"Well, if you see the similarities between this country and many African countries, they were all under European control. They did not simply fall apart....they were destroyed by imperialistic Europeans (French, Belgian, English, etc)."
I guess mud huts and AIDS are symbols of third world progress, huh? Whereas the "invasion" of those that bring indoor plumbing, air conditioning, and modern medicine are evil?
HAHA you dumb libertards are so brainwashingly predictable.
Libberish: The verbal diarhea that the libertard mind spews forth.
'Racism' is moving into a black neighborhood and kicking everyone out.
'Self-Interest / Self-Preservation' is moving out of a black neighborhood to live in the suburbs. One is offensive, the other defensive.
God did not create different races, they've evolved over hundreds of thousands of years of natural self-interest and/or migration and/or selection and/or geography, and not through legislation. Or somone like Eric Holder saying we're a bunch of cowards because we're white.
He should keep his conflicted interior dialogue to himself..Obama too. White people have enabled both of them.
I am moving out of my house because my neighbor of 4 years is a terrible person, has 5 children all under the age of 6 living in a 2 bedroom rowhouse, screams at his wife and is rude to my wife when he sees her on the street
He is also racist as i have heard many racial slurs being screamed out in the street by him. I have seen many members of his family and they all seem to be the same type of person i never want to be around. They all live within a 3 block radius of each other in this neighborhood and am leaving because of people like them
I live in a predominantly white neighborhood, my neighbor is white, and i am white.
Am i racist against my own race because of this?
Many times it has nothing to do with race, and each example can be for different reasons.
And Geer
I am pretty sure there are plenty of black neighborhoods that are ok to live in just as there are plenty of suburbs that many would not want to live in. I think you may have mis-stated that
If you look at the numbers of people moving in and out of these neighborhoods, you will see that it is much more than personal difference with neighbors. In Chicago and in Long Island, they created community boards which basically would screen or prevent minorities from living there. There is a name for this historic trend and it has been very widely documented. It is not a myth.
ObiWanKenobi's account has been banned. This person has a history of setting up accounts with the purpose of spreading his white-power message, which is obviously not tolerated on Archinect.
We apologize to anyone who read his comments and were offended. Thanks to those of you who alerted us.
I never said it was a myth, just as racism is not a myth
And i did not say that my example was the general rule
I am not sure where that came from, but please dont take that from my post, or claim I said that, as I said nothing of the sort
My point is that Geertrude's example of moving to the suburbs is not really self preservation. Perhaps moving to a different neighborhood would be self preservation
Moving to the suburbs usually is based on a desired change in life style, namely city/urban living to suburb living
Unless i am mistaken in interpreting his use of "black neighborhoods" as to be more city living, and "suburbs" as more white neighborhoods. Considering you named 2 cities, it seems that is how you interpreted it as well
from........."I live in a predominantly white neighborhood, my neighbor is white, and i am white. Am i racist against my own race because of this? Many times it has nothing to do with race, and each example can be for different reasons." I understood this as you were saying people moving away from neighborhoods where black people were moving in was not about race. My misunderstanding....my bad.
yeah i guess i didnt make that clear enough, or it was too jumbled with other things
my example was of me moving away to the suburbs from a neighborhood not because black people are moving in, but because of the white people currently living there
where i live is a neighborhood where everyone is moving in, kind of the new trendy "up and coming/ hipster neighborhood". the problem here isnt the people moving in (which also includes black people among others). It's the people who have been here forever, pass down their houses to their kids, who pass it down to their kids, who all keep it as a trashpile basically. And these people are 99.9% white.
also, i realize that my case is not the norm, and not the majority. I just wanted to point out that we cant make blanket statements like people move to the suburbs because they dont want black people to move into their neighborhood.
Moving out of a black neighborhood to go to the suburbs doesnt automatically have racist implications. Maybe saying moving out of a black neighborhood to somewhere a couple blocks away, you could make that case. I dont think going to the suburbs has anything to do with it though, as there are so many reasons to do that, we cant just assume its racism
Agreed. In the early 50's and the 60's after the Great Migration and African Americans were moving from the South, this was a serious problem. Today, I don't think its the same scenario because the Civil Rights Movement and racial tension was much higher then. Also, I don't know if I was clear on this, but I see it as a historic trend that has played a part in establishing neighborhoods for today, not necessarily an explanation for people moving today.
Ok. well that was a massive diversion. I didnt actually plan on this becoming the racial grievance thread, kinda went out of my way to stay literal and not harp too much on the racial angle in the onset post (I used graphs and everything!), but I guess these things happen. 2step, absolutely dude, theres no reason whatsoever people who disagree with obama on this or that are racists. I was just trying to explain to Gerty why I didnt really feel it was worth my time to argue with Obi.
Anyway, that said, before we climb too high on our liberal horses, I just thought Id offer this really great talk by Mahzarin Banaji on implicit gender and racial bias. (Its just the first 25 minutes or so, you can skip forward to minute 23 for the cool experiment). Basically its a group of famous phds and philosophers dramatically failing a test for gender prejudice. This is conference on science and sociology and atheism, a group thats hugely self-selected for the most liberal and educated people imaginable, and of course if you asked any of these people if they harbored gender-bias they would vehemently deny it, and vehemently believe it, but the bias is there without them being consciously aware of it. She points out that a test for racial bias would almost certainly yield a similar result.
So this stuff is there. When most people think "black neighborhood" they think crime. When most people think "woman", they think family. And these social constructions are self-feeding and hugely powerful, applying enormous unseen pressure on hiring practices and public policy and media constructions. And I'll admit it myself, when I first arrived in India and started spending time in those neighborhoods, I found myself experiencing a visceral, unprovoked fear of muslims. I knew they werent dangerous, I knew nobody was going to just randomly attack me, but I felt it just the same. After years and years of endless newsreels of people shouting and burning flags and trashy movies of hapless stereotypes with ak47s on planes, even though I knew it was wrong, it had been completely programmed into my head. It took weeks to make that go away. I had to spend time with families, spend dinner with them, and talk with them, and drink tea and laugh with them before my mind would really believe they were nothing what media in the US had just blindly portrayed them to be.
