________________________
___________
____________
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V74f9eIi9c0
_________________
Views from other people on various issues:
Ron Paul says he didn't write those racist screeds, didn't know about them, and disavows them. But this, like his statments regarding civil rights, leave some questions in my mind. Should he have allowed such things to be published in his name, in his newletter? How did he not know about racist tripe published in his name over a period of some years (apparently from some point in the 1980s --90s)? WHEN did he learn of this, and when did he disavow this junk? I wouldn't surprise me that the Paul's GOP adversaries are trying to discredit him with this, as no doubt with the Democrats should he be nominated as the Republican presidential candidate. But if he allowed stuff to be published in his name without repudiating it (and maybe firing the persons who wrote it), he left himself open for that attack
-Savant
In the popular lingo of Black America, and "oreo" was not a biracial person. An oreo is a Black person who, like an oreo cookie, is Black on the outside and whiite on the inside. White on the inside means largely being wholly committed to white racial values, white aesthetics, and often even wishing to be white. As for progressives defending the president on his policies, some do and others don't. Some support his health care package even if they don't think it goes far enough. Some progressives--e.g. , Cornel West and Chris Hedges--deny that Obama is a progressive, and argue that he is in the hip pocket or corporate power. But they also charge that much of the criticism of Obama from the RIGHT is racist, or motivated by racism. While I am also severely critical of Obama from a PROGRESSIVE perspective, I think that much of the anti-Obama opposition from th Right is racist, and sometimes not even thinly veiled racism.
-Savant
____________________
It is precisely his attitude toward social rights that is unclear to me, and which makes me less receptive to Ron Paul than are some fellow progressives. Frankly, I don't know if he's a racist. He does not appear to be, though those clearly racist writings under his name makes me pause. But from what I read (and heard in one interview) regarding his attitude towards the Civil Rights Act of 1964--without which I'd have pretty much the same life my father and grandfather did--he was very weak. It's not that he argues or presumes like the typical racist that Blacks are an inferior race, or that racial caste and segregation ought to have continued (or be restored full blast). It's the attitude, perhaps integral to right wing libertarianism, that the government can't intervene to end discrimination or segregation so long as it is practiced in the private sphere. Apparently, it would be ok for Paul for the Civil Rights act of 1964 to be used against segregation and discrimination at the FEDERAL level. But in a capitalist society, especially one like the USA, the private sphere is dominant. Most employers are in the private sector. Most businesses are private. In short, on a day to day basis I actually have more interaction with private, non-Federal parts of society--a sphere that would apparently be untouched by the Civil Rights Act on Ron Paul's view of things. For example, I might not have obtained by doctoral degree in philosophy from Vanderbilt University, a private institution if Ron Paul's constriction of the range of the Civil Rights Act had been enforced. Given his emphasis on the constricting of the national government, I can't see how he could begin to stomach universal health care. I fear what would happen with social security, medicare, etc. The Federal hands off approach may allow Paul to adopt relatively sane policies in some areas: reduction of militarism (which every progressive desires as well), probably de-criminalization of drugs (which many of us also want) which would also mean a decrease in massive incarceration. But I am uncertain about Ron Paul's stand on other social issues
-Savant
___________________
_________________________
JenQueen
8 hours ago__________
4 hours ago________________________
whowantz2kno
6 hours agoUmmm hate to tell the white man this, but uhhhh, no matter how much a black woman exercises and eats healthy, that A____ ain't goin nowhere son! But judging by the way his rectangular, "piece of ply-wood' women are shaped, I can see why he knows NOTHING about that.....
All hail the large posterior sisters!!! hahahhaa! :D
All hail the large posterior sisters!!! hahahhaa! :D
______________
________________________
Highest30
8 hours agoPeople choose to eat what they want and I don't recall Michelle stating it was mandatory for everyone in America to follow her regimen for healthy eating. However, you can't expect common sense from people who are simply blinded by melanin. And I mean that. Highly conservative whites in America are having some type of mental crisis due to the fact President Obama is in the White House. None of what they say make any sense. Last, we have to remember that whites are so use to everything being given to them and America really being "their country" for so long. And they had segregation laws, police brutality, systemic racism to help secure their sense of white superiority in America. This world is changing rapidly and they are aware of it. It's why they say the most bizarre s___ relating to President Obama destroying the country, being un-American, Hitler's equal, or b_______ about socialism. They will pick apart any and everything relating to the President and his family because that is what whites do when they feel threaten. They can't see reality right now. Look at their history in this country and around the world. They always resort to insane, illogical tactics to satisfy their hate.
