LOL!
2,440,000 hits on google for "nappy headed hos"
this is gonna beat snakes on a plane, totally
http://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aofficial&channel=s&hl=en&q=%22nappy+headed+hos%22&btnG=Google+Search
:edit: it already did 😂 whole fleet o' roflcopters
:edit2: BWAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHA!!!!! that made my week.
Originally posted by Burner
Yeah, I know. I was just ****ing around.CZ, stop being so ignorant. Those views are completely imaginary, you are simply racist. Stop.
imaginary? i think it's more like abstract thinking. and tell me how i am wrong. i know full well that whites use negative whites to repell and blacks use positive blacks to attract.
the rich and wealthy HATE negativity, and these folks (Al and Jesse) KNOW IT as well as their followers, and they sit on negativity and feed this energy to other people (in their thoughts and words and deeds), and fueling it, and we all know that negativity is a destructive force, not a positive constructive force. we can rebuild this stuff really quickly, putting out the fires, by not feeding anymore of it, and that means (also) trying to get Al and Jesse to use that kind of power with a lot more discretion, not every other month, it's tired and tiring for Americans, we have enough of it already, enough negativity!
Originally posted by chithappens
the rich and wealthy ARE negativity.
you don't understand the difference b/t the rich and the wealthy. a person can win a million and be rich and negative but will realize he or she has to stay on the affirmative to keep it, the wealthy already know this.
if a rich person loses everything, he or she may not get it back.
if a wealthy person loses everything, he or she will.
there is a difference in mentality b/t the rich and the wealthy. the wealthy will donate their money, the rich won't. the wealthy WORK and believe in hard/smart work, the rich don't. there is a difference in class b/c of their mentality, even if they have the same amount of excess.
the rich may exploit to get gain, the wealthy will never. there are a lot of wealthy people who won't have anything to do with the defined "rich".
Originally posted by Czarina_Czarina
you don't understand the difference b/c rich and wealthy. a person can win a million and be rich and negative but will realize he or she has to stay on the affirmative to keep it, the wealthy already know this.
again with the generalizations.
"the wealthy already know this" just like "blacks and their niggerism."
poor people start wars! all mexicans cook tacos!
where do you stop?
in the case of negative regarding money, it means political correctness of those who have more influence than you do. otherwise, u end up like imus
Originally posted by chithappens
again with the generalizations."the wealthy already know this" just like "blacks and their niggerism."
poor people start wars! all mexicans cook tacos!
where do you stop?
in the case of negative regarding money, it means political correctness of those who have more influence than you do. otherwise, u end up like imus
you really are a piece of work. i am going to do you the favor, and i am going to shut up. i don't "need" this. if you want to apply the negative everytime, then do it with someone else. i thought this was the issue on the other thread, but it's really just tiring right now (negativity is used to "tire" someone or to slow learning or development or construction).
Originally posted by Czarina_Czarina
(negativity is used to "tire" someone or to slow learning or development or construction).
Hmm, education issues sounds like a really, really interesting development there. But I won't go there.
You keep talking about negative, but I'm only emulating you. This is what you did to everything I said.
wealthy is usually used to describe character in comparison with "rich", rich is usually used to describe abundance (and it doesn't matter how it was obtained). so it's a compliment to have riches, but it's better if thought of as wealthy. if i see someone is hard working and has a lot of money, i would never call them rich, i call them wealthy. if they inherented it and aren't working, i call them rich. if the parents are wealthy, their character can recreate the riches, but their children may not be as skilled or disciplined, so for the kids, i think of them as rich but not wealthy.
and i would like to know how the woman's movement is going to go after the rap music without getting shot at, i mean, how many intelligent, hard working blacks moved back into the black community just to hear of crime after crime, and the inner city blacks blame everyone, from white racists to integration on their condition, no one sees that it's the internal rewarding of negativity and tearing things down AS A DEFAULT that causes so much problems and negative conflict resolution. how many blacks died in DC this year? LOTS, and why? life is hard to create, 9 mos in the womb doesn't guarantee anything, but what takes months of life, takes seconds to kill, but for ego, it doesn't matter huh?. let's talk about black ego and conflict resolution and negativity that is rewarded, before we talk about poor Imus and whites. black inner city has white libs thinking that it's the uppity blacks who have caused this continual poor part of black culture (b/c they feel that they abandon them (via intergrating with whites, that's why "acting" white is made fun of), so black intellectuals feel GUILTY and feel they have to justify inner black cultural behavior, and the ones "left behind" blame integration b/c that allowed blacks who were positive and progressive the freedom to MOVE AND GET AWAY FROM THE NEGATIVE MENTALITIES, so they too join in on making fun of blacks who are rich or well off or well educated, why? why degrade people who are positive for the sake of the ones who will even blame liberals on their condition, but never look at themselves. i know self reflection isn't always pretty, i certainly don't always look good in the mirror (but i gotta look at myself too), but sometimes, we do have to look at ourselves, and blacks do need to look at themselves very closely, esp. about emotionalism, conflict resolution, seeking the negative outlook on things, ect., throwing money at the problems (of race relations) is like putting a band-aid on a broken or cracked water damn, the fixing is internal, not external, and the internal pressure is just going to resurface again (next month shall we?).
Originally posted by FeceMan
OMFG.They said "jigga-boo" and the blacks are freaking out about "nappy-headed hos"?
Give me a ****ing break. Al Sharpton, DIAF.
Imus is playing hang man for this, and so is Al Sharpton, when the real problem is the ones who want to follow the emotionalism, AS has to be responsible and be a better leader, let's say we replace AS and get another guy, if "the people" desire negativity and emotionalism, what difference is it? He's responsible but so are the ones getting emotional and calling up advertisers and fueling negativity, the ones with this kind of group think want Al Sharpton or someone like him. Blacks are sometimes cowardly and will allow someone like him to take the hit without admitting that they get too damn emotional about little stuff. and this isn't in defense for Al Sharpton, but rather an exposure of the group think that would desire that kind of leadership to begin with, if people said "no" to emotional ploys, AS would have to change his tactics and be more of a logical leader and not emotional one, but he feeds them what they want, imo. The hero is able to admit his faults, the coward won't.