And I think the very same thing is going on in almost all of these battles. Weve conjured these things in our heads, and they stay there, even as the reality moves on. I mean you see these people losing their ever-loving minds over healthcare, and like fine, it cuts the deficit, but sure, there are huge up-front costs that are worth worrying about. There are lots and lots of very reasonable people who think so. But this isnt fucking stalinism. Its actually crazy and insulting to say so. Theres this frighteningly large minority who have gone completely apoplectic over this president over shit thats so obviously delusional I find it pretty difficult to believe they believe it themselves. And Im sorry, but for many of them, I do think race is a big part of it.
Anyway, I know most of the time it looks like this country is spiraling into the abyss, but I know these people have always been there, and have never constituted more than 10-15% of the country. Theyre just really, really, loud right now. I frankly think the GOP would be wise to look long term, maybe try to show they are a real, rational, broad-appeal party and tell the nuts to fuck off, but I dont see much sign of that yet. All obama can really do is set a decent example, do his best to fix shit and hope in the end people can make a reasonable assessment of the real things that have actually occurred instead of succumbing to the phantasms and demagoguery and hyperbolic nonsense.
This really should not be Obama's problem, I mean some of these people have legitimate concerns, but nobody can fight the nuts with reason and he better not even address it
It is the responsibility of the republicans, they are the ones who have to protect their brand, assume their part for the situation we are in. Instead, they just let "conservative" become a dirty word.
And race is a huge part of it, consciously and subconsciously, that's the real meaning of "let's take our country back".
thank you for this thread. I think it brings up some well considered points, prior to being hijacked by the white supremacist in our midst (who was thankfully banned.)
Trying to have a reasonable conversation on the archinect boards these days reminds me of something I heard once called the parable of the tribes:
Imagine a group of tribes living within reach of one another. If all choose the way of peace, then all may live in peace. But what if all but one chooses peace? What if one is endlessly beliigerent, hostile, and difficult?
It throws all of the tribes into chaos and perverts any attempt at reasonable discussion and connection. A number of the more vitriolic posters on Archinect these days have created a place that I rarely visit any more.
So I couldnt hope to get overly gleeful just yet, but this is still a good sign? Right? I mean every month is a test. They need 100,000 new jobs plus every month from here on out, and with all those depressed people dropped off the unemployment rolls for exhaustion to keep trying coming back into the fold we still probably wont see that big bad number move very much, but even just anecdotally, when you talk to firms and contractors there does seem to be some sense that things are coming back.
I guess the question I still have is, when does Obama and crew start to get some credit for that? This is sort of what I mean about Reagan, and republicanism more generally; they make people feel great about doing jack-diddly-squat. And if it were even true that they were doing responsible things like lowering the deficit and giving substantial tax breaks to actual middle class people rather than just dolling out billions to their fucking golf buddies to blow on an unregulated wallstreet casino, I might understand. But theyre not. They never have. Just to refresh our memory:
See those little leveling off plateaus when the budget gets balanced? Thats when democrats ran things. And see those exponential asymptotes toward colossal fucking catastrophe? Thats republicans. Thats because theyre spending your money on stupid fucking shit.
I mean how fucked up a country is it when people love you for spending money on killing people and rewarding greed and dumping ink into the ocean, but when you do spend on things like healthcare and education and not turning every dime we make over to saudi arabia and exxonmobil youre some stalinist harbinger of the end times?
Just to play devil's advocate...people judge the world by what surrounds them on a daily basis. Gas prices, while seemingly trivial in the big picture, affect our economy substantially, both in numbers and psychologically. So higher prices means a lower quality of life, which means no vacations, no eating out, no big screen tvs, etc. Nobody wants that.
Education is an intangible. I think we are facing more of a societal problem then just a monetary one (which I don't think there is a clear solution). The bureaucracy that is our school system is pathetic.
Many think health care is just part of their job, no thought that they are paying for it. I saw on a Yahoo forum recently "I am a hard working, tax paying individual, I don't want my money going to someone not paying their dues". Uh, sure, no one does, but I am pretty sure I can bet where your values are and your education level!
As for the R's nasty messages, I think we can thank Limbaugh and others for their sensationalism. They've made a good case for selling extremes (and fortunes).
A side effect of that is these tea party gangs. I think that will actually back fire and end up hurting the R's come elections. Too extreme makes headlines, stirs people up, but also will get more centrists (on both sides) rallying for something more moderate.
So, that being said, I agree with you, just that there will always be reasons to point the finger around. I look at Obama and I see some hope, but I see more of the status quo. Who's running our financial system? Same group from the same place. Who's writing the regulations? Same, same.
We'll see where health care ends up, but so far it is mostly more of the same. Which might not be too bad, no one really knows how to do things.
The fact is that the "Tea Partiers" or tea-baggers as I like to call them, are basically just motivated by "white fear" of the minorities in the country "taking over". It's what they mean when they say "We Want Our Country Back". Back from whom? What? Back from the "mandingo" or mixed-race President?
These people are pathetic. The fact is that this country will no longer be a White majority anymore by 2030. It will be primarily "minorities" such as African-Americans and Hispanics making up the largest portion.
Get over it. Or if you can't, or won't - at least stop hiding behind your ignorance by pretending that it's not about race - because if this were Bush, you may not like what he's doing but you wouldn't be saying "I want my country back".
@dallasarchitect...this is one of those threads we all wish would go away. Well, perhaps not you - because you sound like a racist.
What do you have against whites? And why on earth do you think Whites will be a minority in 20 years?
Oh please, the tea party are more in line with libertarianism than white fear. The whole premise of their founding was the exploding debt and their perception of the republicans abandoning their smaller government pro small business platform. Its truly ironic that the party who believes minorities can't compete and must have institutionalised quotas and programs to help them, gifts from the party if you will, are calling the tea partyers racist. What's more racist, saying people should immegrate leagaly and we should punish enabling businesses who profit off them? Or making it law that your race is subpar and needs goverment mandates to prosper? What I see in the teaparty is a lot of people who have little political experiance and most likely never participated before just being extremely pissed off and wether you like their message or not you can't ignore the anger of those who have had something taken away and are using their right of assembely.
Statistics and Projections are two different things. Statistics are based on historical information, and projections are a derivative of historical statistics. Maybe you are talking about disparaging birthrates? Why is that? Why are whites reproducing less?
6% of All White Males Living in the Union States Died in the Civil War, fighting to Free the slaves. 6% of all white males.....
There were 2,100,000 total Union Soldiers, 180,000 of them were Black.
It brings great pain to alot of people to be called racist - especially by people who like to throw Statistics around.......
