BF2S Forums Rep. Andre Carson, D- Indiana - words of wisdom

Pug wrote:

Um, answered you....a lot.  Didn't take...so answered a different way...didn't take...tried again and agin...so I stopped answering the same question...take a hint...

What do you think if I call you Special Needs Lowing now?

Since discrimination is merely "special needs" according to you.

PUG really you are full of shit. but that is ok. As I said I don't blame you from standing toe to toe against what was asked you. I am over it. It is clear you will remain a fish I can not hook because of your squirming around the questions.



Go ahead, call me anything you want, I've been called worse in this forum. However, it would not be an accurate accusation.


no discrimination is discrimination. special needs is special needs. 2 different things. Unless you wanna really go out on a limb and say being black is a special needs organization, you really have no argument for supporting their "blacks only" caucus or their blacks only agenda.

Hey, I filled out an application the other day under sex it said "Male or Special Needs"

Seriously, that's your argument.

I answered you lowing.  Whine more.  Ask again...

Secondly, whatever I answer, I've already shown why your logic is flawed - which means it doesn't matter.

Thirdly, educate yourself on the legislative process before spewing this kind of shit out first.

FEOS wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

Blacks have been discriminated against and oppressed, in the 'land of the free' for generations lowing, you don't think they might need a leg up at some point?

It's actually been illegal to discriminate against blacks for nearly two generations, and has been legal/required to discriminate in their favor for nearly as long.

Give it another couple of generations and you might have a point.

Pug wrote:

Hey, I filled out an application the other day under sex it said "Male or Special Needs"

Seriously, that's your argument.

I answered you lowing.  Whine more.  Ask again...

Secondly, whatever I answer, I've already shown why your logic is flawed - which means it doesn't matter.

Thirdly, educate yourself on the legislative process before spewing this kind of shit out first.

No that is not my argument, you asked if women were a special needs group. I answered, they could be depending on the issue. I did not say absolutely in all cases yes they are.


No ya didn't, you answered your own questions, you refused to touch my questions with a 10 foot poll. My questions were regrading double standards, you refused to answer them clearly and concisely. You preferred to stay away from anything regarding the double standards and the inconsistencies of those double standards and your opinions.


You haven't shown my logic is flawed, because you haven't addressed my logic....The double standards and the inconsistencies on which the CBC exists and its supporting  groups like the NAACP and the black panthers, and now the administrative branch. THAT is the logic you should be addressing


This has nothing to do with the "legislative process" and for you to make such claims pretty much proves your refusal to address the pertinent issues of the OP.

Last edited by lowing (2011-09-26 04:31:34)

"It gets folks discouraged. I know. I listen to some of y'all," Obama told an audience of some 3,000 in a darkened Washington convention center.

I wonder what the author was thinking when they wrote this passage?

Well, I tried.

No matter how many times I answer your question or point out the inconcistencies...you don't seem to understand

Pug wrote:

Well, I tried.

No matter how many times I answer your question or point out the inconcistencies...you don't seem to understand

Ya know I was gunna type out a response, then I realized I did it already several pages ago.


line by line you have failed to answer the question..

I didn't ask if a caucus is a special interest group. I asked if a whites only group would be considered racist by you.

I didn't ask if a whites only caucus would be allowed and could assemble by your rules. I asked if a whites only group would be considered racist by you.

I didn't ask if the CBC was the only group with a narrow focus. I asked if a whites only group would be considered racist by you.

I didn't ask you if there were other groups. I asked if a whites only group would be considered racist by you.

I didn't ask you if the rules would allow a whites only caucus. I asked if a whites only group would be considered racist by you.

I didn't ask you if you had a problem with race specific groups and their lobbying. I asked if a whites only group would be considered racist by you.

I didn't ask you if white was a race. I asked if a whites only group would be considered racist by you.

Whither or ont I think the legislative system works has nothing to do with my asking you if a whites only group would be considered racist by you.

So again I ask

Would you consider a whites only group, who excludes all other races, and pushes whites only interests within our govt. or not, a racist organization? Yes or no



If you wanna help me understand, you do so by answering the questions I asked, not the ones you invent to avoid mine.

