Black people employed in that particular field.

He then asked if I had read the article on Michael Oher’s new memoir in USA Today, since the Michael Oher Story piece written here was once a popular entry that search engine optimization (SEO) pointed web browsers to at a rate of 100 – 300 per day before that Google decided to pull the algorithm code to Stuff Black People Don’t Like.

I said yes. The conversation then turned to how a number of white people that have fled inner cities (in the case of Oher, Memphis) and found the wreckage created by Black people since the abandonment of those cities their fault. Not the fault of the Black people who have turned Detroit, Baltimore, Birmingham and many other once magnificent cities into decaying metropolises, but the fault of those whites who left these people behind to their own devices.

If only we had stayed to endure high rates of criminality, none of this would have ever occurred, they think. We could have had an impact on those unwanted Black youth that their father’s seem unconcerned with taking care of and in the case of Michael Oher, even their mother:

I Beat the Odds opens with the adult Oher going to meet a woman he spent his childhood fearing: a responsible Memphis social worker named Ms. Bobbie Spivey. She kept track of Michael, one of 12 children born to a crack-addicted mother. (Oher had almost no contact with his father, who was murdered when Oher was in high school.)
In 1994, when 7-year-old Michael was in the second grade, he and his brother Carlos were put in foster care because his mother would periodically leave her children (including a 14-month-old) alone for days to use drugs.
When he was 11, he moved back in with her, but her drug use made and continues to make her an unreliable mother.
The topic of his mother pains Oher. “We were always loved,” he says. “When she was clean and sober, she took care of us.”

My friend then asked me if I had ever watched the commercials for sending 10, 15 or 20 cents a day to Africa to help starving children or those depressing ads with celebrities hawking texts to a certain phone number on your screen for malaria nets to save third world kids.

I said yes, but that the emotional pull of these advertisements had long since subsided. Immediately, he responded with this question: “But have you seen the commercials with Sarah McLachlan for abused animals?”

It was at that moment that a flood of emotions crept into my mind, the haunting chords of her song Angel indelibly etched into my soul with the images of abused and neglected animals creeping into my thoughts.

I could only mutter an affirmative yes.

Animals do not have free will. Dogs (and even cats) provide a companion to man that to many represent a relationship as real and loving as any another human could give. But animals cannot care for themselves. Only sociopaths and those with severe mental disorders would dare mistreat or harm a defenseless, helpless animal.

Humans make choices that impact their lives and their families. Nearly 3/4ths of Black babies in America are born out-of-wedlock, the sperm donors (loosely defined as fathers) deciding that the state can provide a much better opportunity at success then they can.

Desensitized to Black suffering?

Is it because of hate facts like these that have desensitized me to would-be harrowing commercials of Black people in need of 15 cents a day to subsist? I can barely watch the Sarah McLachlan commercial for abused animals, finding the images of maimed animals overwhelming powerful.

People who do evil to animals have a special place in hell awaiting them. When one understands the problems plaguing Africa (high population growth), the empathy for their situation fades entirely.

Having traveled to all of the major cities in America teeming with an inner-city population (read Black) that most people residing in those cities – even Disingenuous White Liberals – pay handsomely to avoid, I have lost all empathy for that particular community. Their problems are not due to white racism, white privilege or The Man, but entirely because of their own hands.

My sympathy lies with those people who cannot avoid contact with these people (Black or white) because they don’t have the means to escape. Those are the true victims of BRA and the stringent blocking of any serious discussion of race in this country.

But my true sympathy is with those animals in the McLachlan commercial. Animals can’t help the way they are treated.

Black History Month Heroes: Mark Watson from “Soul Man”

One-drop makes C. Thomas Howell a Soul Man

Go to your kitchen and pour a tall glass of frosty white milk. Now pull out some chocolate syrup and squirt a few drops into that milk. Get a spoon and slowly stir the two liquids together, watching as a miniature whirlpool develops and ultimately a delicious mongrelization of flavor appears.