I just find it ironic that all the tea party people and libertarians keep having meetings in public parks and public pavilions paid for by millions of dollars of tax payer money.
You know, rather than doing the libertarian thing of renting out a conference space.
Racist? haha. Do you shop at 7-11? Do you use elevated highways? Are your department (and big box stores) located on county land? Do you use a car?
Because those are all racist things in one sick twisted way or another.
It's one thing to blatantly say "I hate n*ggers." It is quite another thing to say "I like black people" while continuing to use the systems created, put in place and operated to isolate and segregate people.
Which is pretty much the entire American landscape with some minimal exceptions.
Bunyan Bryant, Paul Mohai. Race and the Incidence of Environmental Hazards: A Time for Discourse. Westview Press, 1992
Catherine L. Ross. Planning, Urban Revitalization, and the Inner City: An Exploration of Structural Racism. Journal of Planning Literature, Vol. 14, No. 3, 367-380.
Laura Pulido. Rethinking Environmental Racism: White Privilege and Urban Development in Southern California. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, Volume 90, Issue 1 March 2000, pages 12 - 40.
Guy Baeten. Clichés of Urban Doom: The Dystopian Politics of Metaphors for the Unequal City – a View from Brussels. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research. Volume 25 Issue 1, Pages 55 - 69.
JT Hamilton. Testing for Environmental Racism: Prejudice, Profits, Political Power?. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 1995
Robert Doyle Bullard, Glenn S. Johnson, Angel O. Torres. Sprawl city: race, politics, and planning in Atlanta. 2000.
S.Rose-Ackerman. Racism and urban structure. Journal of Urban Economics, Volume 2, Issue 1, Pages 85-103. 1975.
RA Beauregard. Between modernity and postmodernity: the ambiguous position of US planning. Readings in planning theory. 1989.
I am not going to argue the fact that you see everything through the prism of race....it's pathological at this point. You're a racist, and it's manifest - if you've found 50+ sources of the same message, it's obviously the case.
Just because the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was passed does not mean that the institution of racism (and by some extension the institution of slavery) miraculously disappeared over night.
In fact, all it did was remove the target from the equation. Many structuralist components of the Antebellum, The Reconstruction Era and the Golden Era still exist today. But instead of letting this elements outright target individuals, they now blindly attack any individual who meets the qualifications of the original party.
Black and poor were synonymous pretty much until the 1980s. So, any specific legislation, urban plan or cultural ideal that attacked black people would also attack poor people.
When the Civil Rights Act passed, it was no longer legally or socially acceptable to target black people. It was, however, perfectly acceptable to target poor people.
So, if anything, these systems never went away... they ended up indiscriminately attacking all poor people. And the bulk of 'poor' people in this country are lower-middle class whites. So, understanding these principles are necessary because they not only attack blacks... they now attack the young, old and white.
White people suffer just as much as any other race (in a very contemporary setting) because the Civil Rights Act simply 'whitewashed' legislation rather than dismantling those legal systems.
So, if you want to talk about America's dying white middle class, you should look at the legislation that was originally applied to blacks but now legally has to be applied to everyone.
Are you seriously an architect? I find it hard to believe you can function as such with this kind of crap swirling around in your head....You prefaced your last post by saying, essentially, that [racism abounds, despite legislative efforts] and concluded by suggesting it is because that legislation has been exploited by whites - that it isn't the 'Black thing' it was originally designed to be? Unreal.
....You did make one point (albeit indirect and unintentional) regarding Tea [Baggers] using Public Parks afforded by tax revenue......
Tax money used to go towards building parks and pavillions, but now it is sucked into the vacuum of unsustainable social programs and administration of ill-fated projects which are never completed. See the problem here? Taking back the country to a place where things were physically Produced, and not socially cultivated, like today.
...then you are a self-loathing white, or applying the single bandwagon argument against the tea-partiers: They're racist because Obama is black....It's all you got. It's too bad the partly lines have become divides between white heterosexual christians vs. everyone else. Collectivism sucks.
So, my brother and I were talking about what could potentially lose Obama the election in 2012. Lets say, more than likely, the economy is growing comfortably. More than likely the republicans have won seats but not gained control of either the house or the senate, are frustrated and likely still fragmented and leaderless. Given that, baring a major incident of terrorism Id say Obamas chances look quite good.
My brothers question was though, what happens if Iran announces it has nuclear weapons a month before the election?
Given the most recent pentagon report on the subject, that seems like a pretty reasonable timeframe. Its every bit in the interest of the revolutionary guard to have Republicans in office. Republicans are morons, who love the bloviating cowboy bullshit that does nothing but drive the iranian people into the hardliners hands. Whatever they tell everybody else, I dont think anyone has any real question they want nuclear weapons, both for the domestic prowess of defying the great and terrible United States, and for the regional leverage it offers them.
So what can Obama or anyone do to stop it? Honestly, I dont think anything can. Rumors are now Netanyahu wants airstrikes in return for a peace deal, which is fucking great. From my angle that kind of looks like holding the Palestinian territories hostage in exchange for being allowed to irradiate 66 million people, but whatever. I dont think Netanyahu has ever had any real interest in peace anyway. At this point, all Obama can do is make him look terrible and hope his coalition collapses.
But lets say for the sake of argument 2 years from now we're roughly where we are now, a totally recalcitrant Israel, 50-100 thousand troops in Iraq and Afghanistan each. What happens if either Obama or a recently elected Republican actual does strike? Well to start, its probably several months of sustained airstrikes, breaking down the iranian air defense and airforce, and then pummeling a dozen nuclear sites right next to dense population centers. Planes shot down and American and Israeli pilots tortured and paraded out the videocameras. Then youve got the ballistic retaliation from Iran, bombarding Israeli cities and US bases in Iraq and Afghanistan. Theres a naval war for the straits of Hormuz, with missiles pounding US carrier groups and shutting down 80% of the worlds oil supply for a year. If youre lucky at this point Israel hasnt nuked Tehran, but it doesnt really matter, because now Irans radioactive nuclear material is blowing all over most of the middle east. Every US embassy in a muslim country burns. You can forget about Iraq and Afghanistan, and youve probably turned Pakistan over to the Taliban in the bargain. Which means youve handed the bomb to Mullah Omar and Osama Bin Laden, and landed a hop skip and jump from nukes in US cities and a full-on nuclear war between them and India.
