PDA

View Full Version : Sweeden joins other EU countries removing race from legislation



garhkal
08-01-2014, 08:38 PM
Hmm. Will have to keep a watch on this situation. Sweeden joins Austria and Denmark/france as countries who are removing (Or have removed) Race from legal forms, legislation etc.. Everyone is just a person.

http://www.illumemagazine.com/zine/articleDetail.php?The-French-kiss-race-goodbye-14330

http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-London/2014/08/01/Swedes-to-remove-the-concept-of-race-from-all-legislation

http://www.digitaljournal.com/news/world/swedish-legislators-plan-to-remove-race-from-law/article/394264

So what do you all think about this? Is it time we here in the US went to this way of doing things?
If we do, what sort of issues do you see arising from it?

Smeghead
08-01-2014, 10:46 PM
Hmm. Will have to keep a watch on this situation. Sweeden joins Austria and Denmark/france as countries who are removing (Or have removed) Race from legal forms, legislation etc.. Everyone is just a person.

http://www.illumemagazine.com/zine/articleDetail.php?The-French-kiss-race-goodbye-14330

http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-London/2014/08/01/Swedes-to-remove-the-concept-of-race-from-all-legislation

http://www.digitaljournal.com/news/world/swedish-legislators-plan-to-remove-race-from-law/article/394264

So what do you all think about this? Is it time we here in the US went to this way of doing things?
If we do, what sort of issues do you see arising from it?

Why will YOU have to keep a watch on it? Do you live in Sweden? Only two Es, genius.

sandsjames
08-01-2014, 11:34 PM
Why will YOU have to keep a watch on it? Do you live in Sweden? Only two Es, genius.

You are so irrelevant...

Smeghead
08-01-2014, 11:40 PM
You are so irrelevant...

Who the fuck involved you in this?

garhkal
08-02-2014, 05:45 AM
Why will YOU have to keep a watch on it? Do you live in Sweden? Only two Es, genius.

Apologies on the spelling error.
As to why i feel we would do well to keep watch, is to see if it works over there (and in the other countries it is going on at), to see if it might be something we could implement here in the states.
Or would 'dat be racist'?

TJMAC77SP
08-02-2014, 02:48 PM
Who the fuck involved you in this?

Is posting now by invitation only?

Did I miss a moderator message?

firenomore
08-04-2014, 01:51 AM
America wants so bad to ignore the race problem that it has, and removing the 'race' category from legislation would only make things worse for those not in the dominant society.

hustonj
08-04-2014, 11:38 AM
America wants so bad to ignore the race problem that it has, and removing the 'race' category from legislation would only make things worse for those not in the dominant society.

Strange. The most successful members of the previously minority races all claim that the biggest obstacle members of their own minorities face is the internal social pressures of that group. The people who overcame those social expectations to under perform are all clear that the "dominant majority" really don't stand in the way of someone working to improve their position.

Should I believe the people who refused to take advantage of any of the opportunities we shared, or the people who took advantage fo opportunities I never saw, and demonstrated a drive to succeed financially that far exceeds my own?

Yes, I'm a white guy. I also grew up eating cornbread and pintos, ham and beans and other really cheap Southern dishes because we were poor. At one point, with both of my parents working, their entertainment budget bought one can of soda a week for them to share. I missed several opportunities that were open to me, but I enlisted and managed to build upon opportunities within the military. The opportunities I have taken advantage of are open to those of any skin color or religion. What success I've had anyone willing to put forth the effort could have had (as long as they could get into the military).

But you go ahead and keep telling yourself that a lack of success is caused by not having opportunities instead of by not taking advantage of the opportunities which do exist.

WILDJOKER5
08-04-2014, 01:50 PM
America wants so bad to ignore the race problem that it has, and removing the 'race' category from legislation would only make things worse for those not in the dominant society.

How does making legislation ambiguous cause a problem? I actually dont really know of any legislation that mentions a specific race in it, do you? Even the CRA is ambiguous as it doesnt mention any race specifically. I know most of the people who infer a law as pretaining to one race or another are typically lefties.

WILDJOKER5
08-04-2014, 02:02 PM
Strange. The most successful members of the previously minority races all claim that the biggest obstacle members of their own minorities face is the internal social pressures of that group. The people who overcame those social expectations to under perform are all clear that the "dominant majority" really don't stand in the way of someone working to improve their position.

Should I believe the people who refused to take advantage of any of the opportunities we shared, or the people who took advantage fo opportunities I never saw, and demonstrated a drive to succeed financially that far exceeds my own?

Yes, I'm a white guy. I also grew up eating cornbread and pintos, ham and beans and other really cheap Southern dishes because we were poor. At one point, with both of my parents working, their entertainment budget bought one can of soda a week for them to share. I missed several opportunities that were open to me, but I enlisted and managed to build upon opportunities within the military. The opportunities I have taken advantage of are open to those of any skin color or religion. What success I've had anyone willing to put forth the effort could have had (as long as they could get into the military).

But you go ahead and keep telling yourself that a lack of success is caused by not having opportunities instead of by not taking advantage of the opportunities which do exist.

But but but.... You didnt have the cops arresting you for "no reason" which kept you out of the military...And just being white means you have "privilage" according to the white guilt propogators of the left.

sandsjames
08-04-2014, 04:55 PM
How does making legislation ambiguous cause a problem? Wait...just a sec...I am going to need to go back and read your posts on the California marriage laws before I answer this one.

WILDJOKER5
08-04-2014, 05:00 PM
Wait...just a sec...I am going to need to go back and read your posts on the California marriage laws before I answer this one.

Did I say there was a problem? I had a simple question about why if calling it a "civil union" was a kin to "seperate but equal", but getting rid of the rest of the terminology that goes along with marriage was needed to include everyone?

sandsjames
08-04-2014, 05:03 PM
Did I say there was a problem? I had a simple question about why if calling it a "civil union" was a kin to "seperate but equal", but getting rid of the rest of the terminology that goes along with marriage was needed to include everyone?

I don't know...to me it sounds like in one case you are good with the ambiguous term and in the other you are not...that's all.

WILDJOKER5
08-04-2014, 05:12 PM
I don't know...to me it sounds like in one case you are good with the ambiguous term and in the other you are not...that's all.

Nah, was more rehtorical. Seems if there MUST be one form of the terminology, then why not have all the forms? But thats also a different issue than race related laws.

Oh, and BTW, I am black now. I dont want to be constrained by traditional forms of thinking about race set up by the natural order of the world and biology. So no more of this calling me racist. I can't be racist... Im black. ;)

firenomore
08-04-2014, 11:45 PM
Strange. The most successful members of the previously minority races all claim that the biggest obstacle members of their own minorities face is the internal social pressures of that group. The people who overcame those social expectations to under perform are all clear that the "dominant majority" really don't stand in the way of someone working to improve their position.

Should I believe the people who refused to take advantage of any of the opportunities we shared, or the people who took advantage fo opportunities I never saw, and demonstrated a drive to succeed financially that far exceeds my own?

Yes, I'm a white guy. I also grew up eating cornbread and pintos, ham and beans and other really cheap Southern dishes because we were poor. At one point, with both of my parents working, their entertainment budget bought one can of soda a week for them to share. I missed several opportunities that were open to me, but I enlisted and managed to build upon opportunities within the military. The opportunities I have taken advantage of are open to those of any skin color or religion. What success I've had anyone willing to put forth the effort could have had (as long as they could get into the military).

But you go ahead and keep telling yourself that a lack of success is caused by not having opportunities instead of by not taking advantage of the opportunities which do exist.

It looks like you're saying (in the first paragraph) that members of that group inherently don't want to do better, and it's cool to not be successful. Is that how I should take that statement? How many of those that "refused to take advantage..." have you talked to versus the ones that did take advantage? Congrats on being a white guy, you will never know how it is to be racially discriminated against despite the fact that you grew up poor. BTW, it sounds like we ate some of the same things growing up. Good eating if you ask me. I totally agree that the opportunities that we both took advantage of (joining the military) are open to most, but even that has been steeped in racism and discrimination. It's not me telling me that's the reason, its the highly disproportionate numbers of unemployment among those not in the dominant society.

firenomore
08-05-2014, 01:11 AM
How does making legislation ambiguous cause a problem? I actually dont really know of any legislation that mentions a specific race in it, do you? Even the CRA is ambiguous as it doesnt mention any race specifically. I know most of the people who infer a law as pretaining to one race or another are typically lefties.

What does me being left handed have to do with anything? What does the Canadian Revenue Agency have to do with anything? Just to be clear, I used legislation because that was one of the areas mentioned in the articles. The removal of race from forms and legislation will make racism much more blatant than it already is. Then there will be no accountability to racist practices, because they can hide under the cloak of "people." The prisons will be filled with "people" that just so happen to have dark skin.

You make light of being arrested for no reason at all, but that is a reality in the lives of those that are not a part of the dominant society. And yes, just being white gives privilege whether you want to admit it or not.

I wish you could just choose to be black. Maybe those traditional forms of thinking would change drastically. Since you mentioned it, could you tell me how someone black can be racist? I'm not talking about name calling, bigotry, and prejudice either. I'm talking about having the ability to affect the outcome of someone's life on a grand scale.

sandsjames
08-05-2014, 11:25 AM
Since you mentioned it, could you tell me how someone black can be racist? I'm not talking about name calling, bigotry, and prejudice either. I'm talking about having the ability to affect the outcome of someone's life on a grand scale.So now there are conditions on being racist? So if I just use racist terms and am a bigot then I'm not actually racist because I'm not impacting anyone's life? Is that what you're saying?

WILDJOKER5
08-05-2014, 01:10 PM
What does me being left handed have to do with anything? What does the Canadian Revenue Agency have to do with anything? Just to be clear, I used legislation because that was one of the areas mentioned in the articles. The removal of race from forms and legislation will make racism much more blatant than it already is. Then there will be no accountability to racist practices, because they can hide under the cloak of "people." The prisons will be filled with "people" that just so happen to have dark skin. Funny first part. As far as the prisions are concerned, they are already filled with "people" of dark skin. But I have yet to see the memo of the deep conspiracy to imprision half of the black community just to keep them down. Yes, I do agree that non-violent drug charges are BS and causes more problems then it eliminates. But as it has been documented, even though whites and blacks are supposed to smoke weed at the same rate with absolutely no proof or scientific testing, but why is it that blacks are arrested 4 times more than whites? There really is no study on why this is and only leads to the question of whether the initial statement that whites and blacks really do smoke weed at the same rate is even true.


You make light of being arrested for no reason at all, but that is a reality in the lives of those that are not a part of the dominant society. And yes, just being white gives privilege whether you want to admit it or not. Or you are unwilling to admit that there really is a higher crime rate from blacks than whites of 300 to 800%?


I wish you could just choose to be black. Maybe those traditional forms of thinking would change drastically. Since you mentioned it, could you tell me how someone black can be racist? I'm not talking about name calling, bigotry, and prejudice either. I'm talking about having the ability to affect the outcome of someone's life on a grand scale.How can one white person be affect the outcome of someone's life on a grand scale? By arresting them? Is that like how in NYC 50% of the officers are minority? Yet its the white mans fault for a higher arrest rate for blacks over whites? Cant a black cop arrest a white guy for "doing nothing" if they so choose to do? I am still trying to figure out how you can claim whites still hold blacks back when over half the population now sways to the left on issues that are usually detrimental to minorities. And it has been that way for some time. Sadly, the biggest problem and biggest decline of social status for minorities started after LBJ's great society and the welfare system.

