Obviously, anyone looking at her could immediately tell she's a Martian--from Venus.
Kamala's father is of Jamaican descent, while her mother is of Indian ancestry. She was born in Oakland, California in 1964.
None of this is new news, but all public record from day one.
Does it really matter whether she identifies as Indian, black, having borne a child, having had older/rich/powerful boyfriends when she was 29, etc.?
My goodness, talk about grasping for ANYTHING, in desperation, as a political weapon.
Republicans, behold your choice for president...and retch!
7 months ago RE: Trump Asks Whether K. Harris Is Indian Or Black
Ah, so, Simian, you're saying that nothing Trump says should be believed/trusted--got it, thanks!
His promises about securing the border, improving the economy, helping black/minority folk, quickly ending all the foreign regional conflicts/wars--alll were just for show/entertainment.
An astute observation by you, I must say. Keep it up!
7 months ago RE: Trump Asks Whether K. Harris Is Indian Or Black
Just about anything can be twisted to be labeled as a truth or called a lie, especially in a language as complex as English, which is precisely why the media exists. To quote Trump: what I said is what I said.
7 months ago RE: Trump Asks Whether K. Harris Is Indian Or Black
Response to Simian:
Not that it matters, but Gloria did actually say the quote I attributed to her. Go back and check it out. I only mention it because it take great pains to be sure I quote someone accurately.
Simian: "The other part you're missing is that whites are killed by blacks at a massively higher per capita rate than blacks are killed by whites."
I wasn't missing anything. My comments weren't meant to be a comprehensive examination of murder and race. I made it quite clear that I was responding specifically to Gloria's comment, and that's what I limited my commentary to - "wrong doing by the police" and "black people being killed by one another."
I even explained why I was limiting my discussion to those comments.
For the record, though, yes, according to FBI murder statistics for the year 2019, blacks were responsible for 50% of murders committed. According to that same report it is also true that blacks kill whites at a much higher rate per capita than whites kill blacks.
Of course black on black killing needs to be talked about. I never disagreed with that. The only time I see it talked about, though, is when it is used as a talking point to counter concerns over the latest police shooting of an unarmed black person. That's what I was addressing.
My interest is in raising the overall lifespan of Black people.
And a noble interest it is. Clearly a number of complex socio-economic issues come into play, not just in relation to black on black crime, but black crime in general. One issue I never hear discussed when black on black killings are brought up is the easy availability of guns.
I know some people like to dismiss or minimize external (socio-economic) factors, but there are compelling arguments and studies to back up the assertion that these factors have a profound impact on Black communities. I mentioned two excellent books on this subject in my last post. I suggest you check them out if you haven't already. This post will become way too long if I try to address some of these factors now, and I still want to address Lancelot's comments, so, instead I would like to offer some observations as food for thought.
If external factors were not a factor in high Black crime rates, one should expect Black crime rates to be fairly uniform across the country, shouldn't they?
Well, consider this. New York City has the highest black population of any city in the country at just about 2,000,000 people. This is over 20% of the total population of NYC. And yet NYC is the safest big city (cities with population over 700,000) in the country. Since Black crime rates are so high, and NYC has such a high Black population, wouldn't one expect the overall crime rate in NYC to be much higher? Add to that the fact that NYC is also by far the most densely populated U.S. city for those with a population over 100,000.
This is indicative of huge fluctuations in Black crime rates across different regions of the country that can only be attributed to varying living conditions, economic factors, law enforcement, policies (including gun regulation), etc (i.e. extenal factors). Just something to mull over.
I'll have to return later to address Lancelot's absurd comments.
7 months ago RE: Trump Asks Whether K. Harris Is Indian Or Black
Bananafish, Gloria was quoting me and asking a question in return. So when you say she said it, that's kinda like blaming a journalist for interviewing a dictator.
And yes, I plan on taking over a country. This one, after I win the election.
I would definitely NOT expect Black crime rates to be uniform across the country, because it's not skin color that makes people violent, although it's definitely an advantage to be black at night if your goal is to not be identified by security cameras; special operations soldiers paint their faces black for a reason. Areas with high SES will obviously be safer. However, statistics 101, look at the ratio of what demographics cause the violence in a given area. So your point about NYC being relatively safe makes no sense to me. New Hampshire has virtually no violent crime, and the Black population there is 1%.