Add all that to what the world looks like with gas at $40 a gallon, and Id say youre in fine shape for something between WW3 and just the single most lethal event in human history. And if that doesnt scare you, even the best possible case leaves us with between 50 and 100 thousand dead Iranians and Israelis, US influence in the middle east dead for hundred years, and all youve accomplished is to set Iran back for maybe 2 years.
Somehow I dont see Obama taking that deal. What really worries me is what some fuckwad Republican will do if he loses.
To argue that Eugene Terreblanche was wrong about the destruction of his nation by communists is just plain insane, now that he has officially sealed his convictions with his bolld (martyered for the Cause):
Farm Murders in Africa (whites being systematically exterminated by blacks):
Welcome to the future. North America is surely less than two decades behind South Africa. And less than two decades ago South Africa was one of the most developed, civilized nations on the planet, until the marxists "deconstructed" it by systematically painting it as a "racist", hateful place through their PC distortions and lies. Now, the irony is of course, that by all objective measures and standards, South Africa is a third world ghetto with a ghastly murder rate and low quality of living standards for all.
Let the "canary in the coalmine" that is South Africa and Rhodesia be a warning to the West of what lies ahead if she does not wake up soon. If indeed, it is not too late already...
The West has been subverted by marxists. Betweeen birthrates being below replacement level for five decades, Abortion, and murder, whites have been systematically dispossesed from the lands which they have developed and erased from history.
The unstoppable Islamification of Europe through demographic warfare (set to some catchy music):
Whoever complicitly, explicitly and/or condones and/or has been condoning or outright supporting the genocides and destruction of the West has blood on their hands. This includes the teachers in the Universities who have been brainwashing young minds for 8 decades now.
The most pathetic creatures on the planet, in mu opinion, are self loathing whites. At least black supremacists like the Nation of Islam or MECHA members have an identity and purpose. Perhaps whites do need to go the way of the Dodo bird...at least those of the self loathing variety. That way, those whites with a spine and a Western heritage worth preserving can pick up all the pieces that they've deconstructed over the last century in the name of self hate.
Cass Sunstein, head of The Office of information and Regulatory Affairs advocates that the Government’s stealth infiltration should be accomplished by sending covert agents into “chat rooms, online social networks, or even real-space groups.” He also proposes that the Government make secret payments to so-called “independent” credible voices to bolster the Government’s messaging...
I agree people should not masquerade as architects, who have a true calling for Political discourse, as this thread confirms.
if you feel its necessary to quote that many examples just to prove a point on a random internet forum, i have to wonder why you are on the internet forum to begin with
I wasnt talking about anyone actually discussing the topic and posting a couple links as reference or backup.
I was talking about those who jump in a thread, post a 2 or 3 page rant, throw in 20 links and claim their view is the only view that could ever be correct. Then others will counter, and they then post basically the same thing again over and over
@marmkid, are you speaking of 'oe' or 'Paul Revere'?
Well, in my defense, when I write about these things I supply actual, real events and data as evidence, where as others supply stark raving lunatics on youtube.
I have an idea though! Maybe, just as an fun experiment, lets see if its possible for people to talk about geopolitics without regressing into hydrocephalic claims of racial superiority? Is that really too much to ask?
Can you spell random???? I wish I could avoid this conversation because at this point, the great discussion started by OE was supported with more information than you can refute has transformed into a platform for a troll.
Dr. Mr./Mrs. Troll,
Sometimes I am ashamed that I share the same country with people that are so ignorant. Why not identify yourself as what you are? Are you a racist? I am a socialist, an atheist, a father, an American, an architect and an artist. To question these facts is simply a matter of value (good/bad/etc). Since I am comfortable with being these things, I share that when its necessary. It lets people understand where I am coming from. Sometimes, people need to label you and when they do, it means that they are not open to listening to what you have to say.
I don't know how many times we have to spell it out. Protesting against Obama does not make people racist. Saying things like "We want our country back", however, is subtly and indirectly racist. I'm glad that someone else pointed it out already, but as I have said several times, racism hides now because people are too afraid to wear it on their chest (like they did before). Most people don't want to wear ignorant on their chest, but when people do, it needs to be identified.....and it definitely is nothing to be proud about (that's my opinion btw).
The target of racism HAS shifted from "black" to "poor". If you accept that as a concept, then you can see that legislation, large government projects and community development could ultimately be utilized as racist tools. Regardless if you agree or not, there is a consistent thread of logic that makes valid connections throughout the argument. In addition, there are many examples that support this theory.
Alinsky Doesn't Work On Me. You might as well stop wasting your time.
I am as "non-racist" or as "racist" as the founding fathers. period.
And yes, I have a VERY open mind. The rest of y'all (exceptions are obvious--->wink wink you know who you are!) are as ignorant as a box of rocks.
So except for the exceptional few who can still see and perceive things as they really are (its always been this way though...sigh) NOTHING to see here...go back to your rated R movies, pornographic pursuits, and immerse yourselves in the hegelian dialectic spectacle like your "good" (but oh so evil) hippie professors have brainwashed you into participating in.
Zombies love Alinsky..."never let a good crisis go to waste"...works on them every single time.
So keep on keeping on with parroting back your regurgitated BS that someone else invariably spoon fed your borderline retarded brains. And for those who have otherwise healthy brains....keep on keeping on with dumbing yourselves down with booze and ilicit drugs and prescription painkillers and downers you stole from your grandma's medicine cabinet...it will make you feel better in the meantime as it will be all over soon and you won't feel a thing regardless.
Obama is the Anti-Reagan
"Well, if you see the similarities between this country and many African countries, they were all under European control. They did not simply fall apart....they were destroyed by imperialistic Europeans (French, Belgian, English, etc)."
I guess mud huts and AIDS are symbols of third world progress, huh? Whereas the "invasion" of those that bring indoor plumbing, air conditioning, and modern medicine are evil?
HAHA you dumb libertards are so brainwashingly predictable.
Libberish: The verbal diarhea that the libertard mind spews forth.
'Racism' is moving into a black neighborhood and kicking everyone out.
'Self-Interest / Self-Preservation' is moving out of a black neighborhood to live in the suburbs. One is offensive, the other defensive.
God did not create different races, they've evolved over hundreds of thousands of years of natural self-interest and/or migration and/or selection and/or geography, and not through legislation. Or somone like Eric Holder saying we're a bunch of cowards because we're white.
