Obama destroys another neighborhood.

[knight_shadow]

Case in point...

Originally Posted by kish2

Sure, that is easy. Lincoln HS in Phila has 14 full time cops and that is not even a big school. Name me one public school in Phila that does not have full time cops. Be specific!

All the integrated neighborhoods in the city have been destroyed.

N. Philly
S. Phila,
SW Phila,
NE Phila

I could pretty much name a dozen neighborhoods in EACH of those areas. Why do you think most people moved out of the city? The city population went from 2.1 mil down to 1.5 while the suburbs went from almost nothing to 3.5 million. The city has 400 murders per year while the burbs with double the population has very few murders. N. Philly is pretty much a warzone. The cops call it the badlands. The state actually leads the nation in black homicides thanks to a couple sq miles in N. Philly and you wonder why we won't let you in the pool.



The ONLY neighborhoods that have not been destroyed are the ones with minimal integration.

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by knight_shadow

Case in point...

Try explaining WHY you think that post is BS.

[knight_shadow]

Originally Posted by DrPhil

Try explaining WHY you think that post is BS.

"The ONLY neighborhoods that have not been destroyed are the ones with minimal integration."

Obviously, his intent is to stir up drama, NOT to have intelligent discussion. Bringing up "black homicide" and "not letting us in the pool" have nothing to do with the negative effects of integration. I agree with you (and him, I guess) that a lot of low-income areas are plagued with crime and less-than-stellar school districts, and forcing integration will do little to change that.

But if the only way he can get his point across is by telling "my people" to get jobs and take care of our kids (ie. his bullshit), then I can't quite take him seriously.

Again, there was a start to a good discussion until he showed his ass.

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by knight_shadow

"The ONLY neighborhoods that have not been destroyed are the ones with minimal integration."

I knew you'd start here.

ETA: We know who the messenger is. That doesn't mean the central point behind the message is incorrect. It means that it will be clouded with madmax-isms. No surprises here, people.

[knight_shadow]

Originally Posted by DrPhil

I knew you'd start here.

OK.

ETA: I agree with your ETA.

[KSig RC]

Originally Posted by knight_shadow

Bringing up "black homicide" and "not letting us in the pool" have nothing to do with the negative effects of integration. I agree with you (and him, I guess) that a lot of low-income areas are plagued with crime and less-than-stellar school districts, and forcing integration will do little to change that.

Read this again. These two sentences basically cannot coexist together - that's what DrPhil is saying. If the second is true, then madmax's sentence is also true in spirit if not to the letter. Inflammatory =/= wrong.

[knight_shadow]

Originally Posted by KSig RC

Read this again. These two sentences basically cannot coexist together - that's what DrPhil is saying. If the second is true, then madmax's sentence is also true in spirit if not to the letter. Inflammatory =/= wrong.

IIRC, those children were bussed to that pool. I don't remember integration having anything to do with that story.

[KSig RC]

Originally Posted by knight_shadow

IIRC, those children were bussed to that pool. I don't remember integration having anything to do with that story.

I was hoping you'd come back with this . . . remember, you noted how little will change as a result of integration? You can view it either as:

A - A micro-level example of integration at a single point (the pool level; bussing kids to the pool is de facto integration of the pool)
B - An example of things that haven't changed

Either way, it's an incidental but not unimportant vestige of integration - related to DrPhil's other point about knowing who is poor being a detriment to integration. Don't you think others feel like madmax, even if they don't say it loudly or the same way?

[knight_shadow]

Originally Posted by KSig RC

I was hoping you'd come back with this . . . remember, you noted how little will change as a result of integration? You can view it either as:

A - A micro-level example of integration at a single point (the pool level; bussing kids to the pool is de facto integration of the pool)
B - An example of things that haven't changed

Either way, it's an incidental but not unimportant vestige of integration - related to DrPhil's other point about knowing who is poor being a detriment to integration. Don't you think others feel like madmax, even if they don't say it loudly or the same way?

I'm positive others feel the same way.

I've already said that I agree with the "central" point here. If you can tell me how "taking care of my kids" and George Jefferson fit into this discussion, then we might get on the same page. That was the point of my tangent.

[kish2]

Originally Posted by knight_shadow

"The ONLY neighborhoods that have not been destroyed are the ones with minimal integration."

.

My intent was to stop destroying neighborhoods.