Huh?
What part of 'everyone' do you not understand?

LMFAO!

Actually the statement was quite general (very similar and the same point as hucks that I quoted above)...

But ya... it was not specific at all, and that's what made it funny.

Edit:

And the idea is not idiotic nor is it bogus... it's backed up by science.

People discriminate against those they perceive as different by default.

They are on the same Rugby team!🌫

Ok, you seem to be, I believe the term you've used, is "cherry picking" the questions you answered.
You never answered the one about how African Americans feel about the novel you get your handle from.....so how do the African Americans that are offended by lawn jockeys feel about N*gger Jim?

1)The Pennsylvania State Conference of the NAACP has instructed its branches to file grievances with the state's human rights commission demanding that local school boards and district superintendents remove Mark Twain's "Adventures of Huckleberry Finn" from mandatory reading lists.
The charge, supported by the national NAACP, is that "tax dollars should not be used to perpetuate a stereotype that has psychologically damaging effects on the self-esteem of African American children."

2) Over the years the novel has been declared "unfit for children" on a number of counts, but the indictment that has proven most persistent began in 1957, when the NAACP charged that Huck Finn contained "racial slurs" and "belittling racial designations." Since then, the book has been called "racist" for both the pervasive use of the word "****" and a portrayal of blacks that some people consider stereotypical and demeaning. It has been removed from reading lists in schools ranging from Texas to Pennsylvania (including, ironically, the Mark Twain Intermediate School in Fairfax, Virginia). Public libraries also continue to deal with requests that the book be removed, although the focus of the controversy has shifted to the classroom.

3)The local NAACP chapter published a statement, praising the decision to ban the books due to their “hurtful” nature.
Some people think the novels are educational literature for students, [chapter president Stephan Witherspoon] said, but the novels are “just hurtful” and use “hurtful language that has oppressed the people for over 200 years.” The district’s use of the books as required reading has been an ongoing discussion between elders in the local NAACP and district leaders for years, [he] said.
“It’s wrong. There are a lot more authors out there with better literature that can do the same thing that does not degrade our people. I’m glad that they’re making the decision and it’s long overdue, like 20 years overdue,” Witherspoon said. “Let’s move forward and work together to make school work for all of our kids, not just some, all of them.”

That's what I found about how the NAACP feels about it.....

I did go to your link, and the whole piece is that persons opinion and conjecture that African Americans are offended....he mentions the underground railroad story and dismisses it as "in his opinion", not backed by facts, but conjecture.....he also states, Thus, there is no consensus on the jockey's origin, but I do believe that there is a consensus view in African American communities that black lawn jockeys are demeaning relics of a racist past.
he also dismisses out of hand this statement in his commentary.... Despite this, the creation and acceptance of Jocko stories are ways for African Americans to say, "We were always brave, always worthy of inclusion, even admiration......again, It seems you are "cherry picking" your own points of reference
It also appears the author of your link is also "cherry picking" what he chooses to believe and disbelieve to further his position, and dismisses out of hand the items that do not further his agenda.....

Oh and for the record, I've read The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn a couple of times over the years and loved it.

I think I may have to burn my liberal card.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

I think this tops someone being but hurt about statuary.

Since when did something become racist because a liberal or a person of color says it is?

Pretty obvious for Rick there is nothing racist about Jocko. Pretty obvious Jocko is just a piece of metal statuary. Pretty obvious the constitution protects Ricks right to own and display Jocko.

I question the validity and integrity of any point of view that is in direct opposition to the constitution.

Yeah, I think I have to burn my liberal card.

is this the new Pic Post 500?

The book is a classic and for anyone to NOT comprehend what the lawn jockeys were about needs to be educated. For any African American to be enraged by the safe passage of the Underground Railroad means they liked being captured and tossed back on the plantation.

This is a great post.
Honest.
Because it showcases the difference in our thought patterns.

First, Good on you for reading about lawn jockeys. I admit I haven't. Not even the link you provided.