He should keep his conflicted interior dialogue to himself..Obama too. White people have enabled both of them.
One is offensive and one is defensive? I think that depends on what side of the fence you are.
I am moving out of my house because my neighbor of 4 years is a terrible person, has 5 children all under the age of 6 living in a 2 bedroom rowhouse, screams at his wife and is rude to my wife when he sees her on the street
He is also racist as i have heard many racial slurs being screamed out in the street by him. I have seen many members of his family and they all seem to be the same type of person i never want to be around. They all live within a 3 block radius of each other in this neighborhood and am leaving because of people like them
I live in a predominantly white neighborhood, my neighbor is white, and i am white.
Am i racist against my own race because of this?
Many times it has nothing to do with race, and each example can be for different reasons.
And Geer
I am pretty sure there are plenty of black neighborhoods that are ok to live in just as there are plenty of suburbs that many would not want to live in. I think you may have mis-stated that
If you look at the numbers of people moving in and out of these neighborhoods, you will see that it is much more than personal difference with neighbors. In Chicago and in Long Island, they created community boards which basically would screen or prevent minorities from living there. There is a name for this historic trend and it has been very widely documented. It is not a myth.
ObiWanKenobi's account has been banned. This person has a history of setting up accounts with the purpose of spreading his white-power message, which is obviously not tolerated on Archinect.
We apologize to anyone who read his comments and were offended. Thanks to those of you who alerted us.
I never said it was a myth, just as racism is not a myth
And i did not say that my example was the general rule
I am not sure where that came from, but please dont take that from my post, or claim I said that, as I said nothing of the sort
My point is that Geertrude's example of moving to the suburbs is not really self preservation. Perhaps moving to a different neighborhood would be self preservation
Moving to the suburbs usually is based on a desired change in life style, namely city/urban living to suburb living
Unless i am mistaken in interpreting his use of "black neighborhoods" as to be more city living, and "suburbs" as more white neighborhoods. Considering you named 2 cities, it seems that is how you interpreted it as well
from........."I live in a predominantly white neighborhood, my neighbor is white, and i am white. Am i racist against my own race because of this? Many times it has nothing to do with race, and each example can be for different reasons." I understood this as you were saying people moving away from neighborhoods where black people were moving in was not about race. My misunderstanding....my bad.
yeah i guess i didnt make that clear enough, or it was too jumbled with other things
my example was of me moving away to the suburbs from a neighborhood not because black people are moving in, but because of the white people currently living there
where i live is a neighborhood where everyone is moving in, kind of the new trendy "up and coming/ hipster neighborhood". the problem here isnt the people moving in (which also includes black people among others). It's the people who have been here forever, pass down their houses to their kids, who pass it down to their kids, who all keep it as a trashpile basically. And these people are 99.9% white.
also, i realize that my case is not the norm, and not the majority. I just wanted to point out that we cant make blanket statements like people move to the suburbs because they dont want black people to move into their neighborhood.
Moving out of a black neighborhood to go to the suburbs doesnt automatically have racist implications. Maybe saying moving out of a black neighborhood to somewhere a couple blocks away, you could make that case. I dont think going to the suburbs has anything to do with it though, as there are so many reasons to do that, we cant just assume its racism
Agreed. In the early 50's and the 60's after the Great Migration and African Americans were moving from the South, this was a serious problem. Today, I don't think its the same scenario because the Civil Rights Movement and racial tension was much higher then. Also, I don't know if I was clear on this, but I see it as a historic trend that has played a part in establishing neighborhoods for today, not necessarily an explanation for people moving today.
Oh man, I just spent like 15 minutes crafting a most offensive .gif just for ObiWan.
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2768/4497534919_6fe1d1fc53_o.gif
click at your own risk.
haha^
Ok. well that was a massive diversion. I didnt actually plan on this becoming the racial grievance thread, kinda went out of my way to stay literal and not harp too much on the racial angle in the onset post (I used graphs and everything!), but I guess these things happen. 2step, absolutely dude, theres no reason whatsoever people who disagree with obama on this or that are racists. I was just trying to explain to Gerty why I didnt really feel it was worth my time to argue with Obi.
Anyway, that said, before we climb too high on our liberal horses, I just thought Id offer this really great talk by Mahzarin Banaji on implicit gender and racial bias. (Its just the first 25 minutes or so, you can skip forward to minute 23 for the cool experiment). Basically its a group of famous phds and philosophers dramatically failing a test for gender prejudice. This is conference on science and sociology and atheism, a group thats hugely self-selected for the most liberal and educated people imaginable, and of course if you asked any of these people if they harbored gender-bias they would vehemently deny it, and vehemently believe it, but the bias is there without them being consciously aware of it. She points out that a test for racial bias would almost certainly yield a similar result.
So this stuff is there. When most people think "black neighborhood" they think crime. When most people think "woman", they think family. And these social constructions are self-feeding and hugely powerful, applying enormous unseen pressure on hiring practices and public policy and media constructions. And I'll admit it myself, when I first arrived in India and started spending time in those neighborhoods, I found myself experiencing a visceral, unprovoked fear of muslims. I knew they werent dangerous, I knew nobody was going to just randomly attack me, but I felt it just the same. After years and years of endless newsreels of people shouting and burning flags and trashy movies of hapless stereotypes with ak47s on planes, even though I knew it was wrong, it had been completely programmed into my head. It took weeks to make that go away. I had to spend time with families, spend dinner with them, and talk with them, and drink tea and laugh with them before my mind would really believe they were nothing what media in the US had just blindly portrayed them to be.
And I think the very same thing is going on in almost all of these battles. Weve conjured these things in our heads, and they stay there, even as the reality moves on. I mean you see these people losing their ever-loving minds over healthcare, and like fine, it cuts the deficit, but sure, there are huge up-front costs that are worth worrying about. There are lots and lots of very reasonable people who think so. But this isnt fucking stalinism. Its actually crazy and insulting to say so. Theres this frighteningly large minority who have gone completely apoplectic over this president over shit thats so obviously delusional I find it pretty difficult to believe they believe it themselves. And Im sorry, but for many of them, I do think race is a big part of it.
Anyway, I know most of the time it looks like this country is spiraling into the abyss, but I know these people have always been there, and have never constituted more than 10-15% of the country. Theyre just really, really, loud right now. I frankly think the GOP would be wise to look long term, maybe try to show they are a real, rational, broad-appeal party and tell the nuts to fuck off, but I dont see much sign of that yet. All obama can really do is set a decent example, do his best to fix shit and hope in the end people can make a reasonable assessment of the real things that have actually occurred instead of succumbing to the phantasms and demagoguery and hyperbolic nonsense.