Being white doesnt get me extra points on my college entrance exams. It doesnt put me one step closer to a job that I am equally qualified for as my peers. Hell, it even gets me excluded for promotion if there isnt a high enough percentage of minorities already in some public sector jobs. I dont get a better paying job just because I am white. I didnt go to better schools just because I am white. I still got pulled over by cops even though I am white. I have been falsely accused of being drunk even though I am white. You know why I was never arrested for drug or weapon possesion? Because I never had any on me. I chose not to beligerent to police when they ask me something. Thats how I have avoided being arrested in my life. Had nothing to do with the color of my skin, but the upbringing I had to respect laws, respect other people's things, and not be an ass towards those who could be an ass towards me.

http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/colin-flaherty/does-racism-really-cause-more-black-drug-arrests/

hustonj
08-05-2014, 02:51 PM
It looks like you're saying (in the first paragraph) that members of that group inherently don't want to do better, and it's cool to not be successful. Is that how I should take that statement? How many of those that "refused to take advantage..." have you talked to versus the ones that did take advantage? Congrats on being a white guy, you will never know how it is to be racially discriminated against despite the fact that you grew up poor. BTW, it sounds like we ate some of the same things growing up. Good eating if you ask me. I totally agree that the opportunities that we both took advantage of (joining the military) are open to most, but even that has been steeped in racism and discrimination. It's not me telling me that's the reason, its the highly disproportionate numbers of unemployment among those not in the dominant society.

Thse truly sucessful people of color who talk about the culture of failure in the community of color are the source of the comments about that culture of failure, not me.

Given that the amazingly successful peopel of color talk about the average people of color allowing that culture of failure to disuade them from seeking and leveraging opportunity, I have a hard time buying into the idea that the unusually high number of "failures" in that community are a result of external discrimination.

I know that's the favorite battle cry, but those of color who have created huge personal successes regulalry and publicly note that other people of color did more to encourage their failure than white oppression did.

I don't expect you to believe me. Do some research. See what wildy successful men of color have had to say about it. I'm not talking about uneducated athletes and rappers. I'm talking about people who have made a life of having a real impact on the lives of others.

WILDJOKER5
08-05-2014, 03:43 PM
Thse truly sucessful people of color who talk about the culture of failure in the community of color are the source of the comments about that culture of failure, not me.

Given that the amazingly successful peopel of color talk about the average people of color allowing that culture of failure to disuade them from seeking and leveraging opportunity, I have a hard time buying into the idea that the unusually high number of "failures" in that community are a result of external discrimination.

I know that's the favorite battle cry, but those of color who have created huge personal successes regulalry and publicly note that other people of color did more to encourage their failure than white oppression did.

I don't expect you to believe me. Do some research. See what wildy successful men of color have had to say about it. I'm not talking about uneducated athletes and rappers. I'm talking about people who have made a life of having a real impact on the lives of others.

He's never heard the term thats been thrown around on this very forum of "huxtable black" to discourage the blacks from listening to successful blacks about how they made it. I've seen a poster showing pro-athletes, singers, businessmen, Obama on it talking about how there are all these successful black people but not equal judication. The responses to this post was how all those black people were just sellout and shills for "the man". When I saw a post about how the top enrollee for colleges are black women, the vitrial against these women making more for themselves from the black commentators was just repugnant. Its really sad how white people are blamed for both the success and failures of the black community in a negative way in either case.

Hell, any black person who breaks away from the democrat party's control is so ridiculed and denounced by blacks most of all, its amazing that they still think the white man has to do anything to keep them back. The black community has been so conditioned to believe that making a life for themselves that their kids can thrive on as well diqualifies them as being "truly black". The kid of Beyonce and Jay-z will have zero credibility in the black community because she comes from a rich beginning. The thought of what a white man believes how blacks should act has a miniscule impact on a black person as what the black community thinks about them.

The game plan by the democrats was to get to the black community through the chruch and pastors. Guess thats why the biggest racebaiting victim advocates are called "Rev" Al and Jesse, even though they never finished clergy school. The Dr and true Reverend MLK jr was a republican, and he did so much for the black community, but the left never wants to acknowlage his clergy title. Have you ever wondered why you dont see uneducated blacks in the GOP? Its not because the GOP doesnt keep them out, its because without the education, you fall victim to the propaganda of the left and batter those who try to leave.

Rusty Jones
08-05-2014, 07:01 PM
I'm surprised that I still have an account here, but don't expect me to stay long... because I'm not taking Rainmaker's shit. He's going to get a verbal foot in his ass in reponse to his racist rants, and the mods are gonna send me away for it. Probably because they agree with Rainmaker's sentiments.


Sadly, the biggest problem and biggest decline of social status for minorities started after LBJ's great society and the welfare system.

Nope, it started during the Truman years, and was in full force by the Eisenhower years - but is the fault of neither administration. You might want to familiarize yourself with the Great Migration, and the resulting white flight from urban areas, the housing practices, and the aftermath of all of this before you start pointing fingers at any president.

A new breath of life (or death) was given to the "decline" that you're referring to in the 1980's, and it WAS Reagan's fault with his "War on Drugs."


Being white doesnt get me extra points on my college entrance exams.

And being black does? Show me where.


It doesnt put me one step closer to a job that I am equally qualified for as my peers.

And being black does? Show me where.


Hell, it even gets me excluded for promotion if there isnt a high enough percentage of minorities already in some public sector jobs.

It does? Show me where.

You seem to think black people have an advantage over whites when it comes to getting a job, yet unemployement among blacks is twice what it is for whites.


I dont get a better paying job just because I am white.

You might want to look up things like "name discrimination," and look at the callback rates for resumes submitted by blacks and whites of similar qualifications for the same jobs.


I didnt go to better schools just because I am white.

Maybe not directly, but indirectly, you may have. Look at my city, for example, Norfolk, VA. The top high school in the city, Maury, is in Ghent - Norfolk's uptown. Just north of Ghent is a black neighborhood called Park Place; the border being at 23rd Street. And just north of Park Place is another rich white neighborhood called Colonial Park; the border being at 38th Street. That puts Park Place right in the middle. Further north is a high school called Granby. It's the second best school in the city; but is racially diverse.

Logic would dictate that the line for the zoning of these two high schools would bisect Park Place, so that all children in Ghent and the southern half of Park Place would go to Maury High, and the children of Colonial Park and the northern half of Park Place would go to Granby High, correct?

Wrong. Ghent and Colonial Park go to Maury High, and Park Place goes to Granby High. They went of their their way to zone it like that.


I still got pulled over by cops even though I am white.

Probably because you actually did something. I'm sure you could drive a brand new Audi, and no one will suspect you of having stolen it or bought it drug money. THAT is white privilege.


I have been falsely accused of being drunk even though I am white.

Is being drunk a crime? I'm sure many black folks would love to only be able to say that they were only accused of something that wasn't even a crime.


You know why I was never arrested for drug or weapon possesion? Because I never had any on me.

Because you were never stopped and frisked in New York, or anywhere else where racial profiling occurs.


I chose not to beligerent to police when they ask me something. Thats how I have avoided being arrested in my life. Had nothing to do with the color of my skin, but the upbringing I had to respect laws, respect other people's things, and not be an ass towards those who could be an ass towards me.

http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/colin-flaherty/does-racism-really-cause-more-black-drug-arrests/

You remained calm because you knew you had something to lose. Others aren't so lucky.


Hell, any black person who breaks away from the democrat party's control is so ridiculed and denounced by blacks most of all, its amazing that they still think the white man has to do anything to keep them back. The black community has been so conditioned to believe that making a life for themselves that their kids can thrive on as well diqualifies them as being "truly black". The kid of Beyonce and Jay-z will have zero credibility in the black community because she comes from a rich beginning. The thought of what a white man believes how blacks should act has a miniscule impact on a black person as what the black community thinks about them.

The game plan by the democrats was to get to the black community through the chruch and pastors. Guess thats why the biggest racebaiting victim advocates are called "Rev" Al and Jesse, even though they never finished clergy school. The Dr and true Reverend MLK jr was a republican, and he did so much for the black community, but the left never wants to acknowlage his clergy title. Have you ever wondered why you dont see uneducated blacks in the GOP? Its not because the GOP doesnt keep them out, its because without the education, you fall victim to the propaganda of the left and batter those who try to leave.

Dude, how many times do I have to tell you - MLK was a PRE-SOUTHERN STRATEGY Republican. Conservatives love to pull the shit the the GOP did for minorities before the Southern Strategy, in order to make it look like they're on the correct side of racial politics; and it's disingenous as fuck.

You need to stop. When LBJ signed the Civil Rights Act, and effectively turned the South over to the GOP... the GOP's slate got wiped CLEAN, and their only claims to fame is what they've done ever since.

sandsjames
08-05-2014, 07:28 PM
Because you were never stopped and frisked in New York, or anywhere else where racial profiling occurs.



I won't comment on everything else you said because some I agree with, some I don't, but mainly it's just political differences.

However, the statement I've quoted is crap. Whether or not I agree with the stop and frisk and whether or not I think it's a constitutional infringement or profiling, the fact of the matter is that if you aren't carrying anything illegal then you can't get busted for it.

Rusty Jones
08-05-2014, 07:39 PM
I won't comment on everything else you said because some I agree with, some I don't, but mainly it's just political differences.

However, the statement I've quoted is crap. Whether or not I agree with the stop and frisk and whether or not I think it's a constitutional infringement or profiling, the fact of the matter is that if you aren't carrying anything illegal then you can't get busted for it.

Yep, and if you're white, you're more likely to get away with it because you're less likely to get checked in the first place.

USN - Retired
08-05-2014, 07:45 PM
And being black does? Show me where.

From Wikipedia.....


In 2009, Princeton sociologist Thomas Espenshade and researcher Alexandria Walton Radford, in their book No Longer Separate, Not Yet Equal, examined data on students applying to college in 1997 and calculated that Asian-Americans needed nearly perfect SAT scores of 1550 to have the same chance of being accepted at a top private university as whites who scored 1410 and African Americans who got 1100.


After controlling for grades, test scores, family background (legacy status), and athletic status (whether or not the student was a recruited athlete), Espenshade and Radford found that whites were three times, Hispanics six times, and blacks more than 15 times as likely to be accepted at a US university as Asian Americans.

sandsjames
08-05-2014, 07:47 PM
Yep, and if you're white, you're more likely to get away with it because you're less likely to get checked in the first place.

Right...I will not disagree...HOWEVER...if you aren't carrying illegal shit, then it doesn't matter what color you are.

Rusty Jones
08-05-2014, 07:52 PM
From Wikipedia.....

Great, so where does it mention minorities getting extra points?


Right...I will not disagree...HOWEVER...if you aren't carrying illegal shit, then it doesn't matter what color you are.

So if whites were being targeted for stop and frisk, and you had to deal with that in your hometown every where you went, you wouldn't mind being stopped and frisked, simply because you don't have anything?

Don't answer that question, because the answer is YES, you WOULD mind. And if you say otherwise, you're lying.

USN - Retired
08-05-2014, 07:58 PM
Great, so where does it mention minorities getting extra points?


Some minorities (i.e. Blacks) require less points to get admitted. Some minorities (i.e. Asians) require more points to get admitted.

Do you not see my point or do you not care?

Rusty Jones
08-05-2014, 08:02 PM
Some minorities (i.e. Blacks) require less points to get admitted. Some minorities (i.e. Asians) require more points to get admitted.

Do you not see my point or do you not care?

It didn't provide the answer to the question that I was looking for. WJ5 said that the problem was on the end of the exams, in that they race-normed the scores.

Let me ask you this, though, USN: what race are the people who run these schools and set the admission policies? White. You see, at the end of the day... that's where the power lies. They could easily change it on a whim if they wanted to.

sandsjames
08-05-2014, 08:02 PM
So if whites were being targeted for stop and frisk, and you had to deal with that in your hometown every where you went, you wouldn't mind being stopped and frisked, simply because you don't have anything?


Dude...you aren't paying attention. Stop and frisk and profiling for it are NOT constitutional, IMO. That does not change the FACT that if you aren't carrying illegal shit then you wouldn't get busted for it. Of course I'd be pissed if it was happening to me but I wouldn't end up in jail for carrying illegal weapons, drugs, etc, because I'm not carrying them.

hustonj
08-05-2014, 08:02 PM
It doesnt put me one step closer to a job that I am equally qualified for as my peers.
And being black does? Show me where.



