B Hop explains racial slur:says he didn't mean it,was just to sell fights.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Trainer Monkey

Malcolm X apologized
Unlike Strom

---

He might not have explicitly appologized for his views HOWEVER he did support extending the Voting Rights Act and making Martin Luther King Jr. Day a holiday.

And I do believe he supported Clarence Thomas for the supreme court as well

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lyle

I don't appologize for Strom Thurmond he was a product of an era of resentment and hatred. It's not for ME to appologize for as I had nothing to do with his views or electing him.

Sure Strom ran on a pro-segregation platform....remind you of anyone? Louis Farrakahn? Malcom X? Both segregation advocates and are THEY called racist very often???? Not as often as Strom.

If Strom had no love for black people then how do you account for his fathering and care for Essie Mae Washington-Williams his illigetimate daughter?


We get so far off the point because you guys want to go back and try to say I am racist and I am a bigot when basically this is a dead issue now....Bernard should know what he said was wrong and it shouldn't happen again, there doesn't need to be any fine or firing or anything like that but ohhhhh noooo you guys just can't accept that, you'll go back and wail and moan about my views on other issues because what I just said isn't sensational enough for you to use to paint me as a bigot.

---

Strom never acknowledged his daughter publicly and it wasn't public news till after the old racist hypocrite died because if he had it would have finished his electoral appeal to the white racists he needed to vote for him. You claiming you're not bigoted just adds to the hilarity.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kirkland Laing

Strom never acknowledged his daughter publicly and it wasn't public news till after the old racist hypocrite died because if he had it would have finished his electoral appeal to the white racists he needed to vote for him. You claiming you're not bigoted just adds to the hilarity.

---

...and his daughter didn't publically aknowledge him because AS SHE SAID.....AS SHE SAID "wasn't to the advantage of either one of us"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lyle

...and his daughter didn't publically aknowledge him because AS SHE SAID.....AS SHE SAID "wasn't to the advantage of either one of us"

---

Do you ever stop to think before you open your virtual mouth ? Is there no amount of hypocrisy by racists that you won't try and justify ?


Oh, and here's another welfare case for you. Try reading the whole article and discovering how much this small part of the bank bailout is going to cost taxpayers and then read some more about how much the total welfare bill for black Americans is per year and then tell us which number is biggest. Bet you get it wrong. Bet you can't even accurately work numbers from government data websites out.

Here's the link to read to get you started :

Worried Bankers Seek to Shift Risk to Uncle Sam - WSJ.com

Here's another part of the current corporate socialist bank bailout US taxpayer payout to read about. Doing the maths for this one would be very complicated indeed so I'll let you off asking you a question on this one :

Bernanke Open to a Sizable Rate Cut - WSJ.com

You realise the fed is already giving free money away and this will make it cheaper still ? Currently the prime interest rate is less than the rate of inflation after recent cuts so money is now effectively being given away. This means serious inflation in the future, but Bush will be gone and Obama will get the blame.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kirkland Laing

Do you ever stop to think before you open your virtual mouth ? Is there no amount of hypocrisy by racists that you won't try and justify ?


Oh, and here's another welfare case for you. Try reading the whole article and discovering how much this small part of the bank bailout is going to cost taxpayers and then read some more about how much the total welfare bill for black Americans is per year and then tell us which number is biggest. Bet you get it wrong. Bet you can't even accurately work numbers from government data websites out.

---

Who said anything about "black Americans"....you don't have to be black to be on welfare you can be white, hispanic, asian, or whatever and be on welfare youmade the welfare issue about race and it's not about race it's about entitlement and laziness.

Yes the preadatory lending was sheisty but we'll rebound after a while...this kind of stuff happens people find something they can take advantage of and they go nuts with it.

I don't think Uncle Sam should open up his wallet to help these banks....they don't deserve any help because what they did was wrong to begin with

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lyle

Who said anything about "black Americans"....you don't have to be black to be on welfare you can be white, hispanic, asian, or whatever and be on welfare youmade the welfare issue about race and it's not about race it's about entitlement and laziness.

