Re: IQ AND RACE? HUH?

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
• Next message: Martin Hutchison: "Re: BELL CURVE CRITIC EXPOSED?"
• Previous message: David A. Johns: "Re: IQ AND RACE. The taboo subject."
• Maybe in reply to: Lord Zilch: "IQ AND RACE? HUH?"
• Next in thread: Richard Jacoby: "Re: IQ AND RACE? HUH?"

In article <D3GIyF.Gnu@eskimo.com>, Stephen Lajoie <lajoie@eskimo.com> wrote:
>In article <3grir6$4cj@clarknet.clark.net>,
>Lord Zilch)@clark.net ( <thedavid> wrote:
>>
>It would seem that this "pale-Gentile bunch" are a bit more objective
>than others, seeking only a level playingfield, while others have a
>vested interest in special programs.

Given the history of this "pale-Gentile bunch," your generalization isn't
very believable.

>>If you're out to prove you're (relatively?) "not too bright" please
>>consider you've done so quite conclusively. Now shut the hell up!
>>
>>DAVID, White-Nigger-At-Large
>>--
>
>Again, you overlook that difference between an individual and a population.
>
You do as well, with your statement that those in the "pale-Gentile
bunch" are objective because they don't have any vested interests, but
those that aren't can't be becuase they do.

-- 

"What a waste it is to lose one's mind, or not to have a mind is being 

very wasteful." -- Dan Quayle


"Book 'em, Dannoe." -- Jack Lord

• Next message: Martin Hutchison: "Re: BELL CURVE CRITIC EXPOSED?"
• Previous message: David A. Johns: "Re: IQ AND RACE. The taboo subject."
• Maybe in reply to: Lord Zilch: "IQ AND RACE? HUH?"
• Next in thread: Richard Jacoby: "Re: IQ AND RACE? HUH?"