Hell, it even gets me excluded for promotion if there isnt a high enough percentage of minorities already in some public sector jobs.
It does? Show me where.

Here are a few links to old news stories about court cases settling out for whites being discriminated against in order to hire or promote lesser qualified minority candidates:

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/02/09/10362607-white-firefighters-awarded-25-million-in-discrimination-case

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/06/29/supreme.court.discrimination/index.html?iref=24hours

http://www.syracuse.com/news/index.ssf/2012/07/syracuse_settles_reverse_discr.html

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2011/07/28/138792038/connecticut-firefighters-settle-reverse-discrimination-suit-for-2-millions

My Google search topic was a rather specific "fire fighter reverse discrimination". Yes, there were more results, including duplicate articles about the 4 events linked above. I stopped at 4 unique events arbitrarily.


It didn't provide the answer to the question that I was looking for. WJ5 said that the problem was on the end of the exams, in that they race-normed the scores.

Let me ask you this, though, USN: what race are the people who run these schools and set the admission policies? White. You see, at the end of the day... that's where the power lies. They could easily change it on a whim if they wanted to.

I think your prejudice is not only about 20 years out of date on this point (who are the people in charge, again? Not as white as you seem to think.), but you are ignoring the reality that these policies are tied to Deparment of Education mandated diversity goals. Any college that wants to change the policy gives up access to Federal monies. Interesting concept of a whim you have there.

Let me ask you this: You don't think the very CONCEPT of RACE NORMING isn't discriminatory? Individual capability is about demonstrated performance against the competition, not on a curve. Should we "racially norm" performance on the sports field? At the Olympics? Then we shouldn't "racially norm" performance anywhere else, either.

USN - Retired
08-05-2014, 08:12 PM
It didn't provide the answer to the question that I was looking for. WJ5 said that the problem was on the end of the exams, in that they race-normed the scores.

Let me ask you this, though, USN: what race are the people who run these schools and set the admission policies? White. You see, at the end of the day... that's where the power lies. They could easily change it on a whim if they wanted to.

But that doesn't change the fact that Blacks require less points than Whites or Asians to get admitted. Therefore, Blacks are not the victims of discrimination. Whites and Asians are the victims of discrimination.

Rusty Jones
08-05-2014, 08:21 PM
But that doesn't change the fact that Blacks require less points than Whites or Asians to get admitted. Therefore, Blacks are not the victims of discrimination. Whites and Asians are the victims of discrimination.

And whites are the perpetrators. Direct your anger to where it needs to go.

Rusty Jones
08-05-2014, 08:27 PM
Dude...you aren't paying attention. Stop and frisk and profiling for it are NOT constitutional, IMO. That does not change the FACT that if you aren't carrying illegal shit then you wouldn't get busted for it. Of course I'd be pissed if it was happening to me but I wouldn't end up in jail for carrying illegal weapons, drugs, etc, because I'm not carrying them.

Then revert back to my previous point - whites are less likely to end up in jail, because they're not as likely to get checked.


Here are a few links to old news stories about court cases settling out for whites being discriminated against in order to hire or promote lesser qualified minority candidates:

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/02/09/10362607-white-firefighters-awarded-25-million-in-discrimination-case

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/06/29/supreme.court.discrimination/index.html?iref=24hours

http://www.syracuse.com/news/index.ssf/2012/07/syracuse_settles_reverse_discr.html

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2011/07/28/138792038/connecticut-firefighters-settle-reverse-discrimination-suit-for-2-millions

My Google search topic was a rather specific "fire fighter reverse discrimination". Yes, there were more results, including duplicate articles about the 4 events linked above. I stopped at 4 unique events arbitrarily.

You mean it's illegal, contrary the picture that WJ5 is trying to paint?


I think your prejudice is not only about 20 years out of date on this point (who are the people in charge, again? Not as white as you seem to think.), but you are ignoring the reality that these policies are tied to Deparment of Education mandated diversity goals. Any college that wants to change the policy gives up access to Federal monies. Interesting concept of a whim you have there.

You mean THOSE whites have to answer to whites ABOVE them. You just added to my point.


Let me ask you this: You don't think the very CONCEPT of RACE NORMING isn't discriminatory? Individual capability is about demonstrated performance against the competition, not on a curve. Should we "racially norm" performance on the sports field? At the Olympics? Then we shouldn't "racially norm" performance anywhere else, either.

Strawman. I'm merely asking someone to show me where the companies that own the SAT and any other college entry exams engage in race-norming. I said nothing else about it.

USN - Retired
08-05-2014, 08:28 PM
And whites are the perpetrators. Direct your anger to where it needs to go.

White bleeding-heart liberals?

Rusty Jones
08-05-2014, 08:32 PM
White bleeding-heart liberals?

The ones who wield the power that blacks and Latinos can't.

hustonj
08-05-2014, 08:49 PM
Your position is morphing, Rusty.

When it was identified that different scores are required for admission based on race, YOU called that racial norming.

Now that I've challenged you on the idea that racial norming is inherently discriminatory, you are asking for someone to prove that the scores themselves are adjusted?

Try to maintain one position, and people might think you have a position instead of an emotional stance. Right now you are just teaching me that this is not about accuracy for you, it is about nothing but emotion.

And in the spirit of trying to be about accuracy, since I made my last post, I double-checked on college leadership. Over the past 30 years diversity has DROPPED in college leadership. The reason given? Nobody but white male acadamics are getting the low-level jobs that feed up to those positions. Despite the knee-jerk I can already feel happeneing, the same reports were very careful to not assign any specific reason for the lack of diversity in those low-level positions. That apparantly exceeded the scope of their planned study.

I'm positive that in your emotional stance, you are ready to rant at great length about why women and minorities don't have those feeder jobs. The problem is, there's no proof ready at hand, so the emotional claims are already proven to be useless accusations and grandstanding. Try not to do more of that.

hustonj
08-05-2014, 08:54 PM
Discrimination being legal or illegal isn't the case, here, Rusty. ALL racial discrimination is illegal, so if we accept your newest proposal that illegal discriination isn't a viable discussion topic, what would you like to talk about, as you just destroyed every aspect of this thread?

Oh, wait, you want to talk about discrimination against non-whites, despite the fact that such discrimination is illegal, because you have an emotional need to prove that the other races are victims of The Man, right?

Either discrimination is wrong, regardless of who is targeted (which is why it is illegal), and you need to acknoweldge that when you asked for examples of blacks being the benficiaries of illegal discrimination that they were provided

OR

discrimination is NOT always wrong, and you need to rethink your position from the ground up.

I, BTW, am in the discrimination (by other than individual capabilities and qualifications) is wrong camp.

Rusty Jones
08-05-2014, 09:13 PM
Your position is morphing, Rusty.

Nope, you're just having a hard time keeping up.


When it was identified that different scores are required for admission based on race, YOU called that racial norming.

Nope, look again. I called what WJ5 alleges that those who run the exams are doing "race norming." Not what the college admissions offices are doing. Look again.


Now that I've challenged you on the idea that racial norming is inherently discriminatory, you are asking for someone to prove that the scores themselves are adjusted?

No, I'm asking someone to prove that, because that's what WJ5 stated. He specifically stated that whites do not get extra points on entrance exams, which implies that he believes people of other races DO.


Try to maintain one position, and people might think you have a position instead of an emotional stance. Right now you are just teaching me that this is not about accuracy for you, it is about nothing but emotion.

I've shown that I maintain one position, and hopefully I've broken it down for you enough so that you can understand.

And please, don't confuse the difficulty you're having with me with "emotions."


And in the spirit of trying to be about accuracy, since I made my last post, I double-checked on college leadership. Over the past 30 years diversity has DROPPED in college leadership. The reason given? Nobody but white male acadamics are getting the low-level jobs that feed up to those positions. Despite the knee-jerk I can already feel happeneing, the same reports were very careful to not assign any specific reason for the lack of diversity in those low-level positions. That apparantly exceeded the scope of their planned study.

I'm positive that in your emotional stance, you are ready to rant at great length about why women and minorities don't have those feeder jobs. The problem is, there's no proof ready at hand, so the emotional claims are already proven to be useless accusations and grandstanding. Try not to do more of that.

Ah, so you had to turn the drop in the diversity in college leadership into something where white males are getting the shaft? And I'M being emotional? The only emotion I'm feeling right now is laughter.

Rusty Jones
08-05-2014, 09:17 PM
Discrimination being legal or illegal isn't the case, here, Rusty. ALL racial discrimination is illegal, so if we accept your newest proposal that illegal discriination isn't a viable discussion topic, what would you like to talk about, as you just destroyed every aspect of this thread?

Oh, wait, you want to talk about discrimination against non-whites, despite the fact that such discrimination is illegal, because you have an emotional need to prove that the other races are victims of The Man, right?

Either discrimination is wrong, regardless of who is targeted (which is why it is illegal), and you need to acknoweldge that when you asked for examples of blacks being the benficiaries of illegal discrimination that they were provided

OR

discrimination is NOT always wrong, and you need to rethink your position from the ground up.

I, BTW, am in the discrimination (by other than individual capabilities and qualifications) is wrong camp.

Dude, get off that "emotion" shit. What are you doing, trying to repeat it many times over again, hoping that doing so makes you look good?

You're not paying attention to what WJ5 was saying, and how it prompted my responses. He believes that the system is rigged against whites, when those very links you posted proves him wrong.

sandsjames
08-05-2014, 10:10 PM
Then revert back to my previous point - whites are less likely to end up in jail, because they're not as likely to get checked. You can't control what others do. You can only control what you do. So the easiest way to stay out of jail is to not break the law. If you don't break the law, no amount of profiling will get you sent to jail.

Rusty Jones
08-05-2014, 10:14 PM
You can't control what others do. You can only control what you do. So the easiest way to stay out of jail is to not break the law. If you don't break the law, no amount of profiling will get you sent to jail.

So minorities should just shut the fuck up and take it, and not worry as long as they don't have anything? I mean, seriously, you said that that's not what you were saying earlier, so what ARE you saying?

sandsjames
08-05-2014, 11:29 PM
So minorities should just shut the fuck up and take it, and not worry as long as they don't have anything? I mean, seriously, you said that that's not what you were saying earlier, so what ARE you saying?No that's not what I'm saying. I'm saying EVERYONE should be bitching about the profiling. In the meantime, to avoid getting thrown in jail, stop doing illegal shit.

edit: A person who drives a red sports car is profiled. They are required to pay higher insurance premiums based on the model and color of the vehicle, even if they have a clean driving record. The reason? The stats show that that's where the most tickets/claims come from. If, over the next 10 years, red sports car drivers didn't get caught speeding then the rates for that vehicle would go down. The drivers of red sports cars would no longer be targeted and profiled.

firenomore
08-06-2014, 01:35 AM
No that's not what I'm saying. I'm saying EVERYONE should be bitching about the profiling. In the meantime, to avoid getting thrown in jail, stop doing illegal shit.

edit: A person who drives a red sports car is profiled. They are required to pay higher insurance premiums based on the model and color of the vehicle, even if they have a clean driving record. The reason? The stats show that that's where the most tickets/claims come from. If, over the next 10 years, red sports car drivers didn't get caught speeding then the rates for that vehicle would go down. The drivers of red sports cars would no longer be targeted and profiled.

It's not at all about doing something illegal. Because of the conditioning of the people of this country, they naturally think that blacks are guilty of it just because the police said so. In case you don't already know about these cases, research the cases surrounding these names:
Christopher Lamont Bailey
D'Paris Williams
Marcus Jeter
Tywonn Mitchell and Naybon Moore
Terry Robinson

Good example you used about the red sports cars. The only difference when it comes to those who aren't white, the 'red car' turns into any color car with passengers that aren't white. Hold on, that's reality. My bad.