The amalgamation of milk and chocolate creates chocolate milk, a delectable beverage that wonderfully punctuates illustrates the concept of the “one-drop rule” that predominates the thinking of Black people.

What is the “one-drop rule”?:

The one-drop rule is a historical colloquial term in the United States for the social classification as black of individuals with any African ancestry; it is an example of hypodescent, the automatic assignment of children of a mixed union between different socioeconomic or ethnic groups to the group with the lower status.[1] The one-drop rule was put into law in the twentieth century, for instance in Virginia under the Racial Integrity Actantebellum years free people could have up to one-eighth to one-quarter African ancestry (depending on the state) and be considered legally white.[2] Community acceptance, carrying out community responsibilities, and appearance were often the most important factors if a person’s racial status were questioned. of 1924 (following the passage of similar laws in numerous other states). Despite the strictures of slavery, in the

Similarly in the United States, people of partial Native American descent were usually classified as Native American. In the early years of these types of unions and marriages, the fathers were usually European and the mothers Native American. Most Native American tribes had matrilineal descent systems, so within those communities, they also considered the children to belong to the mother’s people.

The concept of the one-drop rule has been chiefly applied to those of sub-Saharan black African ancestry. The poet Langston Hughes wrote in his 1940 memoir:

You see, unfortunately, I am not black. There are lots of different kinds of blood in our family. But here in the United States, the word ‘Negro’ is used to mean anyone who has any Negro blood at all in his veins. In Africa, the word is more pure. It means all Negro, therefore black. I am brown.

Take a look at that container of pristine milk that recently poured from and realize according to the idea of “one-drop” once even a mere squeeze of chocolate syrup is introduced into that milk it is changed forever. Halle Berry helps illustrate this point further, with her custody battle reigniting the notion of “one-drop“:

The Huffington Post and TMZ are reporting that Halle Berry and Gabriel Aubry have moved beyond just battling for custody of their daughter, Nahla. In the wake of Berry’s allegations that Aubry called her the n-word, they’re now in disagreement about their toddler’s racial identity.

According to TMZ, Berry told Ebony magazine, “I feel she’s black. I’m black and I’m her mother, and I believe in the one-drop theory.”

The one-drop rule, of course, is a historical concept that originally referred to the idea that a person with any trace of sub-Saharan ancestry, however small or invisible, could not legally be considered white, unless he or she could claim an alternative nonwhite ancestry.

Its roots are in slavery and segregation, but the racism behind those concepts isn’t necessarily invoked every time someone uses it. It’s been reclaimed to reflect what many African Americans see as a social reality. We at The Root don’t think its use is quite as scandalous as the mainstream media is making it out to be.

Meanwhile, TMZ has reported that Aubry insists Nahla is white and, according to sources, goes “nuts” anytime someone refers to her as black.

Black people, as we have discussed, love being Black. The “one-drop rule” was once used to vilify light-skinned Black people, castigating them to a lowly existence as a “negro” or a “colored” person. No longer is being Black seen as an impediment to success; instead it is viewed as a ticket to an assortment of incentives and programs not available to white people such as affirmative action and diversity mandates.

Though dark-skinned Black people might protest preferential treatment allotted to mulattoes or light-skinned Black people that are blessed with but a partial gift of the genetic “one-drop rule,” using the hand nature dealt you is a sure way to nurture a positive results for the future.

A competent, light-skinned Black person blessed with but a smidgen of the “one-drop” can write their own ticket to success in Black Run America (BRA) though they will incur the wrath from darker sisters and brothers.

Interestingly, many light-skinned biracial Black people are milking the system of preferential treatment to Black people in college admissions, hiring policies and race-based policies by siding with their chocolate half:

A study of biracial people with black and white ancestry has found that many identify themselves solely as black when filling out college applications and financial-aid forms, raising new questions about the accuracy of educational statistics and research based on racial and ethnic data derived from students.

