From: chaneysa@nextnet.csus.edu (Stephen A Chaney)
Subject: Re: Why we go for non-black women
Organization: California State University Sacramento
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 18:15:34 GMT

In article <C0nGqp.FoA@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu> rbpierce@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (richard b pierce) writes:
>Let me begin by admitting that I do not expect MR. Chaney to respond
>to my post.  I spent a good portion of the last hour reading the various
>responses to Mr. Chaney's original post.  I noticed a few things that 
>I would like to share.  

Lesson #1: The smarter the argument the more likely I am to post. 


>1.  Many posters had cogent, intelligent responses to Mr. Chaney's 
>    post that would have, if acknowledged, presented a serious challenge
>    to his thinking.  Most notably, one netter mentioned Medger's position
>    in Helms' election campaign--the highest paid job Medger has ever had.
>    A sister in Cleveland (I think) was on the mark with her comments 
>    about questioning the reason behind one makes the choice to date
>    outside of ones race.  To these, and other intelligent comments 
>    Mr. Chaney chose to ignore instead concentrating on the more
>    inflammatory and less substantive issue.

The reason why I date someone is irrelevant. What's it to her? I
already stated what attracts me: attitude and ideology, race being
irrelevant. 


>2.  What's this with Jesse and "Hymietown" which Mr. Chaney uses
>    to brand all "liberal" black voices?  Did Mr. Chaney not read
>    Pat Buchanan and his views on Jews?  I only bring up Pat because
>    Mr. Chaney avows himself as a conservative and so does Pat. If
>    liberals are to think as Jesse than I think I'm free to assume
>    that conservatives think as Pat.  Ignorant assumption, I know, but
>    it's consistent with the original.

Well, the media always links us with Pat Buchanan - no one in the
media ever talks about "Hymietown." While the media is constantly
trying to quote anti-semitic things that Pat Buchanan never said in
the first place, they have no time to explain the Jesse Jackson
issue.


>3.  I admit to my position.  I am married to a black woman who possesses
>    all the qualities that I could ever want.  She has some qualities
>    that Mr. Chaney also desires, or so he writes.  I think I found 
>    her because I had no blinders and we remained together because we
>    respect one another.

Where'd you meet her? I'll head over there to live. 


>4.  Mr. Chaney defines conservatism as judicial restraint.  I was 
>    surprised no one challenged his definition.  I would be interested
>    in other definitions.  I'll offer mine:  conservatism is an attempt
>    to remain politically consistent with the past based on some form 
>    of legitimacy.  Not a horrible thought necessarily but the current
>    American strain of conservatism seems to base its validity on a 
>    religious morality that is dangerous, at best.  Not because religion
>    is wrong, but because they contend if you argue with them you are
>    not religious or moral.  

Uh, excuse me, but where do you find conservatism based on religion?
Outside of Pat Robertson, that is. And while we're at it, can you tell
me what role religion had with Martin Luther King, Jr.? (Clue: QUITE A
BIT.) It seems to be okay as long as the person is liberal, but if
they are conservative? Then, suddenly, the First Amendment comes into
existence where it is irrelevant otherwise.. 


>5.  As a ph. d. candidate in history I feel confident in stating that 
>    when the discussion moved to Russia and the reason for victory in
>    W.W. II, I became bored.  I'm not sure how it got there but I can
>    assure you that most of the assertions and causations were, IMHO,
>    sophomoric.  If for no other reason than for Mr. Chaney's comment
>    that we would not have helped Russia defeat Germany if we had known
>    of the atrocities behind the iron curtain.  Mr. Chaney, we knew.

Well, I believe there is a Russian here on s.c.a.a. who knows more
about this than you or I, so I will leave the issue to him.


>I'm not sure where this debate is anymore.  For the record, I believe
>people should date who they want to date and others who feel they 
>shouldn't be together can possess their opinion as well.  I hope that doesn't
>mean that they will accost or assault the dating couple--rather, they 
>can hold their opionions privately.  Mr. Chaney, the sister who lectured
>you on your dating situation did you a favor.  She told you how she 
>felt to your face.  I hope that you did her the courtesy of telling her
>how you feel as you have done so with us.  I hope you didn't misuse the 
>opportunity to reach your real audience (the woman who spoke with you) in
>an effort to get to your computer to reach us--who maybe your audience.

I told her exactly what I felt about her attitude. I told her to take
her so-and-so-and-so and get back in that march behind Jesse Jackson
and take with her various books on how to get a life, and leave me to
enjoy mine. (And my girlfriend's. :) ) 


  --------------------------------------------------------------------- 
  --Steve Chaney: Founder, Borg Operating Space Systems, Revision 2.5--
  USENET Warlord / IRC Channel Owner / Accounts WorldWide / Home Login!
	      (Whooboy that means LOTSA time for all this?)
                  The B.O.S.S. does not speak for CSUS. 

Newsgroups: soc.culture.african.american