So do you agree that if the exact same number of stop and frisk incidents were mandated only in white areas that there would be just as many or even more arrests for doing these illegal things that you speak of?

firenomore
08-06-2014, 01:43 AM
This is for whomever it was that mentioned Dr. King.


http://blackhistory.com/content/260918/rare-dr-martin-luther-king-jr-speaking-on-federal-subsidies-for-white-la

sandsjames
08-06-2014, 11:25 AM
So do you agree that if the exact same number of stop and frisk incidents were mandated only in white areas that there would be just as many or even more arrests for doing these illegal things that you speak of?Nope...I don't agree with this. Not based on race...simply based on the statistics and circumstances surrounding the neighborhoods. The "black" neighborhoods that are targeted are generally lower income. Lower income communities have higher crime rates. Now, in predominantly low income white neighborhoods I'd agree that the crime rates would be just as high. And I would argue that people who live in "trailer trash" areas with high rates of meth problems that whites are targeted. It's not about race, it's about statistics.

Take "white collar" crimes. I'd be willing to bet that when it comes to bank fraud, money laundering, etc, that whites are targeted much more than blacks. Again, statistics.

WILDJOKER5
08-06-2014, 11:41 AM
Nope, it started during the Truman years, and was in full force by the Eisenhower years - but is the fault of neither administration. You might want to familiarize yourself with the Great Migration, and the resulting white flight from urban areas, the housing practices, and the aftermath of all of this before you start pointing fingers at any president.The same person that led the charge against equality in those two administrations was the same person who reluctantly signed the GOP backed CRA...LBJ. "We will have those N***ers voting democrat for 100 years". - LBJ


A new breath of life (or death) was given to the "decline" that you're referring to in the 1980's, and it WAS Reagan's fault with his "War on Drugs."Yep, War on Drug is a complete and utter failure. It has cause more problems than its solved. But you are pushing back the decline of actually both societies by a decade. Drugs have been illegal since the turn of the 20th century, but yet there was more nucular families and more of a cry to go to college and succeede before the CRA. Now 35% of blacks are born to 2 parent house holds. Everyone's ethnicity has dropped in this standard, but none as much as the black population.


And being black does? Show me where.

And being black does? Show me where.So if blacks dont get a boost, that means white people are privelaged? Maybe that just means they are equal?


It does? Show me where.http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/02/09/10362607-white-firefighters-awarded-25-million-in-discrimination-case


You seem to think black people have an advantage over whites when it comes to getting a job, yet unemployement among blacks is twice what it is for whites.You wont get a job if you dont apply. You wont get a job if you dont accept min wage. You wont get a job if you dont present yourself in a manner of professionalism. Just because the unemployment for blacks is higher than whites doesnt prove anything.


You might want to look up things like "name discrimination," and look at the callback rates for resumes submitted by blacks and whites of similar qualifications for the same jobs.Yeah, I've heard of that before. Where an employer assumes that the person applying for the job is a minority because of the name. Yet, all you do is assume that was the only reason for them not being hired.


Maybe not directly, but indirectly, you may have. Look at my city, for example, Norfolk, VA. The top high school in the city, Maury, is in Ghent - Norfolk's uptown. Just north of Ghent is a black neighborhood called Park Place; the border being at 23rd Street. And just north of Park Place is another rich white neighborhood called Colonial Park; the border being at 38th Street. That puts Park Place right in the middle. Further north is a high school called Granby. It's the second best school in the city; but is racially diverse.

Logic would dictate that the line for the zoning of these two high schools would bisect Park Place, so that all children in Ghent and the southern half of Park Place would go to Maury High, and the children of Colonial Park and the northern half of Park Place would go to Granby High, correct?

Wrong. Ghent and Colonial Park go to Maury High, and Park Place goes to Granby High. They went of their their way to zone it like that.So its the schools fault for there being a second place in schooling? Pretty sure there are plenty examples of someone going to a low rate school and still getting straight A's and still going to Ivey league college despite whatever the ranking the school was.

Honest question, which school wins the majority of the sporting contest between the schools? Athletics is a pretty big motivator in districting lines too.


Probably because you actually did something. I'm sure you could drive a brand new Audi, and no one will suspect you of having stolen it or bought it drug money. THAT is white privilege.Yep, dressing like a thug with your skin of any color gets you targeted. My brother was targeted by cops becuase of the way he dressed. Generally speaking, your clothing has more of an outword statement than the color of your skin. If you dont believe me, maybe you are the one that has a problem. White military members vs black military members, they are both looked upon in the same manor as being military when in uniform.


Is being drunk a crime? I'm sure many black folks would love to only be able to say that they were only accused of something that wasn't even a crime.Sorry, meant to have the "drunk" thing in context with driving.


Because you were never stopped and frisked in New York, or anywhere else where racial profiling occurs.Right, when there is an unsolved crime with the a description of a black male suspect(s), thats racial profiling. [sarc]

Never the less, I disagree with those types of searches as the same as I do with no-knock warrants or "I smell weed" warrentless searches...for anyone. Our law enforcements have gone way overboard on their authority, and I will stand with you on that.


You remained calm because you knew you had something to lose. Others aren't so lucky.Are you saying they dont know any better? Everyone has something to lose.


Dude, how many times do I have to tell you - MLK was a PRE-SOUTHERN STRATEGY Republican. Conservatives love to pull the shit the the GOP did for minorities before the Southern Strategy, in order to make it look like they're on the correct side of racial politics; and it's disingenous as fuck.Until you can prove this claim that people switched sides right after fighting so hard against one another. Thats like Brady and Manning demanding a trade to the others team right after getting into a brawl.


You need to stop. When LBJ signed the Civil Rights Act, and effectively turned the South over to the GOP... the GOP's slate got wiped CLEAN, and their only claims to fame is what they've done ever since.So what you're saying is, when people stopped being harrassed when they went to vote in the south, they voted more for the GOP? Gee, I dont understand how that could be. [sarc]

Rusty Jones
08-06-2014, 12:00 PM
The same person that led the charge against equality in those two administrations was the same person who reluctantly signed the GOP backed CRA...LBJ. "We will have those N***ers voting democrat for 100 years". - LBJ

Ah yes, that highly dubious quote that there's no evidence of him saying. Ronald Kessler is the man who started this quote. And no one has corroborated it.

But in any case, you're 100% wrong in that first sentence. LBJ was on the Armed Forces Comittee, and mostly had involvment with foreign policy as a senator. He had very little, if any, involvment in domestic policy.


Yep, War on Drug is a complete and utter failure. It has cause more problems than its solved. But you are pushing back the decline of actually both societies by a decade. Drugs have been illegal since the turn of the 20th century, but yet there was more nucular families and more of a cry to go to college and succeede before the CRA. Now 35% of blacks are born to 2 parent house holds. Everyone's ethnicity has dropped in this standard, but none as much as the black population.

Or a success, depending on what's being measured. Much heavier sentences were being given to people convicted of offenses involving crack (mostly used by blacks) than snortable powder cocaine (mostly used by whites), even if they both contained the same amount of cocaine.


So if blacks dont get a boost, that means white people are privelaged? Maybe that just means they are equal?

I've got a better idea - why don't you admit that you were talking about of your ass when you said that exam scores were race normed?

sandsjames
08-06-2014, 12:17 PM
Or a success, depending on what's being measured. Much heavier sentences were being given to people convicted of offenses involving crack (mostly used by blacks) than snortable powder cocaine (mostly used by whites), even if they both contained the same amount of cocaine.

You don't think the actual crimes associated with those drugs play a role in sentencing? Any "street drug" is, by nature, going to be surrounded my more criminal activity.

Sentencing for convictions on Meth are just as strong as those for crack. Meth is very much associated with white trash trailer parks.

Rusty Jones
08-06-2014, 12:23 PM
You don't think the actual crimes associated with those drugs play a role in sentencing? Any "street drug" is, by nature, going to be surrounded my more criminal activity.

No. Why should it? If one person has crack and the other person has powder, both with the same amounts of cocaine, and they're both being charged with possession/intent to distribute, they should both get the same sentence as long as they're not committing any other crime.


Sentencing for convictions on Meth are just as strong as those for crack. Meth is very much associated with white trash trailer parks.

Oh, really?

http://www.november.org/stayinfo/breaking06/Meth-Crack.html

sandsjames
08-06-2014, 12:34 PM
No. Why should it? If one person has crack and the other person has powder, both with the same amounts of cocaine, and they're both being charged with possession/intent to distribute, they should both get the same sentence as long as they're not committing any other crime. I don't disagree at all. Similar crime should equal similar punishment, all other things being equal. The fact is, though, that there are more crimes associated with crack. I think you failed to read the article you posted. It shows 2 very good reasons why there is a difference..


"In the succeeding months, lawmakers competed to describe crack in dire terms. Peter W. Rodino Jr., the New Jersey Democrat who then chaired the House Judiciary Committee, called it a "plague on our nation." Republican Sen. Paula Hawkins of Florida, warned that it turned people "into walking crime machines." That state's other senator at the time, Democrat Lawton Chiles, said it can "make people into slaves."

Twenty years later, there is a new and bipartisan push to describe meth as an even worse drug plague. While it has been available much longer than crack, its use has grown -- and spread geographically -- much slower. Motorcycle gangs sold meth along the Pacific coast in the 1960s, but only in the last decade has its use spread widely throughout the West and into the Midwest. The drug's popularity has been principally in rural communities, which lack police forces and treatment centers to fight it.
"

I've highlighted those reasons to make it easy for you.

WILDJOKER5
08-06-2014, 12:36 PM
The ones who wield the power that blacks and Latinos can't.

So white bleeding heart liberals claim you are too dumb to score what whites or Asians score, and thats fine. If blacks or latinos where in charge doing the same thing, then are they racist? Either way, there is discrimination and racially motivated programs in place. When you say a female in the military doesnt have to do as much physical activity as a guy does, doesnt that harm the unit because now the males have to pick up the slack of the females? If you are saying blacks dont have to be as smart as whites or asians, doesnt that harm everyone? Causes a bit of resentment too.

hustonj
08-06-2014, 12:40 PM
Actually, Rusty, what was said about SAT scores and college admissions was that admission offices require lower scores on the tests from minroities for admission than they do from whites. Apparantly you are the one with a problem reading an dremembering what was said.

You introduced the phrase "racial norming". You declared that the test was normed and not the admissions office implementing discriminatory selection processes which encourage diversity by allowing less qualified potential students to be selected over more qualified potential students.

You are not willing to address the poitns being made, but are demanding that the conversation morph into what you demand it has always been. That's one of the great things about a message forum. We can read the original message and verify that you are changing the story to suit your agenda instead of addressign the actual responses given to your requests for proof that your position is weaker than you think it is.

If that's not an emotional response, what would you call it? It certainly isn't logical. Logic would require dealign with the facts presented as presented. That you have been avoiding pretty aggressively.

sandsjames
08-06-2014, 12:42 PM
So white bleeding heart liberals claim you are too dumb to score what whites or Asians score, and thats fine. If blacks or latinos where in charge doing the same thing, then are they racist? Either way, there is discrimination and racially motivated programs in place. When you say a female in the military doesnt have to do as much physical activity as a guy does, doesnt that harm the unit because now the males have to pick up the slack of the females? If you are saying blacks dont have to be as smart as whites or asians, doesnt that harm everyone? Causes a bit of resentment too.

You're fogetting that the intelligence difference only comes into play because of white (or Asian?) priviledge, so the diffence in scores is merely leveling the field. A black scoring 1100 is obviously as smart as a white scoring 1400...they just haven't had the opportunity to have their intelligence fostered.

WILDJOKER5
08-06-2014, 12:42 PM
Nope, look again. I called what WJ5 alleges that those who run the exams are doing "race norming." Not what the college admissions offices are doing. Look again.Maybe you should look again, I never said anything about race norming. I was saying just because I am white, doesnt mean I have "priviledge". IF, all things are equal, I dont get a job just because I am white. But since no one, ever, EVER, is the same as someone else, you cant prove that race is a factor in why some people get jobs over others. I can tell you one person that got a job over someone else just because of his skin color as stated by many, MANY people on why they voted for Obama.

sandsjames
08-06-2014, 12:43 PM
You are not willing to address the poitns being made, but are demanding that the conversation morph into what you demand it has always been. If that's not an emotional response, what would you call it? It certainly isn't logical. Logic would require dealign with the facts presented as presented. That you have been avoiding pretty aggressively.

