Yea, did you read my post?
Yes, even after you edited it (which was after I made my post at all).
You must have missed the part where I said that, if he was going to present that point of view, the least he could do was present it coherently, rather than rambling about being forced to watch black people on television with nice hairdos. My beef with the education system isn't focused on multiculturalism. That aspect is just a symptom of a greater ailment, because those agendas are cookie cutter handouts and busy work that are distributed and seldom questioned. "Black History Month" shouldn't exist, but more to my point it exists now as a cliche mishmash of the same dozen "heroes." There are local people, I'm sure, that had an impact on one's own community who are "black enough" to be part of the month... but instead, it focuses on the same national figures. It's just the same tripe.
You could play word association games all day long, and see that it's a symptom.
George Washington? Cherry tree! First President! Wooden teeth!
Abe Lincoln? Honest Abe! Gettysburg address! Freed the slaves!
Martin Luther King, Jr.? "I Had a Dream" speech!
Rosa Parks? Tried to sit on a bus and she's a hero!
WWII? We saved the whole world!
Native Americans? Oh the "white people" slaughtered them en masse and placed those that were left on reservations, which is a shame because they were all peaceful and loved nature.
Africa? It's a lush paradise full of wonderful culture and it would be great if it weren't for the aforementioned "white people"!
Vaccines? They're good for you!
President? I wanna be President!
Phonics? ... What the hell's a "phonics"?
All of that, though, is a bit beside the original point.
I cannot stand to turn on the tube, the black man is the man, he is in charge, he is the smartest, he is the President.
This makes me wonder why this poster turns on the television, and what shows they are watching? "24" has a female President right now, and she's not what people would call "black"
Most scientist types, doctors, and lawyers on television shows are still not "black" that I'm aware of. "Black" folks are sometimes going to be in charge, of course; I don't see why that wouldn't be the case. I'd find it a wee bit unrealistic if there was only one sort of person always in charge of another sort. It harkens back to the silent movie days when the villain was identified by their black hat and big evil mustache.
I would also like to know where this same person obtained the figure that 85% of "them" are on welfare, but I could be reading that wrong, which is why it's important to communicate one's points efficiently. Perhaps they mean 85% of Mexicans are on welfare, which also doesn't sound accurate. Perhaps "85%" is one of those elusive internet statistics for which we're not going to get a real source.
I don't personally think there's some conspiracy to force people to marry interracially, or to "breed out" the "white" people. If the poster in question doesn't find women of a different race attractive, then I really doubt they are going to flutter into his room at night, steal his seed, and breed undesirable mixed children with his DNA. Your loins are still your own.
I do agree that, like every other "cause" that comes and goes, the multiculturalism train has gone past the "removing barriers" phase and is now looking to pick a fight. Too many people see racism where it isn't, or want special privileges based purely on something as fleeting and arbitrary as skin color. That does not make someone who's actually scared of seeing "black people" on their television (for which there's an "off" switch, seriously) any less silly to me.