Yes the preadatory lending was sheisty but we'll rebound after a while...this kind of stuff happens people find something they can take advantage of and they go nuts with it.

I don't think Uncle Sam should open up his wallet to help these banks....they don't deserve any help because what they did was wrong to begin with

---

So compare this small part of the banker welfare bill to the total welfare payment every year. You can't work the numbers out, can you ?

You don't have a clue what you're talking about re. predatory lending, or when "we'll rebound." You haven't worked out yet that "you're" the one getting shafted here.

What you think or don't think is irrelevant, it's what's going to happen that's relevant. And what's going to happen is that you're going to get shafted.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kirkland Laing

So compare this small part of the banker welfare bill to the total welfare payment every year. You can't work the numbers out, can you ?

You don't have a clue what you're talking about re. predatory lending, or when "we'll rebound." You haven't worked out yet that "you're" the one getting shafted here.

What you think or don't think is irrelevant, it's what's going to happen that's relevant. And what's going to happen is that you're going to get shafted.

---

For your first question....I disagree with the government bailing ANYONE out especially when the banks and lenders did wrong to begin with.

Your second part...the economy has cycles this is a downturn partly because of this lending business and partly because we're going into an election year and there is always trepidation in the market because there will be big change in Washington and the market is affected by such worries.

There have been issues like this before in the past and the economy HAS ALWAYS REBOUNDED....not as fast as we would sometimes like but it always comes back. People losing their houses and cars it's sad it really is but they were ignorant of their loan agreements and the banks counted on that when they made those horrible offers.

It's going to be tough here for a while but it'll get better

...you do realize that the government will more than likely bail out both the banks AND the people who got loans....yeah I will end up getting screwed by this and all because there were ignorant people out there who didn't read their loan applications and there were predators out there ready to go get them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lyle

...you do realize that the government will more than likely bail out both the banks AND the people who got loans....yeah I will end up getting screwed by this and all because there were ignorant people out there who didn't read their loan applications and there were predators out there ready to go get them.

---

The government will bail out almost nobody. The banks will get all the money. In the US, the socialist handouts go to corporations, not people.

You realise that the "predatory lending*" you're talking about would have been impossible if the Bush administration had enforced existing laws and not actually sided with the banks against individual states who were trying to use the existing law to prevent predatory lending. The Bush administration filed lawsuits to stop all state level investigation of lending practices. Do you know why ? Because they were intent on letting a huge credit bubble expand to keep the economy ticking till 2008 to hide the fact that their economic policies had been a catastrophic failure.

But facts and evidence don't matter to you. You'll find some dumbass way to rationalise this.

*This isn't just a subprime problem, it's a problem throughout the credit and financial industry and it's only just beginning.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lyle

For your first question....I disagree with the government bailing ANYONE out especially when the banks and lenders did wrong to begin with.

Your second part...the economy has cycles this is a downturn partly because of this lending business and partly because we're going into an election year and there is always trepidation in the market because there will be big change in Washington and the market is affected by such worries.

There have been issues like this before in the past and the economy HAS ALWAYS REBOUNDED....not as fast as we would sometimes like but it always comes back. People losing their houses and cars it's sad it really is but they were ignorant of their loan agreements and the banks counted on that when they made those horrible offers.

It's going to be tough here for a while but it'll get better

---

Whether you disagree with it or not it's going to happen and you personally are going to bail out billionaire and centimillionaire bankers and investors.

Who wins in November is irrelevant to the current state of the financial markets. You really shouldn't pontificate on things you don't have a clue about. This downturn is caused entirely by the inability of the Bush administration to handle fiscal policy competently or lawfully.

The economy will indeed rebound but certain sections of the economy are going to do worse and worse over time. For low/middle income earners the next couple of decades are going to be horrific.

Greenspan had a hand in this as well...so let's include him in all the fun too

Sure we're going to see more trouble come from this cars and homes repo'ed but the repo guys will be doing big business so there are some low/middle income earners that will be doing ok

...you know you're a lot like Mitt Romney, I start on an issue and you try to steer me into talking about the economy.


There is no need for this thread anymore if we're done talking about Bernard Hopkins and what he said about Joe Calzaghe