Ahhhh...and there it is. Twice in the same sentence. You should really work on coming up with a different verbal crutch to get your point across.

WILDJOKER5
08-06-2014, 12:55 PM
Ah yes, that highly dubious quote that there's no evidence of him saying. Ronald Kessler is the man who started this quote. And no one has corroborated it.

But in any case, you're 100% wrong in that first sentence. LBJ was on the Armed Forces Comittee, and mostly had involvment with foreign policy as a senator. He had very little, if any, involvment in domestic policy.Ike had a CRA in congress, LBJ was against it. So once LBJ gets to be POTUS and congress passes the CRA, what is LBJ to do that make it a political "win" for him? His party has already been beaten in congress, if he vetoed the CRA, what do immagine the democrat party being in todays political atmosphere?


Or a success, depending on what's being measured. Much heavier sentences were being given to people convicted of offenses involving crack (mostly used by blacks) than snortable powder cocaine (mostly used by whites), even if they both contained the same amount of cocaine.Thats your take. I am not condoning anything of the war on drugs. I am not making excuses for anyone or any policy. I am not even going to fight you on your generic statements when I am sure there are tons more variables at play.


I've got a better idea - why don't you admit that you were talking about of your ass when you said that exam scores were race normed?
Again, go back and stop assuming I meant one thing that I never said. Me being white gives me no priviledge when it comes to tests. Unless you are saying just because I am white, I am smarter? But then thats on you.

Rusty Jones
08-06-2014, 01:27 PM
I don't disagree at all. Similar crime should equal similar punishment, all other things being equal. The fact is, though, that there are more crimes associated with crack. I think you failed to read the article you posted. It shows 2 very good reasons why there is a difference..


"In the succeeding months, lawmakers competed to describe crack in dire terms. Peter W. Rodino Jr., the New Jersey Democrat who then chaired the House Judiciary Committee, called it a "plague on our nation." Republican Sen. Paula Hawkins of Florida, warned that it turned people "into walking crime machines." That state's other senator at the time, Democrat Lawton Chiles, said it can "make people into slaves."

Twenty years later, there is a new and bipartisan push to describe meth as an even worse drug plague. While it has been available much longer than crack, its use has grown -- and spread geographically -- much slower. Motorcycle gangs sold meth along the Pacific coast in the 1960s, but only in the last decade has its use spread widely throughout the West and into the Midwest. The drug's popularity has been principally in rural communities, which lack police forces and treatment centers to fight it.
"

I've highlighted those reasons to make it easy for you.

You're quoting where the article discusses "the way it should be," but it also discusses "the way it is" - i.e., there's more compassion and help for people addicted to meth.


So white bleeding heart liberals claim you are too dumb to score what whites or Asians score, and thats fine. If blacks or latinos where in charge doing the same thing, then are they racist? Either way, there is discrimination and racially motivated programs in place. When you say a female in the military doesnt have to do as much physical activity as a guy does, doesnt that harm the unit because now the males have to pick up the slack of the females? If you are saying blacks dont have to be as smart as whites or asians, doesnt that harm everyone? Causes a bit of resentment too.

Who are these "white bleeding heart liberals" that are saying that? Maybe there are other motives behind the admissions policy - for example, making way for blacks and Latinos to get into these schools so that they can bring something back to their respective communities.

Now whether or not you or I agree with that particular example is irrelevant. The point is, it could be for reasons other than writing them off as "too dumb."


Actually, Rusty, what was said about SAT scores and college admissions was that admission offices require lower scores on the tests from minroities for admission than they do from whites. Apparantly you are the one with a problem reading an dremembering what was said.

You introduced the phrase "racial norming". You declared that the test was normed and not the admissions office implementing discriminatory selection processes which encourage diversity by allowing less qualified potential students to be selected over more qualified potential students.

You are not willing to address the poitns being made, but are demanding that the conversation morph into what you demand it has always been. That's one of the great things about a message forum. We can read the original message and verify that you are changing the story to suit your agenda instead of addressign the actual responses given to your requests for proof that your position is weaker than you think it is.

If that's not an emotional response, what would you call it? It certainly isn't logical. Logic would require dealign with the facts presented as presented. That you have been avoiding pretty aggressively.

I'm not going to debate semantics or get into argument about who is more virtuous than who. Go do that with someone else.


Maybe you should look again, I never said anything about race norming.

You said you don't get extra points because you're, which implies that you believe that people of other races DO get extra points.


I was saying just because I am white, doesnt mean I have "priviledge".

And there isn't a single reputable sociologist that agrees with you. Not. One.


IF, all things are equal, I dont get a job just because I am white. But since no one, ever, EVER, is the same as someone else, you cant prove that race is a factor in why some people get jobs over others. I can tell you one person that got a job over someone else just because of his skin color as stated by many, MANY people on why they voted for Obama.

Something to hide behind, for sure.


Ike had a CRA in congress, LBJ was against it. So once LBJ gets to be POTUS and congress passes the CRA, what is LBJ to do that make it a political "win" for him? His party has already been beaten in congress, if he vetoed the CRA, what do immagine the democrat party being in todays political atmosphere?

And, of course, you failed to mention to context behind that. The Democratic Party was in a state of transition ever since FDR, and not all Democrats were onboard with where the party was going during that time. The Democratic Party was pretty much fragile at the time, and on the brink - Ike's CRA would have been the coup de grace to the Democratic Party. In other words, LBJ did what he had to do.

But... while we're discussing this, the CRA of 1957 had nothing to do with the decline of the black community during the Great Migration.



Again, go back a stop assuming I meant one thing that I never said. Me being white gives me no priviledge when it comes to tests. Unless you are saying just because I am white, I am smarter? But then thats on you.

You implied that blacks and Latinos get extra points, did you not?

WILDJOKER5
08-06-2014, 01:41 PM
You implied that blacks and Latinos get extra points, did you not?
No, you assumed. For me to have a "priviledge", that would mean I have an advantage when it comes to the test. I have no such advantage to a standardized test just because I am white. Therefore, I have no priviledge. And to say just because I am white, I went to the "good" school which taught me everything I needed to know on the standardized test is a pretty big assumption on your part. I went to predominately black schools. My family wasnt rich. I never had a tudor (obviously by the way I spell). But I was still scoring high on the tests. I still passed all my classes. Why? Because I chose to. I went through the public school system in St Pete during the riots in the 90s. Didnt stop me from learning what I needed to. Its about your own life choices and your parents' choices to force you to study at school. Richard Sherman is a prime example of "what to do".

Rusty Jones
08-06-2014, 02:03 PM
No, you assumed. For me to have a "priviledge", that would mean I have an advantage when it comes to the test.

Is this is what white privilege boils down to for you, or is this what you're pretending to think?

This is where I throw my hands up in the air, and say "you win." I'm done with this shit.

WILDJOKER5
08-06-2014, 02:19 PM
Is this is what white privilege boils down to for you, or is this what you're pretending to think?

This is where I throw my hands up in the air, and say "you win." I'm done with this shit.

Well, for one, I am speaking towards the tests that you think I have some priviledge on because of my skin tone. Hence the reason I am bringing up this specific point. If you have something of factual substance and not emotional to bring to this part of "white priviledge", then by all means, lets hear it.

If we go to your other assertion that I dont get frisked on the regular, thats because I dont hang out in areas where crime is previlant where the majority of the reported suspects are of my make and model and color. Do I agree with them? NO! Do I see where the cops are coming from? Sure. Is it a white on black thing? No, there are 50% of the beat cops in NYC which are of minority decent who carry out these frisks. Its not like its a slow crime day and cops are just out frisking anyone they see loitering. But I maybe wrong there. I dont keep up on reasons since all the reasons they give are still wrong.

There have been plenty of white people being stopped and searched or frisked for just walking down country roads with a rifle. Dont you think that is pretty racially motivated since most mass shootings have been white? No probable cause, just walking along the rural road with his protection for everyone to see.

There have also been plenty of white people swabbed to look for a rapist. There are DUI check points around mostly white neighborhoods. All of them are wrong.

USN - Retired
08-06-2014, 07:56 PM
You're fogetting that the intelligence difference only comes into play because of white (or Asian?) priviledge, so the diffence in scores is merely leveling the field. A black scoring 1100 is obviously as smart as a white scoring 1400...they just haven't had the opportunity to have their intelligence fostered.

Let me explain white male privilege - Society holds white males to a very high standard. A white male is expected to work hard, behave well and succeed in life because he is a white male. Society will not make nor tolerate any excuses for any poor performance or bad behavior on the part of a white male.

If a black male behaves poorly or does not succeed academically, then the black male will probably not be blamed. Society will always make and tolerate lame excuses for any poor performance on the part of a black male.

If you hold a person to high standards, then they usually tend to rise to those high standards. If you hold a person to low standards, then they usually tend to sink to those low standards. If you make excuses for a person's bad behavior, then you will probably get more of that bad behavior.

White males have privilege because society holds white males to a high standard.
Black males are victims because society holds black males to a low standard and makes excuses for their bad behavior.

WILDJOKER5
08-06-2014, 11:23 PM
Back to the part about the biggest hindrance against blacks succeeding are other blacks and the way they view blacks who do succeed, or at least go to the GOP.






http://youtu.be/5nffXk-7OdI

WILDJOKER5
08-06-2014, 11:25 PM
Stupid add banner

firenomore
08-07-2014, 06:53 AM
While doing so, lets go back a little further than that. That point was made to say that blacks are the only ones that are holding blacks back and to take any of the responsibility off of racism. Why is it that when racism was mentioned that this conversation immediately turned into a what's wrong with black people topic? Is it your firm belief that there is no racism in this country?

sandsjames
08-07-2014, 11:28 AM
While doing so, lets go back a little further than that. That point was made to say that blacks are the only ones that are holding blacks back and to take any of the responsibility off of racism. Why is it that when racism was mentioned that this conversation immediately turned into a what's wrong with black people topic? Is it your firm belief that there is no racism in this country?

Of course there is racism. Of course many people have more obstacles in their way. It's that way for all races but overall blacks generally have a harder path. I think what bothers me is that, personally, I believe that everyone has a chance to be successful. That doesn't mean rich...that doesn't mean having a Masters degree, but it does mean having a life somewhere in the middle class and having a family that is told about the possibilities and how to overcome obstacles, not about how obstacles will never allow them to make it. Does the world we live in that was created by white men play a part in making things tougher or "unfair". Definitely. At the same time, does the responsibility ultimately fall on the person to overcome those things? Absolutely. And the complaint is that it seems, publicly at least, that when a black person doesn't fall into a stereotype expected by other blacks that they are somehow no longer accepted within the black community. That obstacle is just as big as any obstacle created by racist white people.

WILDJOKER5
08-07-2014, 11:34 AM
While doing so, lets go back a little further than that. That point was made to say that blacks are the only ones that are holding blacks back and to take any of the responsibility off of racism. Why is it that when racism was mentioned that this conversation immediately turned into a what's wrong with black people topic? Is it your firm belief that there is no racism in this country?

It is my firm belief that 99% of the reasons that hold blacks back is themselves or the culture, NOT racism.

Here's my question, why was the first mention of removing race on government forms went straight into racism alligations? If it your firm belief that there is so much racism in America still that creates the biggest unemployed culture from blacks? Blacks are not the most uneducated. I would like to get away from race because we tend to lump in way too many people based on an arbitrary pigment of our skin or just a name on the paper which denotes how much pigment you have. Say we got away from knowing that half the prison population is black, wouldnt the stereotype of blacks being potential criminals start to go away? If we didnt know that 70% of planned(extiction) Parenthoods abortions are to blacks, wouldnt the negative stereotype go away...slowly?

WILDJOKER5
08-07-2014, 11:45 AM
Of course there is racism. Of course many people have more obstacles in their way. It's that way for all races but overall blacks generally have a harder path. I think what bothers me is that, personally, I believe that everyone has a chance to be successful. That doesn't mean rich...that doesn't mean having a Masters degree, but it does mean having a life somewhere in the middle class and having a family that is told about the possibilities and how to overcome obstacles, not about how obstacles will never allow them to make it. Does the world we live in that was created by white men play a part in making things tougher or "unfair". Definitely. At the same time, does the responsibility ultimately fall on the person to overcome those things? Absolutely. And the complaint is that it seems, publicly at least, that when a black person doesn't fall into a stereotype expected by other blacks that they are somehow no longer accepted within the black community. That obstacle is just as big as any obstacle created by racist white people.

I'd say bigger since when there was such prevelant institutionalized racism pre-CRA, the black community fought tooth and nail for equal chances. Faced down dogs, firehoses, the KKK together. Now 50 years after the CRA, the community is still crying out racism while simultaneously disparaging any blacks that break away from the democrats or that dont associate with the "hood" as being sell outs and "not real blacks" or working for "the man". When racism was the "thing" brought to you by democrats in the south even if the private business owner didnt want to follow the Jim Crow laws, Blacks stood together. They always have. Not saying its a bad thing, its just that the biggest identity influencers for blacks is of the thug and gang life style brought to you by the rap and R&B artists while magnified by athletes. But who want to hear rapping about starting a business (hardware store or restaraunt), raising your kids with their mom, you wife monogomously, and paying taxes while driving a minivan and not doing a drive by?

Rusty Jones
08-07-2014, 02:05 PM
This pure ignorance that I'm reading on this thread is almost as hillarious is it is sad.

WJ5 is under the impression that in order for a black person to succeed, he has to transcend his own race, adopt the "colorblind" ideology, and believe that insitutional racism either doesn't exist or isn't significant enough to hinder his progression.

Pure bullshit.

Are there those who don't do anything with their lives and blame racism for their current situation? Of course there are. However, I acknowledge that it exists just as much as they do. However, the difference between them and I, is that I look for ways to combat and overcome that racism in order to get ahead. That doesn't mean that I don't think that it doesn't exist, or that I have to be a conservative just because I "made it."

efmbman
08-07-2014, 02:39 PM
Just in case the race and discrimination issues are not complicated enough already, it seems a large segment of the population changed their race. Here's the article from the Washington Post:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2014/08/06/a-surprising-number-of-people-change-their-race-and-ethnicity-from-one-census-to-the-next/

WILDJOKER5
08-07-2014, 02:53 PM
This pure ignorance that I'm reading on this thread is almost as hillarious is it is sad.

WJ5 is under the impression that in order for a black person to succeed, he has to transcend his own race, adopt the "colorblind" ideology, and believe that insitutional racism either doesn't exist or isn't significant enough to hinder his progression.

Pure bullshit.

Are there those who don't do anything with their lives and blame racism for their current situation? Of course there are. However, I acknowledge that it exists just as much as they do. However, the difference between them and I, is that I look for ways to combat and overcome that racism in order to get ahead. That doesn't mean that I don't think that it doesn't exist, or that I have to be a conservative just because I "made it.""Transend"? Nah. But as it has been stated many times, blacks stick together. The biggest influence on black culture has been Rap music and athletes. Even most prodominant black casted movies produce by blacks keep portraying the same stereotypical black culture. "Best man", all Tyler Perry's movies. Even "nutty professor" does the black stereotyping in the movies. If you disagree that life immiatates art, especially movies and TV shows, then you have your head in the sand.

sandsjames
08-07-2014, 03:40 PM
Are there those who don't do anything with their lives and blame racism for their current situation? Of course there are. However, I acknowledge that it exists just as much as they do. However, the difference between them and I, is that I look for ways to combat and overcome that racism in order to get ahead. That doesn't mean that I don't think that it doesn't exist, or that I have to be a conservative just because I "made it."

Absolutely right. Agree with everything in this post. And I think if there were more positive success stories like yours and many others then it would become the norm and become accepted within your community. Unfortunately, many do assume that someone in your situation who becomes successful is a sellout. I don't know how prominant it is because I'm obviously not part of that community, but what I see publicly, the majority of the time, is that there is a stigma attached.

Rusty Jones
08-07-2014, 04:22 PM
Success alone doesn't make one a "sellout" in that community. It's when one makes it, and thinks oneself to be "better" than others in his community, or advocates for policies and practices that limit the opportunities for others to do the same - opportunities that he himself took advantage of - then that person's character comes into question.

I take public transportation to and from work; I live in Norfolk and work in Portsmouth; so I'm around the locals who are at the very bottom of the socio-economic ladder on a daily basis. All while I'm dressed in slacks and button-down shirts, and with a voice and pattern of speech that would have one thinking that I'm a white anchorman on the news if one heard me speak, and didn't see who it was. Never once have a I been the target of anything negative from them.

sandsjames
08-07-2014, 04:26 PM
Success alone doesn't make one a "sellout" in that community. It's when one makes it, and thinks oneself to be "better" than others in his community, or advocates for policies and practices that limit the opportunities for others to do the same - opportunities that he himself took advantage of - then that person's character comes into question.

I take public transportation to and from work; I live in Norfolk and work in Portsmouth; so I'm around the locals who are at the very bottom of the socio-economic ladder on a daily basis. All while I'm dressed in slacks and button-down shirts, and with a voice and pattern of speech that would have one thinking that I'm a white anchorman on the news if one heard me speak, and didn't see who it was. Never once have a I been the target of anything negative from them.

So do you feel an obligation to the black community? I only ask because that's something I've never experienced with other whites.

Rusty Jones
08-07-2014, 04:32 PM
So do you feel an obligation to the black community? I only ask because that's something I've never experienced with other whites.

No. (ten characters here)

WILDJOKER5
08-07-2014, 05:23 PM
Success alone doesn't make one a "sellout" in that community. It's when one makes it, and thinks oneself to be "better" than others in his community, or advocates for policies and practices that limit the opportunities for others to do the same - opportunities that he himself took advantage of - then that person's character comes into question.

I take public transportation to and from work; I live in Norfolk and work in Portsmouth; so I'm around the locals who are at the very bottom of the socio-economic ladder on a daily basis. All while I'm dressed in slacks and button-down shirts, and with a voice and pattern of speech that would have one thinking that I'm a white anchorman on the news if one heard me speak, and didn't see who it was. Never once have a I been the target of anything negative from them.

As you being an older person, I can admit that I believe you became successful despite some racism. More so than what there is now. But less than what went on before. I have never said there is absolutly no racism now, but I honestly believe that racism isnt the biggest hurdle in the minority society today. Do I believe cops are become incredibly authoritarian? Yes, towards everyone.

giggawatt
08-07-2014, 05:27 PM
Success alone doesn't make one a "sellout" in that community. It's when one makes it, and thinks oneself to be "better" than others in his community, or advocates for policies and practices that limit the opportunities for others to do the same - opportunities that he himself took advantage of - then that person's character comes into question.

I take public transportation to and from work; I live in Norfolk and work in Portsmouth; so I'm around the locals who are at the very bottom of the socio-economic ladder on a daily basis. All while I'm dressed in slacks and button-down shirts, and with a voice and pattern of speech that would have one thinking that I'm a white anchorman on the news if one heard me speak, and didn't see who it was. Never once have a I been the target of anything negative from them.

Dis you?


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=95Hnkx1uhAk

Rusty Jones
08-07-2014, 06:03 PM
As you being an older person, I can admit that I believe you became successful despite some racism. More so than what there is now. But less than what went on before. I have never said there is absolutly no racism now, but I honestly believe that racism isnt the biggest hurdle in the minority society today. Do I believe cops are become incredibly authoritarian? Yes, towards everyone.
"Older?" I'm only 34.
However, it looks to me like racism actually became worse since Obama took office. People are pissed about it, and the ones in position of power and/or authority - like the police - are taking it out blacks. If Latinos haven't been feeling the brunt yet, they probably are now with the whole border thing going on right now.

sandsjames
08-07-2014, 06:36 PM
"Older?" I'm only 34.
However, it looks to me like racism actually became worse since Obama took office. People are pissed about it, and the ones in position of power and/or authority - like the police - are taking it out blacks. If Latinos haven't been feeling the brunt yet, they probably are now with the whole border thing going on right now.

My aunt believes in ghosts. Occasionally, she'll feel drafts or smell wierd scents or see door knobs turn. It's funny what people will see when they really want to.

WILDJOKER5
08-07-2014, 06:44 PM
Success alone doesn't make one a "sellout" in that community. It's when one makes it, and thinks oneself to be "better" than others in his community, or advocates for policies and practices that limit the opportunities for others to do the same - opportunities that he himself took advantage of - then that person's character comes into question.So here's my question for you. If a black person was never part of the ghetto community, being in the GOP or advocating for welfare reform isnt selling out in your mind? I know it wasnt you that enlightened me to the term "Huxtable black", but it was another very ardent lefty on this form who claimed people like Condi Rice wasnt really black because she didnt come from poverty. So in essences, they arent part of the black community? Doesnt this prove the point that to be accepted by ones race, or at least to get through to those who look like you, you need to first come from poverty or else youre not really black? BTW, the lefty was white as he claimed.

I know there has been debates on why black students do worse in school than whites and the conclusion from the left was that there needed to be more black male teachers to relate to black students. Does this not also play into the "blackness" of someone if they dont come from poverty growing up? How can people like Allen West and Hermain Cain and Ben Carson be shunned by the black community for not being really black because they are conservatives and never came from poverty?

http://www.clutchmagonline.com/2012/03/are-black-students-better-off-with-black-teachers/

WILDJOKER5
08-07-2014, 06:45 PM
"Older?" I'm only 34.
However, it looks to me like racism actually became worse since Obama took office. People are pissed about it, and the ones in position of power and/or authority - like the police - are taking it out blacks. If Latinos haven't been feeling the brunt yet, they probably are now with the whole border thing going on right now.

Well then. I could have sworn you were in your 50's. My appologies.

As far as your assertion that cops are taking more out on blacks, I suggest you find the facebook page "cop block" and see how many times whites are being harrassed too. As far as latinos and the border, Blacks are more against illegal immigration than anyone else. And its pretty silly to believe that cops in leftist cities are taking it on minorities because of the POTUS. I guess though, when you call police stupid for doing their jobs, some backlash will happen, but not against an entire race.

And why do you believe that police will target all latinos around the country? Thats kind of silly. How did you become such a pesimist? Maybe you should move south where there arent stop and frisk laws being carried out like up in statist NYC?

http://www.endillegalimmigration.com/illegal_immigration_polls_surveys/index.shtml

http://www.pewhispanic.org/2010/10/28/illegal-immigration-backlash-worries-divides-latinos/

Rusty Jones
08-07-2014, 07:41 PM
My aunt believes in ghosts. Occasionally, she'll feel drafts or smell wierd scents or see door knobs turn. It's funny what people will see when they really want to.

Kind of like the assertion that wedding cake figurines are pre-packaged in pairs, when the person making that assertion doesn't know.


So here's my question for you. If a black person was never part of the ghetto community, being in the GOP or advocating for welfare reform isnt selling out in your mind? I know it wasnt you that enlightened me to the term "Huxtable black", but it was another very ardent lefty on this form who claimed people like Condi Rice wasnt really black because she didnt come from poverty. So in essences, they arent part of the black community? Doesnt this prove the point that to be accepted by ones race, or at least to get through to those who look like you, you need to first come from poverty or else youre not really black? BTW, the lefty was white as he claimed.

Your black card only gets pulled when you intend to do harm to the black community. Well, that and when you get used as an example by whites to shame other blacks (i.e., "Why can't you people be more like HIM?!"), without any objection to it. At least, from my perspective, that's how it is. I can't speak for everyone.


I know there has been debates on why black students do worse in school than whites and the conclusion from the left was that there needed to be more black male teachers to relate to black students. Does this not also play into the "blackness" of someone if they dont come from poverty growing up? How can people like Allen West and Hermain Cain and Ben Carson be shunned by the black community for not being really black because they are conservatives and never came from poverty?

http://www.clutchmagonline.com/2012/03/are-black-students-better-off-with-black-teachers/

Are you sure that these people didn't come from poverty? Because I can tell you for a fact, that AT LEAST one of them did: Ben Carson. By the way, of the three men that you mention, Allen West is the only one I have serious beef with. The truth is, it's not the black community shunning certain black conservatives - it's them shunning the black community. Colin Powell, for example, was and still is highly respected in the black community. He didn't shun the black community.


Well then. I could have sworn you were in your 50's. My appologies.

As far as your assertion that cops are taking more out on blacks, I suggest you find the facebook page "cop block" and see how many times whites are being harrassed too. As far as latinos and the border, Blacks are more against illegal immigration than anyone else.

You mean it was black people grouping up at the border to block the buses from entering, and forming armed militia groups to patrol the borders? Let me answer that for you: no. They were WHITE.


And its pretty silly to believe that cops in leftist cities are taking it on minorities because of the POTUS. I guess though, when you call police stupid for doing their jobs, some backlash will happen, but not against an entire race.

Yeah, because choking a man to death when he wasn't a physical threat to anyone constitutes "doing their job."


And why do you believe that police will target all latinos around the country? Thats kind of silly. How did you become such a pesimist?

It's already happening in Arizona, so why not?


Maybe you should move south where there arent stop and frisk laws being carried out like up in statist NYC?

Ahem - look at my location to the left.

PburghNo1
08-07-2014, 07:56 PM
So here's my question for you. If a black person was never part of the ghetto community, being in the GOP or advocating for welfare reform isnt selling out in your mind? I know it wasnt you that enlightened me to the term "Huxtable black", but it was another very ardent lefty on this form who claimed people like Condi Rice wasnt really black because she didnt come from poverty. So in essences, they arent part of the black community? Doesnt this prove the point that to be accepted by ones race, or at least to get through to those who look like you, you need to first come from poverty or else youre not really black? BTW, the lefty was white as he claimed.

I know there has been debates on why black students do worse in school than whites and the conclusion from the left was that there needed to be more black male teachers to relate to black students. Does this not also play into the "blackness" of someone if they dont come from poverty growing up? How can people like Allen West and Hermain Cain and Ben Carson be shunned by the black community for not being really black because they are conservatives and never came from poverty?

http://www.clutchmagonline.com/2012/03/are-black-students-better-off-with-black-teachers/

Two quick thoughts...

First, it isn't really about race, it's about socio-economic standing and the feeling that those in the same boat as you are part of your community and are "real" to you because that's what you know--poverty. If that boat sinks, everyone you know sinks with it--that is real to you whether you're black, white, hispanic, Native American--anything. The guy in the yacht across the bay that inherited it from daddy isn't real to you because he didn't have to dig like you do--and his boat's not sinking. Fact is, we (as humans--not races) will always identify with those who have similar experiences, stories and economic situations.

Second, you might want to consider a great number of people (of all races) don't identify with Allen West, Herman Cain and Ben Carson because they continue a pattern of spouting utter nonsense, not because they're not "black enough."

Rusty Jones
08-07-2014, 08:00 PM
Two quick thoughts...

First, it isn't really about race, it's about socio-economic standing and the feeling that those in the same boat as you are part of your community and are "real" to you because that's what you know--poverty. If that boat sinks, everyone you know sinks with it--that is real to you whether you're black, white, hispanic, Native American--anything. The guy in the yacht across the bay that inherited it from daddy isn't real to you because he didn't have to dig like you do--and his boat's not sinking. Fact is, we (as humans--not races) will always identify with those who have similar experiences, stories and economic situations.

Good point. A redneck and a trustafarian might as well not even be the same race, as there is just as much a world of difference between them as there is between Herman Cain and Pookie from around the way.

sandsjames
08-07-2014, 08:15 PM
Good point. A redneck and a trustafarian might as well not even be the same race, as there is just as much a world of difference between them as there is between Herman Cain and Pookie from around the way.

And this is the problem...that people from the same race have to act the same or they aren't considered being the same race. Race and lifestyle two completely different things and should be viewed as such.

Rusty Jones
08-07-2014, 08:23 PM
Unlike most of countries in the Americas, the US never became a nation state - and that's due to how newly freed slaves were dealt with in each country. In most Latin American countries, the practice was elimination through absorption (there was a history of this in medieval Europe, in dealing with Jews and Gypsies).

In the US, segregation was the preferred coping method. The result of this, is that race and ethnicity became synonymous with eachother; where in other countries, it's not uncommon to see people of different races but of the same ethnicities, and people of different ethnicities but of the same race. Well, the latter is somewhat common in the, but is of less significance here.

firenomore
08-08-2014, 06:04 AM
Let me explain white male privilege - Society holds white males to a very high standard. A white male is expected to work hard, behave well and succeed in life because he is a white male. Society will not make nor tolerate any excuses for any poor performance or bad behavior on the part of a white male.

If a black male behaves poorly or does not succeed academically, then the black male will probably not be blamed. Society will always make and tolerate lame excuses for any poor performance on the part of a black male.

If you hold a person to high standards, then they usually tend to rise to those high standards. If you hold a person to low standards, then they usually tend to sink to those low standards. If you make excuses for a person's bad behavior, then you will probably get more of that bad behavior.

White males have privilege because society holds white males to a high standard.
Black males are victims because society holds black males to a low standard and makes excuses for their bad behavior.

I guess those high standards are how white guys get to DUI kill 5 people and get probation huh?

firenomore
08-08-2014, 07:13 AM
It is my firm belief that 99% of the reasons that hold blacks back is themselves or the culture, NOT racism.

Here's my question, why was the first mention of removing race on government forms went straight into racism alligations? If it your firm belief that there is so much racism in America still that creates the biggest unemployed culture from blacks? Blacks are not the most uneducated. I would like to get away from race because we tend to lump in way too many people based on an arbitrary pigment of our skin or just a name on the paper which denotes how much pigment you have. Say we got away from knowing that half the prison population is black, wouldnt the stereotype of blacks being potential criminals start to go away? If we didnt know that 70% of planned(extiction) Parenthoods abortions are to blacks, wouldnt the negative stereotype go away...slowly?

Yes, it is my belief that racism creates the unemployed culture in America. When the same resume can be sent out with 2 different names and one gets an exponential amount of call backs compared to the other, that shows that it has nothing to do with black culture. If we took the race category off of all forms, that wouldn't change the images (or other media)that go along with prison and planned parenthood and anything else stereotypically negative about the black community. Every news report about arrests would still show the face of a black person whether it was on a form or not. Planned parenthood clinics would still be centrally located in black neighborhoods. Its amazing that you used these two examples too because both of those organizations were founded based on the destruction of the black community. Police were the original slave catchers and the constitution gives a loophole for slavery. Immediately after slavery was abolished on paper, here comes the Black Codes that criminalized anything and everything that blacks did and sent them to jail. Then they were rented out for labor to former plantation owners. Margaret Sanger set out to kill off as many as she could with planned parenthood. It was almost their mission statement. So, no the removal of that category would not remove the stereotypes that exist over organizations that are functioning exactly as they were intended.

firenomore
08-08-2014, 07:31 AM
I'd say bigger since when there was such prevelant institutionalized racism pre-CRA, the black community fought tooth and nail for equal chances. Faced down dogs, firehoses, the KKK together. Now 50 years after the CRA, the community is still crying out racism while simultaneously disparaging any blacks that break away from the democrats or that dont associate with the "hood" as being sell outs and "not real blacks" or working for "the man". When racism was the "thing" brought to you by democrats in the south even if the private business owner didnt want to follow the Jim Crow laws, Blacks stood together. They always have. Not saying its a bad thing, its just that the biggest identity influencers for blacks is of the thug and gang life style brought to you by the rap and R&B artists while magnified by athletes. But who want to hear rapping about starting a business (hardware store or restaraunt), raising your kids with their mom, you wife monogomously, and paying taxes while driving a minivan and not doing a drive by?

Shouldn't that have more of an effect on whites than black? Whites are 70-80% of the consumers of that influential music that you spoke of. BTW, no one talks about drive-bys in rap anymore. A lot of rap now is essentially about making money. Tell Fox news they need to change up their stereotypes.

firenomore
08-08-2014, 07:39 AM
"Transend"? Nah. But as it has been stated many times, blacks stick together. The biggest influence on black culture has been Rap music and athletes. Even most prodominant black casted movies produce by blacks keep portraying the same stereotypical black culture. "Best man", all Tyler Perry's movies. Even "nutty professor" does the black stereotyping in the movies. If you disagree that life immiatates art, especially movies and TV shows, then you have your head in the sand.

I agree that life imitates art in certain instances. that being the case, can we address how movies are being white-washed to erase the history of the African race? Right now there is a movement addressing the characters in the movie Exodus. They are portraying Sigourney Weaver as an African queen and etc., while all of the servants and thieves and shady characters are black. Why is that? Life being an imitation of art, why is it that on 2 of the longest running and highest paid sitcoms (Friends and Seinfeld), there might have been 3 appearances of black characters between the 2?

Have you seen Best Man? That movie portrayed pretty successful characters with a comedic twist to it. Nothing near as bad as whats suggested by a show/movie like Sex and the City.

firenomore
08-08-2014, 07:54 AM
So do you feel an obligation to the black community? I only ask because that's something I've never experienced with other whites.

I do feel an obligation to the black community. I'm of the mindset that if I don't pitch in and help and do all that I can to educate the next man, woman, boy or girl, no else will. If that continues, its too easy for certain mentalities to exist that perpetuate that stereotypes everyone believes about the community.

sandsjames
08-08-2014, 11:23 AM
Shouldn't that have more of an effect on whites than black? Whites are 70-80% of the consumers of that influential music that you spoke of. Great question. Why is it that the 70-80% of the consumers can purchase it, listen to it, and not feel the need to immitate it?

WILDJOKER5
08-08-2014, 12:17 PM
Your black card only gets pulled when you intend to do harm to the black community. Well, that and when you get used as an example by whites to shame other blacks (i.e., "Why can't you people be more like HIM?!"), without any objection to it. At least, from my perspective, that's how it is. I can't speak for everyone.Thats understandable. Typically whites dont bash other poorer whites for not making it by using skin color. I do know the bashing of whites from whites comes from democrats.


Are you sure that these people didn't come from poverty? Because I can tell you for a fact, that AT LEAST one of them did: Ben Carson. By the way, of the three men that you mention, Allen West is the only one I have serious beef with. The truth is, it's not the black community shunning certain black conservatives - it's them shunning the black community. Colin Powell, for example, was and still is highly respected in the black community. He didn't shun the black community.Sorry, you're right about Ben. His quote I forgot about was "I was a progressive...till I grew up". Colin Powell, I am not to fond of him, but I wont go to far as to say he's a RINO. He is what he is.


You mean it was black people grouping up at the border to block the buses from entering, and forming armed militia groups to patrol the borders? Let me answer that for you: no. They were WHITE.Border, Chicago, CA.
http://sandrarose.com/2014/07/black-chicagoans-slam-obama-for-funding-illegal-immigrants-worst-president-ever/
http://americannews.com/black-people-fight-illegal-aliens-and-their-supporters-at-the-border/
http://www.bizpacreview.com/2014/07/08/video-black-protesters-confront-pro-illegal-immigrant-supporters-with-raw-passion-130315


Yeah, because choking a man to death when he wasn't a physical threat to anyone constitutes "doing their job."No, not the example I am refering to. And I have posted that crime several times on FB. I have had plenty of white cop friends that are about to defriend me because of what I have posted against to unnecessary force being used.


