Non-white babies in the majority…again May 24, 2012• By Abraham• From Matt Bors…(via Reddit) Share on Facebook Trending TodayReady for Another One?Give us a few more minutes and we'll make you laugh, cry, gasp, or ache... Guaranteed! Famous actors in their first movie roles, Part 3 A complete protein food — 7 Vintage ads from The American Meat Institute Get the best of 22 Words in your inbox Like 22 Words on Facebook comments Andrew says: Why make the distinction? Terra says: Agreed. I mean, who cares? As long as the racist buttheads (white people OR others–racism isn’t just white against etc) can keep their mouths shut, it doesn’t matter. rya says: lol. Braden Keith says: Actually, still first. The first time would not have been in organized America as the comic distinguishes. P. says: The comic does NOT make the distinction, but the statistic would only be of interest for the use of the term referring to the country. “America” can mean the USA, or some combination of the continents of the “New World”, aka the largest non-Eurasian, non-African landmasses, or the land west of the Atlantic Ocean and east of the Pacific Oceans. PennyLane says: Actually, second. Even if it wasn’t organized America, the people that lived within the later imposed borders that make up America today before European settlement were… PJ says: Those two in the picture will only be non-white until they have to use a weapon in self defense. Then they’ll be “White Native Americans.” LJ says: LOL, PJ! I’m loving the dry humor. I also am wondering if you realize that hispanics can be black, white, indian or any combination of the groups. Just saying. Drew says: Is that Scott Stapp on the left? Jay says: Way to keep racism alive. On a related note, has anyone else noticed how our news media seem more racist than any other group in America? Chazzz says: It seems to me that the main point being made here is not specifically about race, but more about how an entire set of communities (ie Native Americans) are often ignored in American history. The statement by the radio broadcaster falls squarely into the “if you want to keep racism alive, talk about race” category, which is obviously a very widespread problem. The old man makes a very valid, significant point – a point about historical shortsightedness and disrespect. jeff says: At least someone understood it. Ashley says: Racism will not end by not talking about race. We need to embrace cultural differences and be able to talk freely about them in order to make progress. Just love one another, we are all people! kenedy says: were same on the inside just not on the outside it should not matter what color u are so i dont care if ur purple green pink yellow orange or any other color we are we r all the same Matthew says: That’s a wonderful point you’ve made! Now, we can focus our energy instead on grammar lessons for today’s Internet denizens! Chuck says: Sure is butthurt white-man in here! trololololol says: I’m confused by this.was this a bad Google translation or something? aNon eMouse says: Actually, if they’re referring to the country, and not the landmass, then the reporter was correct. If they’re referring to the continent, then the old Indian was correct. trololololol says: WHAT IS THIS?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!