The study of 40 biracial people—all of whom reported having one black parent and one white one—found that 29, or nearly three-fourths, reported concealing their white ancestry in applying for college, scholarships, financial aid, or jobs.

How the respondents reported characterizing themselves elsewhere depended on the context, however, with 29 reporting that they “strategically” identified themselves only as black when they thought they would benefit from doing so. One respondent, whose name is given only as Natasha, told the researchers, “I know that if I say I’m ‘biracial,’ I will get certain things, and if I say I’m ‘black,’ I will get certain things.” Another respondent, Julie, said, “If I’m trying to get more money from the government, I am ‘African American.’ There is no white aspect to me.”

In defining themselves as black, the study respondents “are not necessarily challenging contemporary social norms which arguably define them as black anyway,” the article says. Nonetheless, it says, the study’s findings “raise broader questions about who should benefit from affirmative-action programs,” and whether beneficiaries should be required to have two black parents or whether the “one-drop rule” should be applied to people with biracial or multiracial backgrounds.

Black people couldn’t be bothered with harboring inadequate feelings about having “one-drop” in them to qualify and earn their Black card. A Black card, even if it is only “one-drop” is a ticket to unbelievable riches.

A light-skinned Black person can claim to be a Republican and with just enough adherence to the party line could probably run for president in 2012. Fortune 500 companies will bend over backwards to promote a competent Black person just to spurn those who say the hire was merely to reach a predetermined quota of Black employees because this light-skinned Black person might pass for white.

Though they completely repudiate any of their genes and adhere to the notion of “one-drop” these light-skinned Black people aren’t hampered with dark Black skin that causes whispers to be heard around the water cooler and questions to be asked in E-mails about that persons qualifications.

The “one-drop rule” was on hilarious display in the 1980s comedy Soul Man, starring a tanned C. Thomas Howell. Blood truly is thicker then water and though Howell’s character Mark Watson was just a white boy with a lot of tanning cream, he passed as a light-skinned Black person thanks to “one-drop“:

Soul Man is a comedy film made in 1986 about a man who undergoes racial transformation with pills to qualify for an African-American-only scholarship at Harvard Law School. It stars C. Thomas Howell, Rae Dawn Chong, Arye Gross, James Earl Jones, Leslie Nielsen, and Julia Louis-Dreyfus.

The movie’s protagonist is Mark Watson (Howell), the pampered son from a rich family who is about to attend Harvard Law School along with his best friend Gordon (Gross). However, all of a sudden his father’s neurotic psychiatrist talks his patient into having more fun for himself instead of spending money on his son. Faced with the horrifying prospect of having to pay for law school by himself, Mark decides to take up a scholarship, but the only suitable one is for blacks only. So he decides to cheat: by using tanning pills in a larger dose than prescribed to appear as an African-American, he sets out for Harvard, naïvely believing that blacks have no problems at all in American society.

However, once immersed in a black student’s life, Mark finds that people are less lenient than he imagined and more prone to see him as a black person instead of a fellow student. He meets a young African-American student named Sarah Walker (Chong), whom he first only flirts with; gradually, however, he genuinely falls in love with her. As it turns out, she was the original candidate for the scholarship which he had usurped, and now she has to work hard as a waitress to support herself and her son George while studying. Slowly, Mark begins to regret his deed, and after a chaotic day – in which Sarah, his parents (who are not aware of his double life) and his classmate Whitney, who is also his landlord’s daughter (Melora Hardin), drop in for surprise visits at the same time – he drops the charade and openly reveals himself to be white.

The film ends with Mark declaring to his professor (Jones) that he wishes to pay back the scholarship and do charity work to make amends for his fraud, and Sarah decides to give him another chance.

In a country that is increasingly hostile to white people and codifying laws to ensure those hampered by disparate impact get a leg up over the competition and a nation that values diversity as the ultimate ideal, trying to pass oneself off as a light-skinned Black person with but a kiss of “one-drop” makes a lot of sense.

