GasBandit
Staff member
Iranian Revolutionary Guard fires warning shots, boards US cargo ship in Strait of Hormuz. No US citizens on board, however. USS Farragut enroute.
It's registered in the Marshall Islands, which is US Territory.Where do you get US cargo ship out of that article? The thing has a slavic name, a Pacific nation's flag, and is operated by a company headquartered in Germany and/or Singapore.
Huh? Based on what? The traditional "Midwest" is mostly less than average or much less than average. The South is more or far more than average.Turns out the Midwest is even more racist than the South.
Uh, based on the graphic I just posted, and the story about the study from which the graphic came, which was listed right under it.Huh? Based on what? The traditional "Midwest" is mostly less than average or much less than average. The South is more or far more than average.
Most of that isn't Midwest. PA and WV certainly aren't. Almost all of that area you're citing is the Appalachias from the "Pennsyltucky" portion of PA, through WV and on south. Redneck country through and through.Uh, based on the graphic I just posted, and the story about the study from which the graphic came, which was listed right under it.
The triangle that runs from Michigan to NYC to the bottom of WVA is bright crimson. Ohio, PA, and West Virginia sure seem to hate black people.
Well maybe you should leave your stereotypes at home!I much more expected the crimson stain to be more in the area of the Virginias and Carolinas.
--Patrick
Ah, I might not be up on what exactly constitutes the Midwest then. I had thought it was everything west of NJ and east of Chicago, but the images I find on google seem to generally think it goes from Ohio to the Dakotas. However a lot of those maps also include PA/WV, but also include states I'd call "Great Plains" and not Midwestern.Most of that isn't Midwest. PA and WV certainly aren't. Almost all of that area you're citing is the Appalachias from the "Pennsyltucky" portion of PA, through WV and on south. Redneck country through and through.
I would usually think of the Midwest as Big 10 country, not counting Penn State.Ah, I might not be up on what exactly constitutes the Midwest then. I had thought it was everything west of NJ and east of Chicago, but the images I find on google seem to generally think it goes from Ohio to the Dakotas. However a lot of those maps also include PA/WV, but also include states I'd call "Great Plains" and not Midwestern.
Eh, I dunno. In Flanders, it's the city folkI like how all countries have the same attitude towards people who tend to be poorer and live in the countryside ---they're all uneducated morons we don't like to associate with. Literally every country I've been to seems to hold this viewpoint.
That's kind of how it works, here, too. Residents of New York, LA, and Chicago pretend those are the only cities and the rest of the nation is called "Flyover Country" (as in, it's the barren, empty nothing you fly over on your way to the important places)... and those of us living in that godforsaken wasteland likewise consider them thar city folk to be effete snobs out of touch with reality.Eh, I dunno. In Flanders, it's the city folkwethey (I'm one of the city folk ) don't want to associate with. Western Flanders and Limburg are considered the "polite", "warm", "inviting" parts, where-as the center - Antwerp and Brussels - are considered arrogant snobs. Of course, the fact that Antwerp proudly proclaims itself "the only city in the world" and lists the rest of the country as "parking lot" doesn't help the stereotype.
As in, the amount of black people not living there?I would argue that the reason why a lot of Wisconsin is in "less to much less than average" (outside of the MKE metro area) is because of the amount of whites living there.
I have never, in the 30 years of my existence, heard ANYONE utter the word "Successful and Attractive African American" in Ohio. Ever. But that might be because I live so close to Columbus and the cities aren't "dueling bangos, thump your bible" territory.Uh, based on the graphic I just posted, and the story about the study from which the graphic came, which was listed right under it.
The triangle that runs from Michigan to NYC to the bottom of WVA is bright crimson. Ohio, PA, and West Virginia sure seem to hate black people.
Or it could just be that how one thinks doesn't necessarily have to match how one speaks.I have never, in the 30 years of my existence, heard ANYONE utter the word "Successful and Attractive African American" in Ohio. Ever. But that might be because I live so close to Columbus and the cities aren't "dueling bangos, thump your bible" territory.
Bingo.As in, the amount of black people not living there?
there are far less black people living west of the Mississippi River since no white people physically took them and forced them to live there
also I'm really surprised Boston is dark blue
I agree with you on the Boston part anyway.there are far less black people living west of the Mississippi River since no white people physically took them and forced them to live there
also I'm really surprised Boston is dark blue
Guess we can tell all the black people living in Dallas, Houston, Chicago, LA etc that they don't exist because white people didn't take them there.I'm not sure which part you're gif-ing, I didn't think it was a controversial statement that there are large black populations in the rural southern areas where they were enslaved. That's just like. The fact? Same reason there are large Native American populations in Oklahoma and the Big Sky region
...unless they're vampires.The mississippi [sic] is not a magic negro excluding forcefield.
Charlie said "far less", not "none". I mean, I haven't gone and checked the numbers, but I'm fairly sure there are less black people there, making his remark at most a bit of an exaggeration.There are a lot of black people where white people didn't take them. There are more in the south, yes, and for that reason, but the mississippi is not a magic negro excluding forcefield.
I suppose it depends on your definition of "Far less." Basically any superlarge metropolitan area has a large black population. Hell, 2 million black people live in NYC, which is very much not "the south."Charlie said "far less", not "none". I mean, I haven't gone and checked the numbers, but I'm fairly sure there are less black people there, making his remark at most a bit of an exaggeration.
And I assure you, I know about black people going where they aren't taken. I'm from Europe, remember? [/casual racism]
Yes, there are more black people in the south, but like I said, it depends on what you call "far less." Anybody who's been to Dallas, Chicago, LA, Houston, New York City, Washington DC, etc can tell you there is no shortage of black people. In fact, more black people live in NYC than in all of Mississippi (almost twice as many), even though that's the purplest of the purple regions on that census map.While the "since no one took them there..." part is speculation, it isn't baseless speculation.
Regardless, the population maps show exactly that there is a far lower percentage of the population identifying as black west of the Mississippi (and north of the mason Dixon line for that matter).
http://www.censusscope.org/us/map_nhblack.html
Whether that actually means far fewer isn't something I checked as I didn't think it would change the point.
If you're gonna hate on Charlie, at least be factual about it.
It doesn't really match in the Appalachian region, though.Note that it very closely matches the most racist map that started the argument. It may be an issue of reporting and not actual attitude. Would be interesting to see that "most racist" per black capita - though I doubt it would be particularly useful.