_____________
Shangri La5 hours ago
5 hours agoanother example of the jealousy and disrespect black women experience. He knows no black woman would ever want him and he could never enjoy what our President is enjoying with his wife. Sad he can never get his hands on one unless he pays one of our troubled and confused sistah's to let him touch hers. Like many, he's jealous that the president and first lady can barely keep their hands off each other in public. Our president and first lady have the entire package and he knows that no matter what he does, or how hard he tries, he's never going to get it.
_______________
________________
In fact, even as far back as his memoir DREAMS FROM MY FATHER(1995), Obama was pointing out his differences with his paster, including his view that much of what Wright interpreted as racial injustices were sometimes as much CLASS injustice as race. When that "God d***n" America speech hit the news (though Wright made that sermon several years before Obama's 2008 candidacy)Obama rejected it publicly, and used the occasion for a more general discussion on the problems of race in America. And that wasn't Obama's speech, nor one published under his name. When Ron Paul was queried on CNN about those racist statements under his name, he became quite DISMISSIVE (as though they weren't important), though he also denied writing or agreeing with them. His dismissiveness also bothered me, as did his dismissive attitude when queried about his view of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
-Savant
__________
Frankly, the appeal to property rights (like the appeal to states rights) has long been the right wing defense of innumerable injustices--includ ing both slavery and post-Reconstructio n racial caste. While it could point to a belief--also maleficent, though no inherently racist--the property rights takes priority over human rights, that same appeal has been used by politicians whom I KNOW (not just wonder about) to have been racist. Also, the claim that before Civil Rights Black advancement in managerial positions increased only to DECREASE AFTER civil rights legislation--that claim is simply untrue. While I'm neither a sociologist nor economist by profession, virtually everthing I've read (or anecdotally observed) indicates quite the opposite. After the mid-1960s the professional/manag erial strata grew larger than it had ever been before. I know for a fact that both the schools which I attended, and many at which I've been teaching, would have barred me prior to the achievements of the Civil Rights movement, including the legislation of 1964 & 65.
-Savant
In fact, even as far back as his memoir DREAMS FROM MY FATHER(1995), Obama was pointing out his differences with his paster, including his view that much of what Wright interpreted as racial injustices were sometimes as much CLASS injustice as race. When that "God d***n" America speech hit the news (though Wright made that sermon several years before Obama's 2008 candidacy)Obama rejected it publicly, and used the occasion for a more general discussion on the problems of race in America. And that wasn't Obama's speech, nor one published under his name. When Ron Paul was queried on CNN about those racist statements under his name, he became quite DISMISSIVE (as though they weren't important), though he also denied writing or agreeing with them. His dismissiveness also bothered me, as did his dismissive attitude when queried about his view of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
-Savant
__________
Frankly, the appeal to property rights (like the appeal to states rights) has long been the right wing defense of innumerable injustices--includ ing both slavery and post-Reconstructio n racial caste. While it could point to a belief--also maleficent, though no inherently racist--the property rights takes priority over human rights, that same appeal has been used by politicians whom I KNOW (not just wonder about) to have been racist. Also, the claim that before Civil Rights Black advancement in managerial positions increased only to DECREASE AFTER civil rights legislation--that claim is simply untrue. While I'm neither a sociologist nor economist by profession, virtually everthing I've read (or anecdotally observed) indicates quite the opposite. After the mid-1960s the professional/manag erial strata grew larger than it had ever been before. I know for a fact that both the schools which I attended, and many at which I've been teaching, would have barred me prior to the achievements of the Civil Rights movement, including the legislation of 1964 & 65.
-Savant
_________________-
Hello FM Doc, good to see you posting again.
We have to take responsiblity for what we do, especially if he's running for president. The buck stops with them as it was his editiorial and he edited the newsletter and if he disagree with what was printed in it, he could have very well edited it out.