If the movie came out today, Watson could apply for a Gates Foundation Scholarship since those are only available to non-whites. Or he could have gotten into the Naval Academy. Or… okay, that list is long and distinguished.

Black Fictional Month Heroes includes Mark Watson from the fine film Soul Man, as his character helps poignantly showcase the beauty of the “one-drop rule” and how Black people will rally around one another when put into situations that require Blackness to overcome a milky white world.

Plus the “one-drop rule” in Soul Man shows how just a little Black can get you a free ride into Harvard Law School.

Watch Soul Man here. See C. Thomas Howell become Black here.

Lazy? Who you calling Lazy? Black South Carolina Lawmaker calls Black people Lazy

Black South Carolina state senator calls Black people lazy

In the Brave New World of 21st century America, the dwindling white population will enter the battle for ethnic solidarity battle royal that Black people have been dominating for quite sometime. Hispanics are late-comers to this battle, but they will begin asserting themselves with increasingly tenacity in the coming years.

All of this could have been avoided with immigration reform. Even the Model Minority will unquestionable enter this struggle, which could lead to an inevitable second civil war.

Across the nation, individual states are debating enacting laws similar to what Arizona passed. South Carolina is holding a debate on illegal immigration and one Black lawmaker decided to let this beauty slip:

As an Arizona-style immigration bill moves forward, debate today is focusing on a Charleston senator’s comments about the unwillingness of Americans to do dirty work.

Sen. Robert Ford, D-Charleston argued against the bill by saying it would frighten away “Mexicans” when South Carolina needs Mexicans to perform manual labor.

Ford said neither blacks nor whites were willing to do the difficult jobs in South Carolina.
He said Mexicans would be needed to help build the Boeing plant in North Charleston.

“I know brothers — and I’m talking about black guys — they are not going to do the dirty work at Boeing, to do that hauling and all that building, the dirty work,” Ford said. “A brother is going to find a way to take a break.”

He later made a comment about “blue-eyed brothers” also not wanting to work hard.

“Ever since this country was built, we’ve always had someone else come in and do the work for us,” he said.

Black people are lazy? This coming from the lips of a Black lawmaker is sending shockwaves through not only South Carolina, but the entire Black community. Obesity rates aside, Black people aren’t lazy.

They just chose to not do work that Mexicans will gladly perform, such as building new subdivisions in far-away suburbs where white people retreat to so that they can send their kids to “better” schools. It’s a vicious cycle, but an incredibly funny one to watch. Funny in a tragic way.

White people flee Black-run major cities and Mexican day-laborers build the homes. Researchers at LSU found a link between Latino employment and Black urban violence (and societal decay), but few wish to confront the growing Hispanic lobby.

Not every Black person can be a barber, and the other vocations with the highest Black participation aren’t what we would consider intellectually stimulating.
Here are the jobs with the highest Latino percentage of employees:

1. Graders and sorters of agricultural products—58.0%

2. Drywall installers, ceiling tile installers, and tapers—56.6%

3. Cement masons, concrete finishers, and terrazzo workers—51.5%

4. Helpers, construction trades—48.6%

5. Roofers—47.7%

6. Miscellaneous agricultural workers—45.7%

7. Packaging and filling machine operators and tenders—45.1%

8. Carpet, floor, and tile installers and finishers—44.5%

9. Construction laborers—44.2%

10. Hand packers and packagers—43.7%

In 1964 America was 90 percent white and 10 percent Black. Now Latinos comprise the bulk of the new population growth in America and represent 18 percent of the United States population. Blacks have dropped to roughly 12 percent.

Will Disingenuous White Liberals (DWLs) ever decide to abandon their favorite object of affection (Black people) for an upgrade in ethnic value?

Regardless, is Sen. Robert Ford correct in calling Black people lazy?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s