NY Times Charles Blow: The U.S. Flag Is Drenched With Our Blood

Let me summarize for you-

quote:

---

Trump doesn’t understand, white people are evil, slavery, slavery, slavery, more white people are evil, systemic racism, white people are inherently racist, you don’t get it because you’re not black.

---

ETA- This is nothing new. Same song and dance.

quote:

---

mountaintop

---

Hello alter

What a whiny, pathetic pussy.

quote:

---

It is a bold, powerful statement. Hmm...

---

Wrong! This is a bold, powerful statement. Ask around and find out how many of those boys came off that mountain or off that island alive

frick Charles Blow. Let his apologetic arse move to Iran, China, North Korea or some other Regressive Utopia.

quote:

---

NY Times

---

Fake and Failing.

quote:

---

What this misses is that patriotism is particularly fraught for black people in this country because the history of the country’s treatment of them is fraught. It’s not that black people aren’t patriotic; it’s just that patriotism can be a paradox. Many black people see themselves simultaneously as part of America and separate from it, under attack by it, and it has always been thus.

---

It wasn't always this way. What changed their attitudes?

I'd suggest that Charles Blow do a genealogy search and find out where his ancestors were from, then move his arse back there.

And when he gets there, find out which other black tribe sold his ancestors into slavery and write shite articles about them.

quote:

---

NY Times Charles Blow: The U.S. Flag Is Drenched With Our Blood

---

At least you actually included the author's name, but I really wish people would stop including the name of the publication when citing an op-ed, or at the very least put op-ed.

People don't seem to know or care what an op-ed is and how it's different from a typical article. Or I think lot of times people don't open the link, and it's understandable sometimes since it's easy to get the gist in a hurry from the information quoted.

So when people see the publication name, and don't realize it's an opinion piece, people seem to assume it's an actual article that goes through the journalistic process, and attributes the opinion to the publication. Of course they publish it, so it's not completely independent, but it invariably seems to become an example about something that fits their view in relation to the publication and/or it's credibility.