But at the end of the day there's this: I don't care.
It's an inanimate object.
If I thought one was appropriate for my lawn, I'd use it. I wouldn't ask my white neighbors. I wouldn't ask my black neighbor.
It wouldn't be for them.
I wouldn't care what they thought about it.

Unless they told me. And then we could discuss it. Like reasonable adults.

You prefer to make assumptions and label people.
Because you read a story.
About lawn jockeys.

Sorry.
It really doesn't sound any better no matter how many times I say it.

I could ask you the same thing.

You claim "everyone" is racist.

I say you're wrong.
But obviously YOU harbor racist tendencies. No surprise there, I've read about them on these boards.
But instead of owning up and taking responsibility for your own inadequacies, you shrug it off and think it's OK because heck, everyone does it.

It's a weak argument. Save it for yourself.

So why do we hate racists if everyone is racist?

You're confusing discrimination with perceptions.
If you see guys walking down a dark road in your direction, you'd feel better if they were wearing suits rather than baggy pants. It's not about race. Their color matters not. It's cultural and socioeconomic.
We can split hairs and talk about which races are more likely to wear suits or do-rags, but that's counter productive and a completely different subject.

It's been proven that kids don't care what color people are. Until they learn to care about it.
And the biggest reason Americans see differences is economic.
The have's and the have not's.

Nobody would begrudge Michael Jordan from knocking at your door at 2am to ask to use the phone.
It's NOT color.
Because at 2am if the dude knocking looks poor and is white, you're more likely to call the cops than answer the door.

Stop making it about race. And stop telling me what I feel.
Because you're wrong on both counts.

Then why did he paint the face black after his grandpappy gifted it to him?

So.... I haven't bothered reading about lawn jockeys. Nor have I bothered reading most of these posts...

But It's no coincidence that the one person on this forum with a lawn jockey avatar is also the one person on this forum who claimed to move to elevation to stay away from black people.

It's like claiming the confederate flag is only about southern culture when the guy hanging it from his pickup truck is also the guy burning crosses in black peoples yards.

This isn't some symbol with no connection to racism.... something is making cacman want to use it.

Freedom of expression, a constitutional right.

Yes. You have the constitutional right to express racist ideas. Doesn't protect you from criticism for being racist however.

And the Robert E. Lee statue..?? 😕

You can put up as many as you want on your property... that's never been in question.

Wow! I want to tell you to GFY, but I like you.

You just described me as a, shrugging, irresponsible, inadequate racist!

It's like you could see me!

Ok, so, any beliefs I have have evolved in me in my 67 years and I could be wrong here, I mean who can really see themselves clearly, i didn't really choose.
I read. Observed. Tried to remain open-minded, researched. Like most people I guess?
But I even watch Fox!

Not out of vanity, but because I want what i can justifiably/verifiably call the truth. Not to parade it around but for reasons unknown to me.
Is it not true that we are all more comfortable around people that share our religion, skin color or ethnicity? To some extent?
Now is where you ponce. Pick away.

It's nature at work. That's why we are all on this continuum of comfortable-racist.
Watch much nature tv?

Yes. Most people harbor prejudices and biases against people of different ethnicities etc
TO ONE EXTENT OR ANOTHER...



Maybe you're above the fray. Or disingenuous? Even with yourself....

Or maybe, maybe, you're special!
Hold on, Michael Jordan is at the door!!

Know what? GFY....Hadda get that in...you understand...

Even if we agree that you are totally without prejudice, wouldn't displaying a Nazi flag on your lawn, or any symbol that offends some group in a big way be insensitive? Your front lawn. Not the one you're thinking about in the back....
Oh wait, you said you wouldn't care. Missed that.
Or should the snowflakes just suck it up?

I did not repaint Jocko.....that would ruin the antique value
I do not display it on my lawn.........it is in my garage, but out in the open
I do not feel that I am racist.........my grandfather, on the other hand, was the original model for Archie Bunker



So your saying I'm being insensitive if I display a Trump 2020 sign in my yard or a Trump bumper sticker on my truck?

and Huck, you still haven't answered......how do the African Americans that are so offended by Jocko, feel about the 219 times the word n*gger is used in The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn?