Skip to main content

The definition of ignorance - Scott Terry at CPAC

Judging by what I read, CPAC should no longer stand for Conservative Political Action Committee. It should stand for Crazy People Are Coming. This could be seen as a double-entendre, for it could be referring to the people speaking at this gathering or how these people see everyone else.

Last Friday, audience member Scott Terry - a 30-year old from North Carolina - had a few interesting bits of commentary to share with the other audience members, as well as speakers.

After presenter K. Carl Smith of the Frederick Douglass Republicans referenced a letter written by Douglass, where he forgave his former master, Terry blurted out, "For what? For feeding him and housing him?" Sadly, this comment was met with applause and cheers.

Following this back-and-forth, Terry was heard saying, "Why can't we just have segregation?"

Terry wasn't done there. He also said that whites have been "systematically disenfranchised" by the federal government.

When asked if he'd be okay with a society where African-Americans were permanently slaves to their white masters, Terry replied with, "I'd be fine with that."

I wish I was finished, but I'd be leaving out yet another lovely comment by the young man. When a woman challenged him on the roots of the Republican Party, he responded with, "I didn't know the legacy of the Republican Party included women correcting men in public."

...and here the Republican Party wonders why they've struggled earning the votes of women, and especially of minorities...

Whether Scott Terry likes it or not, this country is diverse and becoming progressively more diverse by the year, where in a few years, whites will no longer be the majority. He can deny it all he'd like, and hope that his racist beliefs and commentary will somehow motivate more people of his pasty skin tone to take control of this country by enslaving minorities again. However, the quantity of Caucasians whom don't regularly go around sporting white hoods far outnumbers those, like Mr. Terry, who do. So, don't get your hopes up, Mr. Terry - just do us all a favor and keep your trap shut.

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2013/03/15/1729331/cpac-slavery-minority-outreach/

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun

The difference between "looking" and "checking out"

I may be way off with these numbers, but it's my approximation that at least 75% of individuals whom are involved in a serious relationship feel it's perfectly acceptable to "check out" members of the opposite sex they're not involved with. Meanwhile, approximately 25% either don't feel this is acceptable or aren't sure about the matter. I hadn't thought about this matter for a while, but since I've been dating a woman for about 8 months, the topic has been pondered about some. When reading or hearing others discuss this very issue, I often times hear comments similar to the following: "It's human nature to look." "There's nothing wrong with checking others out. I'm sure he/she does it too!" "It's fine to do it. Just don't tell your boyfriend/girlfriend about it or do it in front of them!" "It's natural to find people attractive." When observing the array of comments, I i

The verdict is in. To no one's surprise, Jonathan Hoenig has been found guilty of being an idiot.

Just recently, when discussing the Michael Brown shooting and whether or not race had anything to do with it, Fox News contributor Jonathan Hoenig said, "You know who talks about race? Racists." One moment while I provide Mr. Hoenig with the well deserved slow-clap. :: slow-claps for two seconds :: So, that was quite the line by Mr. Hoenig, wasn't it? "You know who talks about race? Racists." Well, wasn't he just talking about race? So, by his own words, I guess that makes him a racist. Also, if he wants to be consistent, does this mean that people whom talk about gender are sexists and people whom talk about sexual orientation are homophobes? With that line of thinking, Hoenig would engage in the following back-and-forths: Hoenig: "So, who are you voting for?" A woman: "The Democratic candidate, because he's been adamant about his support for equal rights for women." Hoenig: "You sexist feminist nazi!"