With regards to President Obama and Jerimah Wright, yes, he attended his church, but where did he "personally" put out a newsletter or anything in print cosigning what Wright preached or believed? As a black woman, I understand fully what most whites cannot about what Wright preached and why. We don't expect most whites to agree, nor understand, but as the underclass in this country, there is a feeling of alienation and rightfully so. HOwever, Mr. Paul is or was part of the priviledged class. Educated, articulate, and even brilliant some say, but to cosign such a newsletter 20 years ago or yesterday, is political suicide. As a black woman, I am deeply offended by those writings. I liked him before but I'd never trust him now and sadly none of the people he wrote intolerant articles against (or he allowed to be written) will trust or like him either. We'll see him in the same light as we see most Republicans and that's racist.
Just saying...
In fact, even as far back as his memoir DREAMS FROM MY FATHER(1995), Obama was pointing out his differences with his paster, including his view that much of what Wright interpreted as racial injustices were sometimes as much CLASS injustice as race.
When that "God d***n" America speech hit the news (though Wright made that sermon several years before Obama's 2008 candidacy)Obama rejected it publicly, and used the occasion for a more general discussion on the problems of race in America.
And that wasn't Obama's speech, nor one published under his name.
When Ron Paul was queried on CNN about those racist statements under his name, he became quite DISMISSIVE (as though they weren't important), though he also denied writing or agreeing with them.
His dismissiveness also bothered me, as did his dismissive attitude when queried about his view of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
-Savant
_____________
FROM THE GATE THIS INTERVIEW WAS SET TO USE THE NBPP AGAINST THE OLD BBP! SAD! PLAYING THE TWO SIDES AGAINST EACHOTHER SMH!
But the Panthers bombing pig stys? No. & any such claims, that such occurred, would be categorically false. However, had such occurred (which again, it did not), given the state-sponsored terrorism that police departments across the country were subjecting Black communities, in general, given the campaign of harrasment, suppression, & criminal brutality, that law enforcement agencies were subjecting the Panthers, in particular, such would mark such bombing as a self-defense tactic
I've had lunches, afternoon discussions, & debates, w/ Bobby Seale, himself. So u'll forgive me if I find ur reading of ONE Panther biography, & pronouncements of my being, "uneducated about...the Black Panthers...in the 1960s," both amusing & unimpressive. Now granted, it's been a few years since I've perused, "A Taste of Power," nevertheless, I recall no claims by Brown regarding Panthers bombing police stations--the Weather Underground, the SLA (both white radical groups) Yes
Listen u sad halfwit, I've read a"A Taste of Power" by Elaine Brown, as well as "Seize the Time" by Bobby Seale, and "Revolutionary Suicide" & "To Die for the People" by Huey Newon, and "Assata" by Assata Shakur, and "This Side of Glory" by David Hilliard along w/ countless other Panther biographies & histories. Not 2 mention that both of my parents, along w/ several of my aunts, uncles, & cousins are all former Panthers. I grew up in the movent, not just reading it, u dumb a______!
Bobby Seale a domestic terrorist? *smh* Guy, do us all a favor, if u don't know what u're talking about, (& u CLEARLY don't) if u can't differentiate between ppl organizing 2 defend themselves, & their communities, against state sponsored injustice, oppression, & brutality--or ur racist nature makes u lack the integrity, 2 acknowledge the difference bet. the 2--then please, just shut the fuck up. U're adding NOTHING of value 2 the discussion.
Peace
__________
A interesting dilema. The idea of messing up the GOP game is appealing, however, his evasive and cranky answers do little to quell the issue of those rabid, racist, statements. The man has/had? issues with Jews, blacks and gays and whether or not he actually wrote the articles his name was on the cover and he admitted editing these missives. People can and do change but not most people with such rabid, racist views. He wasn't some young person sprouting off ignorant, racist, nonsense. This man was a doctor, highly educated and motivated.
Smear it might be by the Republican party as I am sure some of the other Republican candidates smeared Herman Cain (although liberals are blamed for it as if he could possibly beat Obama, lol); as those voting for Paul will take votes away from whatever Republican candidate is selected to run against Obama, so in essence, Paul is a non-issue as he has no chance of winning the presidential election and this news for those who were unware of it, hardly will get him more votes, especially from minorities, gays or Jews.
To be quite frank with you, my estimation of Ron Paul was not that he was a racist, but that he had a political and economic philosophy which at points might aid and abet racism. Much==probably MOST--of the racism to which we have been subjected dwells in the PRIVATE sphere. Paul's conservative "hands off" the private sector leaves reacism to run while in civll society. Also, the emphasis on letting the states govern however they choose amounts to the same thing.