I am told there are also affluent Black areas without a lot of other races present, with low crime. I just am not familiar with those areas, and I happen to live near a crappy area where I see the things I mentioned.
I think Lance knows more about this than you're giving him credit for.
7 months ago RE: Trump Asks Whether K. Harris Is Indian Or Black
Ok, I misread Gloria's comment. My bad. Clearly I wasn't intentionally "blaming a journalist for interviewing a dictator." Sorry Gloria, if you're out there.
"...because it's not skin color that makes people violent."
Thank you!!! That's exactly the point I am making, and the point I have been making in this forum for years.
"Areas with high SES will obviously be safer."
Yes, it is obvious to you and I, but not others on this thread.
I'm confused by your next statement, though, and I don't want to misinterpret the meaning.
Can you elaborate on the following:
"However, statistics 101, look at the ratio of what demographics cause the violence in a given area. So your point about NYC being relatively safe makes no sense to me."
One reason I'm sure the crime rate in NH is so low is that it is so sparsely populated. Its population density is 150 per square mile compared to 29,302 per square mile for NYC!
7 months ago RE: Trump Asks Whether K. Harris Is Indian Or Black
What I am saying is, if you do a Pareto chart in any area regardless of what the crime is, you're still likely to see a difference in crime based on various demographics, of which race is usually the most obvious. E.g. 150 years ago you might have seen that Italians did a lot of the murders in NYC and Chicago, and Chicago had a higher murder rate, but the rates of killing by race might be similar or even higher in NYC.
The population density is super low in Alaska but they have far and away the highest incidence of sexual assault in the country. On the other hand, Japan has the highest population density of any country in the world, but their violent crime rate is incredibly low.
7 months ago RE: Trump Asks Whether K. Harris Is Indian Or Black
Japan is a strict, highly regulated hierarchical society, which prizes collective harmony over individual rights. It's often used by societies who envy its low crime rate, to argue for stricter gun laws (firearms are restricted to police only) and cultural homogeny (Japan has little diversity), however both arguments massively oversimplify the reasons for Japan's low crime rate.
Interestingly, my father worked for a Japanese company and spent a lot of time there. He used to say that he couldn't understand how they managed to be world leaders in business when it took so long to drink a cup of tea.
7 months ago RE: Trump Asks Whether K. Harris Is Indian Or Black
Having just written a lengthy post on what's going on in my nation just now, I am not going to repeat it, here, however, some points that sort of relate.
It's interesting to read the statistics put forward by Banana and comments by Lance thereupon. As Lance has been rather fond of telling me, our demographic here has a lower percentage of blacks/Asian to ratio of whites.
Statistically, of course, this explains the much higher instances of white-on-white rape and murder.
Fundamentally, though, it cannot be denied that the reaction to rape and murder is different depending on who does it. Killings of children and mass murder are extremely rare in my country, but statistically, whites engaging in such activities far outweigh blacks/Asians (naturally, there are move of us)
However, as we can see now, after the horrific events of the recent child murders in Southport, our response is very different. When a white person kills, we blame the person. Sometimes, we extend that to include the police, if they haven't caught the person, etc. White killers tend also to be allowed the privilege of mental health issues, although this is not always the case.
When a person of colour kills (in the past, this would have included black people more, but the focus tends to lean more now towards those of Asian extraction, specifically of one religion), we blame the entire community. Individuals who never even met the killer are punished for simply 'looking the same'.
We don't afford other cultures the same rights to having good and bad people that we do our own. We will ignore our own abysmal record of paedophilia, for example, in favour of casting up the actions of some members of one community as indicative of the whole.
We think all our problems will be solved by removing certain people. We thought that of the Windrush generation, the Bangladeshi influx and today it's the Muslims. And so it goes. Anyone 'other' because it's easier than looking at ourselves.
7 months ago RE: Trump Asks Whether K. Harris Is Indian Or Black
I'm afraid I need to repeat myself. I said just a bit ago that it's not your skin color that makes you violent. I also said that given a random white person and a random black person in America meeting, the black person is 49x more likely to kill the white person than vice versa. Crossing the road to avoid an encounter with someone in a Black neighborhood and switching traffic lanes to avoid being in one adjacent to a young Black driver are protective measures that I take regularly. There is a thin line between fear and rage when you live this every day.