This really should not be Obama's problem, I mean some of these people have legitimate concerns, but nobody can fight the nuts with reason and he better not even address it
It is the responsibility of the republicans, they are the ones who have to protect their brand, assume their part for the situation we are in. Instead, they just let "conservative" become a dirty word.
And race is a huge part of it, consciously and subconsciously, that's the real meaning of "let's take our country back".
oe,
thank you for this thread. I think it brings up some well considered points, prior to being hijacked by the white supremacist in our midst (who was thankfully banned.)
Trying to have a reasonable conversation on the archinect boards these days reminds me of something I heard once called the parable of the tribes:
Imagine a group of tribes living within reach of one another. If all choose the way of peace, then all may live in peace. But what if all but one chooses peace? What if one is endlessly beliigerent, hostile, and difficult?
It throws all of the tribes into chaos and perverts any attempt at reasonable discussion and connection. A number of the more vitriolic posters on Archinect these days have created a place that I rarely visit any more.
(For reference.)
Well I think fortunately our resident malcontent has happily wandered off into the desert.
http://www.newsweek.com/id/236190/page/1
So I couldnt hope to get overly gleeful just yet, but this is still a good sign? Right? I mean every month is a test. They need 100,000 new jobs plus every month from here on out, and with all those depressed people dropped off the unemployment rolls for exhaustion to keep trying coming back into the fold we still probably wont see that big bad number move very much, but even just anecdotally, when you talk to firms and contractors there does seem to be some sense that things are coming back.
I guess the question I still have is, when does Obama and crew start to get some credit for that? This is sort of what I mean about Reagan, and republicanism more generally; they make people feel great about doing jack-diddly-squat. And if it were even true that they were doing responsible things like lowering the deficit and giving substantial tax breaks to actual middle class people rather than just dolling out billions to their fucking golf buddies to blow on an unregulated wallstreet casino, I might understand. But theyre not. They never have. Just to refresh our memory:
See those little leveling off plateaus when the budget gets balanced? Thats when democrats ran things. And see those exponential asymptotes toward colossal fucking catastrophe? Thats republicans. Thats because theyre spending your money on stupid fucking shit.
I mean how fucked up a country is it when people love you for spending money on killing people and rewarding greed and dumping ink into the ocean, but when you do spend on things like healthcare and education and not turning every dime we make over to saudi arabia and exxonmobil youre some stalinist harbinger of the end times?
Just to play devil's advocate...people judge the world by what surrounds them on a daily basis. Gas prices, while seemingly trivial in the big picture, affect our economy substantially, both in numbers and psychologically. So higher prices means a lower quality of life, which means no vacations, no eating out, no big screen tvs, etc. Nobody wants that.
Education is an intangible. I think we are facing more of a societal problem then just a monetary one (which I don't think there is a clear solution). The bureaucracy that is our school system is pathetic.
Many think health care is just part of their job, no thought that they are paying for it. I saw on a Yahoo forum recently "I am a hard working, tax paying individual, I don't want my money going to someone not paying their dues". Uh, sure, no one does, but I am pretty sure I can bet where your values are and your education level!
As for the R's nasty messages, I think we can thank Limbaugh and others for their sensationalism. They've made a good case for selling extremes (and fortunes).
A side effect of that is these tea party gangs. I think that will actually back fire and end up hurting the R's come elections. Too extreme makes headlines, stirs people up, but also will get more centrists (on both sides) rallying for something more moderate.
So, that being said, I agree with you, just that there will always be reasons to point the finger around. I look at Obama and I see some hope, but I see more of the status quo. Who's running our financial system? Same group from the same place. Who's writing the regulations? Same, same.
We'll see where health care ends up, but so far it is mostly more of the same. Which might not be too bad, no one really knows how to do things.
A read:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/07/opinion/07sun1.html
More charts:
The fact is that the "Tea Partiers" or tea-baggers as I like to call them, are basically just motivated by "white fear" of the minorities in the country "taking over". It's what they mean when they say "We Want Our Country Back". Back from whom? What? Back from the "mandingo" or mixed-race President?
These people are pathetic. The fact is that this country will no longer be a White majority anymore by 2030. It will be primarily "minorities" such as African-Americans and Hispanics making up the largest portion.
Get over it. Or if you can't, or won't - at least stop hiding behind your ignorance by pretending that it's not about race - because if this were Bush, you may not like what he's doing but you wouldn't be saying "I want my country back".
@dallasarchitect...this is one of those threads we all wish would go away. Well, perhaps not you - because you sound like a racist.
What do you have against whites? And why on earth do you think Whites will be a minority in 20 years?
Err I'm pretty sure this is a real statistic, Geertrude. - I've read it several times before.
Oh please, the tea party are more in line with libertarianism than white fear. The whole premise of their founding was the exploding debt and their perception of the republicans abandoning their smaller government pro small business platform. Its truly ironic that the party who believes minorities can't compete and must have institutionalised quotas and programs to help them, gifts from the party if you will, are calling the tea partyers racist. What's more racist, saying people should immegrate leagaly and we should punish enabling businesses who profit off them? Or making it law that your race is subpar and needs goverment mandates to prosper? What I see in the teaparty is a lot of people who have little political experiance and most likely never participated before just being extremely pissed off and wether you like their message or not you can't ignore the anger of those who have had something taken away and are using their right of assembely.
Statistics and Projections are two different things. Statistics are based on historical information, and projections are a derivative of historical statistics. Maybe you are talking about disparaging birthrates? Why is that? Why are whites reproducing less?
6% of All White Males Living in the Union States Died in the Civil War, fighting to Free the slaves. 6% of all white males.....
There were 2,100,000 total Union Soldiers, 180,000 of them were Black.
It brings great pain to alot of people to be called racist - especially by people who like to throw Statistics around.......
I just find it ironic that all the tea party people and libertarians keep having meetings in public parks and public pavilions paid for by millions of dollars of tax payer money.
You know, rather than doing the libertarian thing of renting out a conference space.
Racist? haha. Do you shop at 7-11? Do you use elevated highways? Are your department (and big box stores) located on county land? Do you use a car?
Because those are all racist things in one sick twisted way or another.