In short, my impression was somewhat like Dr. King's impression of Barry Goldwater. Not a racist but a man whose political and economic philosophy affords support, even if only inadvertently.
Ron Paul's attitude toward the Civil Rights act of 1964 (which precipitated or enabled MOST of the desegregation that has occurred in the past 45+ years) has made me deeply skeptical. And, as I've said previously, I am also skeptical about his position on numerous other social issues.
But what REALLY made me wonder about the possibility of Ron Paul being a racist was precisely the news of those racist articles in his Newslatter.
Somehow his claim that he neither wrote them nor even KNEW about it sounds implausible.
By the way, Ta Neheisi Coates is a brother from Bmore. Son of Paul Coates, former head of Bmore's Black Panther Party (original one, not "new" pretenders). Paul, his dad, was one of the elders who had a certain influence on me as well when I was yonger.
He's now publisher of Black Classics Press.
-Savant
________________
______________
Let's keep it real. I understand Rev. Wright's speech. Most whites don't want to hear it (those who are sensitive, racist, or looking to bash Obama). If we're to get real about race relations in this country, then the truth has to be told and the truth is, many AAs were unhappy, angry and disenfranchised and why they should have to apologize to whites who are clueless about why is not something ANY BLACK PERSON SHOULD HAVE TO EXPLAIN, LET ALONE APOLOGIZE FOR.
With that said, no, whites are not responsible for what their ancestors did during slavery. Nor are they responsible for what their grandparents did, but they're responsible for "what they do, or didn't do, with regards to equal treatment, i.e. what they expect or take for granted and that's still their "priviledged" status, not only in America, but the world.
Yes, slavery has been over long ago. Mind telling me why it took till 1964 for a "civil rights" movement and laws had to be enacted? Mind telling me why these people who fought for civil rights, also fought in wars, paid taxes, had to demonstrate and fight for the rights and priviledges that were afforded to white citizens? So, from 1964 until 2011,(37 years) blacks were supposed to take this gigantic jump, and just assemble into the mainstream of American life. No complaints, nada, zlich?
I offer this in conclusion, no race, on the face of this earth, has come so far, so fast, with so many obstacles place in their way. Yes, slavery ended a long time ago, but racisim didn't and it interfered with blacks ability to obtain an education, where to live, jobs, health care and every other aspect of American life that whites take for granted. So yes, in this day and age, I can fully understand Rev. Wright's so-called outrageous speech for people who didn't want to hear it as most are the same that were the ones who were the obstacles in our way.
I'am proud of my race and president as we finally have someone who can identify with not just one segement of the population, but all people. White, black, Hispanic, Asian, Native, poor, rich, disenfranchised, hopeful, young, old, etc. A president, finally for the people, by all the people!
As for Ron Paul, he's over. A wolf, in sheeps clothing. Isolationist? hmmm, whom does he want to isolate? I think we already have the answer an it's a crime and a shame that a man, so gifted with the ability to save live, in effect, the closet we on earth come to God, is such a shallow, unelightened, flawed, human being. Our elders are supposed to be wise, but he's lived a lifetime and should know better and look further, but he's stuck in the elite attitude too. What is the elite attitude? There is no God, the white man is God on this planet.
Not true....
With regards to our society, it's a given that people help those who they're associated with. They help in jobs, education, social organizations, etc., and that, in and of itself, isn't racist. We all do it. The problems occur when you "discriminate" against someone outside of your "social circle" or family. These people,(i.e. blacks, asians, hispanics, etc.) don't look like you, don't speak like you, don't share your world view, etc., so they're strangers and don't fit into your "small" world view. Obama was in a church with people of Chicago and that's how they felt! And they had reason to feel that way! Instead of lamblasting him, Rev. Wright or the parishoners, did any of these naysayers ever wonder why the parishoners felt that way? Did they care to know the reasons for the firey speech? Condeming it from their biased point of view? Where they not Americans? Did anyone question why they were so upset before decrying they were wrong? Trust me, if whites were ever mistreated, YOU WILL KNOW ABOUT IT! It's their American Right by the Constitution, but does it only apply to them? And they get to decided what people should or shouldn't be angry about?
With that said, no, whites are not responsible for what their ancestors did during slavery. Nor are they responsible for what their grandparents did, but they're responsible for "what they do, or didn't do, with regards to equal treatment, i.e. what they expect or take for granted and that's still their "priviledged" status, not only in America, but the world.