Yes, fighting for jobs is wrong.

lowing wrote:

Ya know I was gunna type out a response, then I realized I did it already several pages ago.


line by line you have failed to answer the question..

I didn't ask if a caucus is a special interest group. I asked if a whites only group would be considered racist by you.

I didn't ask if a whites only caucus would be allowed and could assemble by your rules. I asked if a whites only group would be considered racist by you.

I didn't ask if the CBC was the only group with a narrow focus. I asked if a whites only group would be considered racist by you.

I didn't ask you if there were other groups. I asked if a whites only group would be considered racist by you.

I didn't ask you if the rules would allow a whites only caucus. I asked if a whites only group would be considered racist by you.

I didn't ask you if you had a problem with race specific groups and their lobbying. I asked if a whites only group would be considered racist by you.

I didn't ask you if white was a race. I asked if a whites only group would be considered racist by you.

Whither or ont I think the legislative system works has nothing to do with my asking you if a whites only group would be considered racist by you.

So again I ask

Would you consider a whites only group, who excludes all other races, and pushes whites only interests within our govt. or not, a racist organization? Yes or no



If you wanna help me understand, you do so by answering the questions I asked, not the ones you invent to avoid mine.

Sorry, answered all of those.

Not racist if working within the rules of LSO's.

Highlighting again you inability to understand these groups have rules governing their behavior.

Pug wrote:

lowing wrote:

Ya know I was gunna type out a response, then I realized I did it already several pages ago.


line by line you have failed to answer the question..

I didn't ask if a caucus is a special interest group. I asked if a whites only group would be considered racist by you.

I didn't ask if a whites only caucus would be allowed and could assemble by your rules. I asked if a whites only group would be considered racist by you.

I didn't ask if the CBC was the only group with a narrow focus. I asked if a whites only group would be considered racist by you.

I didn't ask you if there were other groups. I asked if a whites only group would be considered racist by you.

I didn't ask you if the rules would allow a whites only caucus. I asked if a whites only group would be considered racist by you.

I didn't ask you if you had a problem with race specific groups and their lobbying. I asked if a whites only group would be considered racist by you.

I didn't ask you if white was a race. I asked if a whites only group would be considered racist by you.

Whither or ont I think the legislative system works has nothing to do with my asking you if a whites only group would be considered racist by you.

So again I ask

Would you consider a whites only group, who excludes all other races, and pushes whites only interests within our govt. or not, a racist organization? Yes or no



If you wanna help me understand, you do so by answering the questions I asked, not the ones you invent to avoid mine.

Sorry, answered all of those.

Not racist if working within the rules of LSO's.

Highlighting again you inability to understand these groups have rules governing their behavior.

rules are not the issue, and never have been...speaking of understanding. Try addressing the double standards in which the CBC NAACP black panthers exist while any white groups like this could not without being chastised and labeled as racist. Then address how a group like the CBC can exist within our govt. while no such whites only group would be accepted.

Pug wrote:

lowing wrote:

Pug wrote:

Yes, fighting for jobs is wrong.

Fighting for jobs isn't the issue...but you know that already.

Whoa, where'd that come from?

I was using the link you provided.

THen address the observations of the link I provided. How a president can address ALL BLACK Americans and telling them he needs them as blacks to continue his fight. Ya think any other president could get away with rallying whites only to his cause and to encourage whites to keep fighting......for anything

lowing wrote:

Pug wrote:

lowing wrote:

Fighting for jobs isn't the issue...but you know that already.

Whoa, where'd that come from?

I was using the link you provided.

THen address the observations of the link I provided. How a president can address ALL BLACK Americans and telling them he needs them as blacks to continue his fight. Ya think any other president could get away with rallying whites only to his cause and to encourage whites to keep fighting......for anything

The link provides the answer.  Underemployment of blacks, motivate yourself to fight for jobs and the jobs bill.

Obviously, if they find jobs it's a terrible thing for the economy?