It's one thing to blatantly say "I hate n*ggers." It is quite another thing to say "I like black people" while continuing to use the systems created, put in place and operated to isolate and segregate people.
Which is pretty much the entire American landscape with some minimal exceptions.
Bunyan Bryant, Paul Mohai. Race and the Incidence of Environmental Hazards: A Time for Discourse. Westview Press, 1992
Catherine L. Ross. Planning, Urban Revitalization, and the Inner City: An Exploration of Structural Racism. Journal of Planning Literature, Vol. 14, No. 3, 367-380.
Laura Pulido. Rethinking Environmental Racism: White Privilege and Urban Development in Southern California. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, Volume 90, Issue 1 March 2000, pages 12 - 40.
Guy Baeten. Clichés of Urban Doom: The Dystopian Politics of Metaphors for the Unequal City – a View from Brussels. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research. Volume 25 Issue 1, Pages 55 - 69.
JT Hamilton. Testing for Environmental Racism: Prejudice, Profits, Political Power?. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 1995
Robert Doyle Bullard, Glenn S. Johnson, Angel O. Torres. Sprawl city: race, politics, and planning in Atlanta. 2000.
S.Rose-Ackerman. Racism and urban structure. Journal of Urban Economics, Volume 2, Issue 1, Pages 85-103. 1975.
RA Beauregard. Between modernity and postmodernity: the ambiguous position of US planning. Readings in planning theory. 1989.
Got 45 more citations if you want them, Geertrude.
No thanks, white hater.
I am not going to argue the fact that you see everything through the prism of race....it's pathological at this point. You're a racist, and it's manifest - if you've found 50+ sources of the same message, it's obviously the case.
Just because the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was passed does not mean that the institution of racism (and by some extension the institution of slavery) miraculously disappeared over night.
In fact, all it did was remove the target from the equation. Many structuralist components of the Antebellum, The Reconstruction Era and the Golden Era still exist today. But instead of letting this elements outright target individuals, they now blindly attack any individual who meets the qualifications of the original party.
Black and poor were synonymous pretty much until the 1980s. So, any specific legislation, urban plan or cultural ideal that attacked black people would also attack poor people.
When the Civil Rights Act passed, it was no longer legally or socially acceptable to target black people. It was, however, perfectly acceptable to target poor people.
So, if anything, these systems never went away... they ended up indiscriminately attacking all poor people. And the bulk of 'poor' people in this country are lower-middle class whites. So, understanding these principles are necessary because they not only attack blacks... they now attack the young, old and white.
White people suffer just as much as any other race (in a very contemporary setting) because the Civil Rights Act simply 'whitewashed' legislation rather than dismantling those legal systems.
So, if you want to talk about America's dying white middle class, you should look at the legislation that was originally applied to blacks but now legally has to be applied to everyone.
Are you seriously an architect? I find it hard to believe you can function as such with this kind of crap swirling around in your head....You prefaced your last post by saying, essentially, that [racism abounds, despite legislative efforts] and concluded by suggesting it is because that legislation has been exploited by whites - that it isn't the 'Black thing' it was originally designed to be? Unreal.
....You did make one point (albeit indirect and unintentional) regarding Tea [Baggers] using Public Parks afforded by tax revenue......
Tax money used to go towards building parks and pavillions, but now it is sucked into the vacuum of unsustainable social programs and administration of ill-fated projects which are never completed. See the problem here? Taking back the country to a place where things were physically Produced, and not socially cultivated, like today.
I am white! I just see things objectively! Racism is racism, it's not subjective.
...then you are a self-loathing white, or applying the single bandwagon argument against the tea-partiers: They're racist because Obama is black....It's all you got. It's too bad the partly lines have become divides between white heterosexual christians vs. everyone else. Collectivism sucks.
Alright, thats tiresome.
So, my brother and I were talking about what could potentially lose Obama the election in 2012. Lets say, more than likely, the economy is growing comfortably. More than likely the republicans have won seats but not gained control of either the house or the senate, are frustrated and likely still fragmented and leaderless. Given that, baring a major incident of terrorism Id say Obamas chances look quite good.
My brothers question was though, what happens if Iran announces it has nuclear weapons a month before the election?
Given the most recent pentagon report on the subject, that seems like a pretty reasonable timeframe. Its every bit in the interest of the revolutionary guard to have Republicans in office. Republicans are morons, who love the bloviating cowboy bullshit that does nothing but drive the iranian people into the hardliners hands. Whatever they tell everybody else, I dont think anyone has any real question they want nuclear weapons, both for the domestic prowess of defying the great and terrible United States, and for the regional leverage it offers them.
So what can Obama or anyone do to stop it? Honestly, I dont think anything can. Rumors are now Netanyahu wants airstrikes in return for a peace deal, which is fucking great. From my angle that kind of looks like holding the Palestinian territories hostage in exchange for being allowed to irradiate 66 million people, but whatever. I dont think Netanyahu has ever had any real interest in peace anyway. At this point, all Obama can do is make him look terrible and hope his coalition collapses.
But lets say for the sake of argument 2 years from now we're roughly where we are now, a totally recalcitrant Israel, 50-100 thousand troops in Iraq and Afghanistan each. What happens if either Obama or a recently elected Republican actual does strike? Well to start, its probably several months of sustained airstrikes, breaking down the iranian air defense and airforce, and then pummeling a dozen nuclear sites right next to dense population centers. Planes shot down and American and Israeli pilots tortured and paraded out the videocameras. Then youve got the ballistic retaliation from Iran, bombarding Israeli cities and US bases in Iraq and Afghanistan. Theres a naval war for the straits of Hormuz, with missiles pounding US carrier groups and shutting down 80% of the worlds oil supply for a year. If youre lucky at this point Israel hasnt nuked Tehran, but it doesnt really matter, because now Irans radioactive nuclear material is blowing all over most of the middle east. Every US embassy in a muslim country burns. You can forget about Iraq and Afghanistan, and youve probably turned Pakistan over to the Taliban in the bargain. Which means youve handed the bomb to Mullah Omar and Osama Bin Laden, and landed a hop skip and jump from nukes in US cities and a full-on nuclear war between them and India.
Add all that to what the world looks like with gas at $40 a gallon, and Id say youre in fine shape for something between WW3 and just the single most lethal event in human history. And if that doesnt scare you, even the best possible case leaves us with between 50 and 100 thousand dead Iranians and Israelis, US influence in the middle east dead for hundred years, and all youve accomplished is to set Iran back for maybe 2 years.