Yes, slavery has been over long ago. Mind telling me why it took till 1964 for a "civil rights" movement and laws had to be enacted? Mind telling me why these people who fought for civil rights, also fought in wars, paid taxes, had to demonstrate and fight for the rights and priviledges that were afforded to white citizens? So, from 1964 until 2011,(37 years) blacks were supposed to take this gigantic jump, and just assemble into the mainstream of American life. No complaints, nada, zlich?
I offer this in conclusion, no race, on the face of this earth, has come so far, so fast, with so many obstacles place in their way. Yes, slavery ended a long time ago, but racisim didn't and it interfered with blacks ability to obtain an education, where to live, jobs, health care and every other aspect of American life that whites take for granted. So yes, in this day and age, I can fully understand Rev. Wright's so-called outrageous speech for people who didn't want to hear it as most are the same that were the ones who were the obstacles in our way.
I'am proud of my race and president as we finally have someone who can identify with not just one segement of the population, but all people. White, black, Hispanic, Asian, Native, poor, rich, disenfranchised, hopeful, young, old, etc. A president, finally for the people, by all the people!
As for Ron Paul, he's over. A wolf, in sheeps clothing. Isolationist? hmmm, whom does he want to isolate? I think we already have the answer an it's a crime and a shame that a man, so gifted with the ability to save live, in effect, the closet we on earth come to God, is such a shallow, unelightened, flawed, human being. Our elders are supposed to be wise, but he's lived a lifetime and should know better and look further, but he's stuck in the elite attitude too. What is the elite attitude? There is no God, the white man is God on this planet.
Not true....
With regards to our society, it's a given that people help those who they're associated with. They help in jobs, education, social organizations, etc., and that, in and of itself, isn't racist. We all do it. The problems occur when you "discriminate" against someone outside of your "social circle" or family. These people,(i.e. blacks, asians, hispanics, etc.) don't look like you, don't speak like you, don't share your world view, etc., so they're strangers and don't fit into your "small" world view. Obama was in a church with people of Chicago and that's how they felt! And they had reason to feel that way! Instead of lamblasting him, Rev. Wright or the parishoners, did any of these naysayers ever wonder why the parishoners felt that way? Did they care to know the reasons for the firey speech? Condeming it from their biased point of view? Where they not Americans? Did anyone question why they were so upset before decrying they were wrong? Trust me, if whites were ever mistreated, YOU WILL KNOW ABOUT IT! It's their American Right by the Constitution, but does it only apply to them? And they get to decided what people should or shouldn't be angry about?
-bappie
______________________
Excellent post Bappie. It's interesting that racists fear strong black people that are not afraid to speak out that's why they hate Obama.It has nothing to do with policies because they are actually happy when legislation doesn't get passed they want him to fail.Also attacking Michelle Obama is another example of pure racism because there is no reason to attack her.
-iamcuriousnow
_________________
http://newsone.com/nation/newsonestaff4/natural-hair-on-the-rise-in-2011/
1 day ago
1 day ago
____________
Laquita T. Hodge4 days ago
______________________
Excellent post Bappie. It's interesting that racists fear strong black people that are not afraid to speak out that's why they hate Obama.It has nothing to do with policies because they are actually happy when legislation doesn't get passed they want him to fail.Also attacking Michelle Obama is another example of pure racism because there is no reason to attack her.
-iamcuriousnow
_________________
http://newsone.com/nation/newsonestaff4/natural-hair-on-the-rise-in-2011/
1 day agoOur natural has been getting a bum rap for too long. I'm glad we're gradually dispelling the myths!
___________
1 day agoI've been natural for sometime now, and I can definitely tell more sistas are rockin their natural hair. I just hope that sistahs continue to buy from small black owned businesses who are genuine and knowledgeable about black hair. Because we all know that major (prominently white) hair care businesses will notice this natural hair movement and how much they can make off it and start targeting naturals. LET'S PLACE SOME MONEY BACK IN OUR COMMUNITIES!
________
Symone23 hours ago
23 hours agoI so agree!!!!
I refuse to let Whites make money off my hair when they have always denigrated certain textures of Black hair....I get my oils from a Black lady that my mother knows that has provided oils to my Mom for years because Mom has been rocking "natural hair"...Love it!
