quote:

---

Are they some how more appealing at state level?

---

Yes.

So you'd also approve of forced integration at state level?

What I found strange was that none of the PC brigade seemed to be critical of Senator Thrummond - they criticised Lott for praising him but didn't want to appear like party poopers by directing it at the man whose past policies they actually opposed.
(bear in mind this impression was given by UK news so may not be strictly accurate).

That seems akin to jumping on someone for saying "In the current circumstances Bush is right to pursue a vigorous foreign policy" without having a harsh word to say for Bush himself.

Not only did the criticism seem to be an unduly harsh and emotive misinterpretation of what Lott was trying to say, they also seem to have completely missed the fact that Thrummond actually did used to openly advocate segregation. The only conclusion that can be drawn is that whoever created the media storm in the first place was motivated more out of personal animosity/opposition to Lott than any sense of idealism.

Anything at the State level is preferable to the Federal level for two reasons.

1) If you don't like it, you can move to another state.

2) It's easier for people within a State to change their own laws based on what they want than to change them at the Federal level. At the Federal level, you get voters in New York and California dictating how to run Alabama and Mississippi.

quote:

---

1) If you don't like it, you can move to another state.

---

The harsh converse of course is that if you are unhappy with the country, then YOU can leave. Not that I agree with that.

quote:

---

2) It's easier for people within a State to change their own laws based on what they want than to change them at the Federal level. At the Federal level, you get voters in New York and California dictating how to run Alabama and Mississippi.

---

Your original problem was that the law was being forced upon people who didn't want it. This is odious at the state and federal level. The true solution to your problem would be to have no segredation and no anti-discrimination laws. Let people associate freely and engage in comerce with who they wish. Their is no basis for having segregation laws and their is no basis for anti-discrimination laws. Just leave everyone alone, and it will naturally sort itself out.

quote:

---

The harsh converse of course is that if you are unhappy with the country, then YOU can leave. Not that I agree with that.

---

1) It's much easier to move to another State than to move to another country.

2) The US was supposed to be a confederation of sovereign States in the first place.

quote:

---

Your original problem was that the law was being forced upon people who didn't want it. This is odious at the state and federal level. The true solution to your problem would be to have no segredation and no anti-discrimination laws. Let people associate freely and engage in comerce with who they wish. Their is no basis for having segregation laws and their is no basis for anti-discrimination laws. Just leave everyone alone, and it will naturally sort itself out.

---

If the people in Georgia, for example, wanted that, it would have come about naturally through voting. That's not how it happened though. Northerner Liberals swarmed down on the South and dictated how they run their communities and State, and things were imposed at the Federal level. That causes a lot of resentment and violence.

What I'm trying to say is that only citizens of the State/community they live in have the right to decide how their State/community will function. New Yorkers have no right to tell people in Alabama how to do things. This goes for drug laws, prostitution laws, alchohol laws, abortion laws, etc.

And I am saying that in ceratin areas, like freedom of association, no one has the right to dictate to me how I act. A state is just a very small nation. In California, the politics are dominated by about 3 or 4 very large cities. Just because it is a state, it does not mean that its action or laws are vindicated by some sort of will of the majority. What you are claiming is odious on the Federal level, carpetbaggers, you are excusing on the state level becuase it is theoretically easier to fight.

That would be reverse racism Vene, and that's Baaaad.

1)I am not a reverse racist. I simply hate the morons who refuse to believe that we are ONE race. Theories of genetic predispositions and use of biased statistics are not cause for hate against someone who is just like you, or, sometimes better than you.
2)Jim crow laws were better on a state level than they ever would have been on a federal level.
3)They were still bad.

Jim crow laws were set in place because pain-in-the-ass ex-confederates could not see the former slaves as anything but animals.
This idea that black people were not people was only spread once slavery had begun to be contested. Once abolition movements began to gain strength, pro-slavery activists began spreading propoganda that black people were savage animals, infinately inferior to the white race. Before this, blacks were looked upon as regular people that were simply misfortunate.
4)I believe Saturnrocketx's constant remarks to be the ravings of a child who wishes for attention. Because his peers at school shunned him for his nerd glasses and wannabe punk attitude, Saturn feels that he must rave about how he and his race are better than others. Mouse however, seems to be quite intelligent, although really stupid on this one issue.

Homer

Homer, we are not one race. That itself is the "theory". Actually, it's further than theory now... it's an idiotic liberal dogma born out of radical political correctness. Get a black man's skull and a white man's skull, compare them, then tell me that we are all the same race.

"Blacks smell bad and are not very human."

- Defiant Exile

(Confirmed by personal experience.)

(Note: Species is a term applied arbitrarily for convenience.)

Someone should put together a collection of quotes from Spirit.

By genetics, we are one race. Different races cannot interbreed, and when they do, their offspring are sterile, that is not true with the human race.

Saturn, if brainless white people were somehow successfull in exterminating all non-whites, what then? Your attitude of hate would not dissapear once your perverse goal is achieved. Soon you would begin to hate all the lutherans and all the english. Once they were dead you would find someone else until you destroyed yourselves completely. You would never be satisfied with the "purity of the white race."

Homer

Don't be silly, Homer. Race is not species. Race is breeds. Different dog, cat, and horse breeds can have mutt offspring, but no one denies the fact that different animal breeds exist.

Different groups of humans have evolved in vastly different climates, resulting in different genetic strengths, weaknesses, and physical characteristics - different races.

quote:

---

Originally posted by HomerJay603:
You would never be satisfied with the "purity of the white race."

---

If white were gold, then higher purity would be the smith's goal.

Homer, where do you get this stuff?

It's different species that usually can't interbreed (although jaguars and cougars and tigers can produce fertile offspring, though they're different species.)

Next comes sub-species, which would be what is commonly thought of as race, such as Caucasian, Congoid, and such.

Race is a further subdivision.

quote:

---

Originally posted by FuckOffandDie:
whoever created the media storm in the first place was motivated more out of personal animosity/opposition to Lott than any sense of idealism.

---

The motive of those that exposed him is irrelevant. The ones that used it to gain some political yardage ARE idealists though, so I disagree FOAD.

I was talking about the motives of those who started it, not those who jumped on the bandwagon later.

I hesitate to continue this because it's such a trivial point, but yes I realize you were talking about the ones that exposed him.

If you don't know who, then you don't know why. Politicians have all sorts of people watching their every move, waiting for the great fuck-up that can be used against them. And many of these people are idealists.