Somehow I dont see Obama taking that deal. What really worries me is what some fuckwad Republican will do if he loses.
The Marxists are not coming! The Marxists are not coming! The Marxists are HERE and they've been here for eight decades.
The weapon of the marxists: the schools, the media, the judicial system:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_marxism
To argue that Eugene Terreblanche was wrong about the destruction of his nation by communists is just plain insane, now that he has officially sealed his convictions with his bolld (martyered for the Cause):
Farm Murders in Africa (whites being systematically exterminated by blacks):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3S71PbichSw
Welcome to the future. North America is surely less than two decades behind South Africa. And less than two decades ago South Africa was one of the most developed, civilized nations on the planet, until the marxists "deconstructed" it by systematically painting it as a "racist", hateful place through their PC distortions and lies. Now, the irony is of course, that by all objective measures and standards, South Africa is a third world ghetto with a ghastly murder rate and low quality of living standards for all.
Let the "canary in the coalmine" that is South Africa and Rhodesia be a warning to the West of what lies ahead if she does not wake up soon. If indeed, it is not too late already...
The West has been subverted by marxists. Betweeen birthrates being below replacement level for five decades, Abortion, and murder, whites have been systematically dispossesed from the lands which they have developed and erased from history.
The unstoppable Islamification of Europe through demographic warfare (set to some catchy music):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6-3X5hIFXYU
Whoever complicitly, explicitly and/or condones and/or has been condoning or outright supporting the genocides and destruction of the West has blood on their hands. This includes the teachers in the Universities who have been brainwashing young minds for 8 decades now.
The most pathetic creatures on the planet, in mu opinion, are self loathing whites. At least black supremacists like the Nation of Islam or MECHA members have an identity and purpose. Perhaps whites do need to go the way of the Dodo bird...at least those of the self loathing variety. That way, those whites with a spine and a Western heritage worth preserving can pick up all the pieces that they've deconstructed over the last century in the name of self hate.
Seriously dude. You again?
Youre not paul revere. Youre a schmuck. And you need a job.
I always figured the most pathetic creatures on the planet were those who spend their days writing page long rants on random internet forums
I could be wrong though
@marmkid, are you speaking of 'oe' or 'Paul Revere'?
oh definitely Paul Revere
mainly those who jump into a thread and start these things and name 50 examples of one thing
right....
http://www.redstate.com/erick/2010/04/18/is-the-obama-administration-behind-an-astroturf-anti-tea-party-website/
Cass Sunstein, head of The Office of information and Regulatory Affairs advocates that the Government’s stealth infiltration should be accomplished by sending covert agents into “chat rooms, online social networks, or even real-space groups.” He also proposes that the Government make secret payments to so-called “independent” credible voices to bolster the Government’s messaging...
I agree people should not masquerade as architects, who have a true calling for Political discourse, as this thread confirms.
@marmkid - what about 53 examples of one thing?
if you feel its necessary to quote that many examples just to prove a point on a random internet forum, i have to wonder why you are on the internet forum to begin with
I agree. There is a fine line between having an opinion and providing some backup, and having a preoccupation / obsession.
oh definitely
I wasnt talking about anyone actually discussing the topic and posting a couple links as reference or backup.
I was talking about those who jump in a thread, post a 2 or 3 page rant, throw in 20 links and claim their view is the only view that could ever be correct. Then others will counter, and they then post basically the same thing again over and over
@PaulRevere:
I agree with you 100% regarding S. Africa - it's a Cesspool.
@marmkid, are you speaking of 'oe' or 'Paul Revere'?
Well, in my defense, when I write about these things I supply actual, real events and data as evidence, where as others supply stark raving lunatics on youtube.
I have an idea though! Maybe, just as an fun experiment, lets see if its possible for people to talk about geopolitics without regressing into hydrocephalic claims of racial superiority? Is that really too much to ask?
Can you spell random???? I wish I could avoid this conversation because at this point, the great discussion started by OE was supported with more information than you can refute has transformed into a platform for a troll.
Dr. Mr./Mrs. Troll,
Sometimes I am ashamed that I share the same country with people that are so ignorant. Why not identify yourself as what you are? Are you a racist? I am a socialist, an atheist, a father, an American, an architect and an artist. To question these facts is simply a matter of value (good/bad/etc). Since I am comfortable with being these things, I share that when its necessary. It lets people understand where I am coming from. Sometimes, people need to label you and when they do, it means that they are not open to listening to what you have to say.
I don't know how many times we have to spell it out. Protesting against Obama does not make people racist. Saying things like "We want our country back", however, is subtly and indirectly racist. I'm glad that someone else pointed it out already, but as I have said several times, racism hides now because people are too afraid to wear it on their chest (like they did before). Most people don't want to wear ignorant on their chest, but when people do, it needs to be identified.....and it definitely is nothing to be proud about (that's my opinion btw).
The target of racism HAS shifted from "black" to "poor". If you accept that as a concept, then you can see that legislation, large government projects and community development could ultimately be utilized as racist tools. Regardless if you agree or not, there is a consistent thread of logic that makes valid connections throughout the argument. In addition, there are many examples that support this theory.
Alinsky Doesn't Work On Me. You might as well stop wasting your time.
I am as "non-racist" or as "racist" as the founding fathers. period.
And yes, I have a VERY open mind. The rest of y'all (exceptions are obvious--->wink wink you know who you are!) are as ignorant as a box of rocks.
So except for the exceptional few who can still see and perceive things as they really are (its always been this way though...sigh) NOTHING to see here...go back to your rated R movies, pornographic pursuits, and immerse yourselves in the hegelian dialectic spectacle like your "good" (but oh so evil) hippie professors have brainwashed you into participating in.
Zombies love Alinsky..."never let a good crisis go to waste"...works on them every single time.
So keep on keeping on with parroting back your regurgitated BS that someone else invariably spoon fed your borderline retarded brains. And for those who have otherwise healthy brains....keep on keeping on with dumbing yourselves down with booze and ilicit drugs and prescription painkillers and downers you stole from your grandma's medicine cabinet...it will make you feel better in the meantime as it will be all over soon and you won't feel a thing regardless.
Nothing to see hear.
PaulRevere......bravo. You're a demagogue. Salud, dinero y amor!!!
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.