I refuse to let Whites make money off my hair when they have always denigrated certain textures of Black hair....I get my oils from a Black lady that my mother knows that has provided oils to my Mom for years because Mom has been rocking "natural hair"...Love it!
__________
freelancepimp1 day ago
1 day agoOh ans sisters don't seem to need to wear all that d_____ makeup when they go natural too.
________
Iwillbfree
18 hours ago
________
Iwillbfree
18 hours ago__________
Amen with clown circles on their cheekbones. Black skin is at it best when it's make-up free and glowing. Many Black women unfortunately do not appreciate their natural beauty, that's another symptom of Stockholm syndrome many Blacks suffer from.
______-
Symone1 day ago
1 day agoI'm just glad to see more Black girls and Black women rocking "Natural hair" and it's also great that many of us that rock it also know how to take care of it.I also say this to many Black women and girls that have not had a perm in atleast a year but may still get their hair flat ironed once a month or perhaps every two months but even with that said if you moisturize your hair and seal the moisture daily you shouldn't have much breakage......
___________
jazzwatch1 day ago
1 day agoAnd the natural hair is the SEXIEST hair, IJS.......and you H-O-T-T-I-E-S out there KNOW who you are :).....
_______
nodoubt101 day ago
1 day agoIt's great that someone finally decided to address this issue, particularly for women coming from fatherless homes. I've encountered many women who fit the categories of the women shown in the video above. Most were seeking intimate relationships with older fatherly men or just seeking validation in the form of promiscuity from any and many men. What's worse is that the women weren't aware or conscious of what they were doing to themselves and why they were doing it. I'm glad to see that the women in this video are brining to light this issue which could be very unhealthy- mentally, emotionally, spiritually, and physically- to all women. I know not all women will be interested in watching the video, but I hope many have the chance to check it out. Along with religious principles, these are the type of community issues pastors SHOULD be addressing in churches. Bishop TD Jakes and Roland Martin are great for their work in putting this out.
As for the men who have helped to bring a child into this world, please help to raise that child, especially your daughters. Give them the guidance they will need to face a challenging society and stop being selfish. Regardless of the setbacks or relationship issues you may be dealing with, you still have a duty! Lest they will become part of the 70% statistic that could lead to; "acting out, using drugs, quitting school, becoming pregnant, and also going to jail", and also being involved with unhealthy relationships with carefree men like the women interviewed in the video.
Share this video!
Peace and God Bless!
As for the men who have helped to bring a child into this world, please help to raise that child, especially your daughters. Give them the guidance they will need to face a challenging society and stop being selfish. Regardless of the setbacks or relationship issues you may be dealing with, you still have a duty! Lest they will become part of the 70% statistic that could lead to; "acting out, using drugs, quitting school, becoming pregnant, and also going to jail", and also being involved with unhealthy relationships with carefree men like the women interviewed in the video.
Share this video!
Peace and God Bless!
_______
__________
______
____________
Laquita T. Hodge
4 days agoI believe it. If he's continuously cheated for pretty much their entire marriage, why all of suddenly leave after the 10 year mark?
His parents & sister warned him, he didn't listen & cut them off until his oldest daughter was born. They didn't even attend his wedding because they wanted him to sign a pre-nup.
Besides, who would let their teenage daughter marry a pro athlete while she's still in high school? There were no encouragements to get a degree?
Vanessa wanted a big payday and she got it.
His parents & sister warned him, he didn't listen & cut them off until his oldest daughter was born. They didn't even attend his wedding because they wanted him to sign a pre-nup.
Besides, who would let their teenage daughter marry a pro athlete while she's still in high school? There were no encouragements to get a degree?
Vanessa wanted a big payday and she got it.
_________
dkh23 days ago
3 days agoI personally know dozens of African American couples who have been married over 15 years (this count includes my parents until my father passed away). These couples are partners. Both work jobs and share in paying bills, etc. No one in the relationship is "after the money".
It's apparent to me that some (not all) people that comment on this site have not witnessed enough Black love first hand, and they therefore have a distorted view of marriage. You can't base a genuine view of marriage off of the lives of celebs. Celebs live a different world from the one that we (commenters on this site) live in.
It's apparent to me that some (not all) people that comment on this site have not witnessed enough Black love first hand, and they therefore have a distorted view of marriage. You can't base a genuine view of marriage off of the lives of celebs. Celebs live a different world from the one that we (commenters on this site) live in.
________________
_________
No comments:
Post a Comment