translation:
ooooops....should not call someone else out on hyperbole when i use hyperbole in the same thread. must, must be more discreet next time.
50 years is a long time onceler. comparing stats on racial issues over such a long period misses the mark entirely. why don't we go back thousands of years? race as a form of subjugation is nothing new, but you and your liberal ilk act as if it is only fair skinned (whites) who are guilty of such subjugation. you ignore history in order to promote your political agenda. in order to discuss ratios, we first have to agree that ratios are stats, collected and thus recorded. that being said, such a record is bound to be incomplete. it doesn't matter if there was more white on black crimes 50, 45 years ago, in determining whether racism exists today. your logic seemingly inidicates, that if we have more X racism over a set period of time, given that there was more X racism at the start of the time period, then today's racism from Y, is not to be considered as detrimental, because over a 50 year period, X group has engaged in more racism.
your pathetic apologetic excuse for racism is duly noted.
Translation: I won't even attempt to guess, because I realize that it will show me as the ignorant buffoon that I am.
Thanks for admitting that, btw.