nojojojo: Sorry if I went too far, I just couldn’t believe some of the garbage he was saying. Made me so damn angry I could hardly see straight.

You’re right; it’s not appropriate for us to keep discussing Paul now that he’s been banned from the blog. Nor is it appropriate to jump to conclusions about his personality, motives, and possible alternate-history slaveowner behavior.

It’s also not appropriate to make ad hominem attacks, as you did with your last post. Mote, eye, beam-plucking. Don’t do that again, OK?

Did anybody else almost fall out of their chair when they read the part where he asserted that being an “ugly white male” puts him at a disadvantage? Uh, last tine I checked, ugly white males make up about 90% of the elitist class. In fact, being unattractive (If you’re a man) seems to actually contribute to your success. Paul’s “poor me” routine falls on deaf ears, over here. He is a typical representation of the white boy’s club, with the usual entitlement attitude. Notice how upset he was that attractive women were rejecting him? The very fact that he feels these women owe him any form of attention (just because he’s white & wealthy) speaks volumes about his spoiled, privileged mindset. Men such as him also felt they were entitled to a black woman’s body during the days of slavery. His pro-racism/pro-sexism blatherings literally made my stomach turn. I wished he hadn’t been banned; I’d give him a “debate” alright. He’d limp out of this blog, licking his gaping wounds.

Ok, Paul, at the risk of sounding like a sell-out, I am going to take your side on this. Why because although, Puerto Ricans are a culturally blended group which includes Africans, whites, Taino and Arowak indians, they have formed a whole new third race. Judging from the recent strife between certain elements of the Latino community against Blacks, and knowing that there are many who don’t like whites as well, I wonder about the statement as well.
I also think that someone like Michelle Obama or any other black woman would not have been given a free pass, had they stated the same thing. If we would like to level the playing field, we are going to start calling ALL on their racism, sexism and antisemitism. Failing to do so, only serves to create resentment.

She does not seemed to be a fan of the second amendment. For example , in the case Maloney v. Cuomo, she dimissed Maloney statement that being arrested for carrying Nunchakus was in clear violation of the 2nd amendment .”(quote from one of my previous posts)

Ah, now I get it. I was wondering why you were so obsessed with individual acts and unwilling to see the big picture.

We’re going to have to just agree to disagree here, then, because I view libertarianism (as described and practiced by most libertarians I’ve met, including you) as fundamentally incompatible with fighting racism.

Here’s the thing, though. You’re still arguing with the definition of racism, even though I told you that was off-topic for this conversation. You’re also espousing some support for racism in the process — and since this is an anti-racist site, y’know, I gotta tell you, that shit ain’t welcome here.

I don’t really care what your beliefs are, and I don’t care whether you’re a black woman (if you are) or a white man. What I do care about is that this discussion stays on-topic, and this blog remains a safe space. Find a way to talk about Sonia Sotomayor without promoting racism — this site’s definition of racism — or I’ll have to break out the banhammer again.