It's already happening in Arizona, so why not?Thats not a targeting of a specific ethnic group. Thats targeting anyone that cant provide papers as to their legal status in this country. Its amazing how ambiguous laws can be constrewed by the left to have racial undertones just because one group more than others breaks the law. Guess we shouldn't have murder as a crime because minorities commit the majority of murders. The crime of murder must be a racist law by your thinking.


Ahem - look at my location to the left.
Still pretty lefty kind of state.

WILDJOKER5
08-08-2014, 12:21 PM
Two quick thoughts...

First, it isn't really about race, it's about socio-economic standing and the feeling that those in the same boat as you are part of your community and are "real" to you because that's what you know--poverty. If that boat sinks, everyone you know sinks with it--that is real to you whether you're black, white, hispanic, Native American--anything. The guy in the yacht across the bay that inherited it from daddy isn't real to you because he didn't have to dig like you do--and his boat's not sinking. Fact is, we (as humans--not races) will always identify with those who have similar experiences, stories and economic situations. I never, nor do I know any white person that chose not to learn from a teacher just because we didnt believe they came from the same backround. Seems kind of silly thing to judge who you learn from just because of where they came from.


Second, you might want to consider a great number of people (of all races) don't identify with Allen West, Herman Cain and Ben Carson because they continue a pattern of spouting utter nonsense, not because they're not "black enough."
But to call them the racist names that they have been called from the people of the left is mind blowing. The intolerance of the "talerant" party is intolerable.

WILDJOKER5
08-08-2014, 12:26 PM
Yes, it is my belief that racism creates the unemployed culture in America. When the same resume can be sent out with 2 different names and one gets an exponential amount of call backs compared to the other, that shows that it has nothing to do with black culture. If we took the race category off of all forms, that wouldn't change the images (or other media)that go along with prison and planned parenthood and anything else stereotypically negative about the black community. Every news report about arrests would still show the face of a black person whether it was on a form or not. Planned parenthood clinics would still be centrally located in black neighborhoods. Its amazing that you used these two examples too because both of those organizations were founded based on the destruction of the black community. Police were the original slave catchers and the constitution gives a loophole for slavery. Immediately after slavery was abolished on paper, here comes the Black Codes that criminalized anything and everything that blacks did and sent them to jail. Then they were rented out for labor to former plantation owners. Margaret Sanger set out to kill off as many as she could with planned parenthood. It was almost their mission statement. So, no the removal of that category would not remove the stereotypes that exist over organizations that are functioning exactly as they were intended.

Funny how you bring up the media, since the media will typically ignore black on black or never mention race when its black on white crime. But white on black and you will hear about it for months or years. Travon is the prime example. GZ wasnt even white, he just had a white sounding name, and the leftist media was all over it calling him a killer.

WILDJOKER5
08-08-2014, 12:34 PM
I agree that life imitates art in certain instances. that being the case, can we address how movies are being white-washed to erase the history of the African race? Right now there is a movement addressing the characters in the movie Exodus. They are portraying Sigourney Weaver as an African queen and etc., while all of the servants and thieves and shady characters are black. Why is that? Life being an imitation of art, why is it that on 2 of the longest running and highest paid sitcoms (Friends and Seinfeld), there might have been 3 appearances of black characters between the 2?I hope you arent putting these movies on to the right? These biblical movies from hollywood are ridiculous and I am not going to spend any money to see them.

As far as the sitcoms, why was it that in Family Matters the only white guy that appeared on the show was an idiot cop? Did the white sitcoms portray blacks in a negative light? It was targeted to a specific race sure. I watched Family Matters and Fresh Prince growing up not even caring about what the color of the skin was of the family. Do I watch Tyler Perrys "Meet the Browns"? Nope. Now each sitcom or tv series has to insert homosexuals into the story.


Have you seen Best Man? That movie portrayed pretty successful characters with a comedic twist to it. Nothing near as bad as whats suggested by a show/movie like Sex and the City.
I do know they portray successful charaters, but those same subtle speaking stereotypes put into a Michael Bay Transformers movie equals racism. Talk about double standards.

WILDJOKER5
08-08-2014, 12:37 PM
I do feel an obligation to the black community. I'm of the mindset that if I don't pitch in and help and do all that I can to educate the next man, woman, boy or girl, no else will. If that continues, its too easy for certain mentalities to exist that perpetuate that stereotypes everyone believes about the community.

Like being a victim? If you are always told you aren't making it because everyone is out to get you, guess what you are growing up to believe. This is what is told and what is preached and from you, what is believed. 18% unemployment among blacks is not because of whites. There is no proof what so ever of that.

Rusty Jones
08-08-2014, 12:56 PM
Thats understandable. Typically whites dont bash other poorer whites for not making it by using skin color. I do know the bashing of whites from whites comes from democrats.

BULLLLSHIITTT.

This is something that I spoke extensively of in my circle of friends, and even moreso when Rachel Jeantel took the stand during the Zimmerman trial.

I'm a graudate degreed white collar professional and, as such, I'm around middle class whites on a daily basis. And when I say "middle class," I'm not talking about "working class," either.

Middle class whites are far more likely to see the poor among their own as embarassments and a detrimental to the image of their race. You might hear black people say "cracker" - which applies to all whites, regardless of class - but you won't hear one say "white trash" or "trailor park trash." Middle class white people use those words. Go to any gathering of middle class whites, and you'll hear them speak ruthlessly ill of the poor among their own.

Now, let's look at black people on this. Let a middle class black person go to any gathering of middle class blacks, and the words "black trash" or "ghetto trash" slip out of his mouth. I'd have to vacate the premises, due to my inability to watch him get a new asshole ripped into him.

Look at how black people of all classes voiced support for Rachel Jeantel, when they thought that her perceived lack of intelligence would be used against her, or that the way she carried herself would be exploited to ruin her credibility.

You know as well as I do, that if she was a fat, white, loudmouth from the trailor park; middle class whites would have left her for DEAD. Middle class whites are not her, and they're going to make sure that you know it.

Now, please don't take this as me saying that white people have the wrong idea, and black people have the wrong idea. Personally, I think they're BOTH wrong. Black people identifying with their lowest common denominators, I believe, stunts the progression of those who've yet to reach their potentital. White people identifying with their highest creates delusions of their socio-economic status, thus tricking them into supporting policies that are against their own economic best interests. There's a happy medium in there somewhere - a "healthy" level of classism - that has yet to be discovered.

And, by the way, whites bashing other whites is not limited to political party affiliation.


Border, Chicago, CA.
http://sandrarose.com/2014/07/black-chicagoans-slam-obama-for-funding-illegal-immigrants-worst-president-ever/
http://americannews.com/black-people-fight-illegal-aliens-and-their-supporters-at-the-border/
http://www.bizpacreview.com/2014/07/08/video-black-protesters-confront-pro-illegal-immigrant-supporters-with-raw-passion-130315

I never said there weren't going to be any here and there. And that's what they are a bunch of "here's" and "there's." Does this prove your assertion that blacks harbor more animosity toward illegals than whites? Nope. Not by a long shot.


No, not the example I am refering to. And I have posted that crime several times on FB. I have had plenty of white cop friends that are about to defriend me because of what I have posted against to unnecessary force being used.

Great, but you should read these message boards that cops post to. Pretty revealing stuff. Stuff like them complaining about "bleeding heart liberals" outlawing racial profiling, among other things.


Thats not a targeting of a specific ethnic group. Thats targeting anyone that cant provide papers as to their legal status in this country.

And how would anyone look suspicious? How do cops know who can and can't provide papers? How? They stop and interrogate anyone who "looks" like they can't. And you and I know damned well what that means.


Its amazing how ambiguous laws can be constrewed by the left to have racial undertones just because one group more than others breaks the law. Guess we shouldn't have murder as a crime because minorities commit the majority of murders. The crime of murder must be a racist law by your thinking.

Oh, my... this pure ignorance right here just became my new quote.



Still pretty lefty kind of state.

You're joking, right? The ONLY reason we have a Democrat governor right is now because of the Libertarian candidate that won 7% of the vote - whom many conservatives in the state have accused of being a fake candidate placed in by the Democrats.

sandsjames
08-08-2014, 01:40 PM
And how would anyone look suspicious? How do cops know who can and can't provide papers? How? They stop and interrogate anyone who "looks" like they can't. And you and I know damned well what that means.



Need I bring up PYB???

PburghNo1
08-08-2014, 02:18 PM
I never, nor do I know any white person that chose not to learn from a teacher just because we didnt believe they came from the same backround. Seems kind of silly thing to judge who you learn from just because of where they came from.

You're right, it is silly. But it doesn't just happen one way.
-----
A UNLV Doctoral study on black teachers in white schools: "She stated that a White student had inquired if she had been hired because of Affirmative Action. She also reported that students had commented on their evaluations of her that “she always talks and gives too many assignments about Black people and shows her true colors“"

http://digitalscholarship.unlv.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2836&context=thesesdissertations
-----
Do you think that student is really listening to what the teacher is saying or simply looking for a way to justify ignoring them using race? Just because you don't know someone who's done it doesn't mean it doesn't happen. It seems as though you quite often act as though white people are saints and everyone else the opposite.


But to call them the racist names that they have been called from the people of the left is mind blowing. The intolerance of the "talerant" party is intolerable.

"This is my clear and succinct message to white Americans. How long will it be before "you people" realize you have elevated someone to the office of president who abjectly despises you -- not to mention his henchman Holder. Combined they are the most vile and disgusting racists -- not you." -- Allen West, Jan 14, 2014.

Not saying two wrongs make a right, but come on--you can't sit there and ignore that West and those of his ilk throw around the same racist rants that you accuse "leftys" of saying. West's assertion is that the President and AG are racist (unfounded, I might add) and white people are too stupid to see it. Racism all around, boys! (But it's Allen West, so it's okay.) You only want to see racism where it suits your argument and nowhere else.

sandsjames
08-08-2014, 04:11 PM
Do you think that student is really listening to what the teacher is saying or simply looking for a way to justify ignoring them using race? Just because you don't know someone who's done it doesn't mean it doesn't happen. It seems as though you quite often act as though white people are saints and everyone else the opposite. How 'bout we quit referring to things a "black history" and "womens history" and just start referring to it as history? Not once in a history class did I ever hear that someone was the first white person to do something. When I hear "first black" or "first woman", honestly, I shut down. This has been mentioned several times and is, for some reason, a difficult concept to grasp but when people stop segregating portions of society when it comes to history (and other things) then there will be much less resistance to hearing it. People won't feel alienated.

Rusty Jones
08-08-2014, 04:25 PM
How 'bout we quit referring to things a "black history" and "womens history" and just start referring to it as history? Not once in a history class did I ever hear that someone was the first white person to do something. When I hear "first black" or "first woman", honestly, I shut down. This has been mentioned several times and is, for some reason, a difficult concept to grasp but when people stop segregating portions of society when it comes to history (and other things) then there will be much less resistance to hearing it. People won't feel alienated.

You're advocating a colorblind approach. I suppose a "sex blind" approach as well.

Here's a good excerpt from wikipedia on why that's not a good thing:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_blindness_(race)_in_the_United_States


Criticism of color blindness
In 1997 Leslie G. Carr published "Color-Blind Racism" (Sage Publications) which reviewed the history of racist ideologies in America. He saw "color-blindness" as an ideology that undercuts the legal and political foundation of integration and affirmative action. Stephanie M. Wildman, in her book Privilege Revealed: How Invisible Preference Undermines America, writes that many Americans who advocate a merit-based, race-free worldview do not acknowledge the systems of privilege which benefit them. For example, many Americans rely on a social and sometimes even financial inheritance from previous generations. She argues that this inheritance is unlikely to be forthcoming if one's ancestors were slaves, and privileges whiteness, maleness, and heterosexuality.

Critics allege that majority groups use practices of color-blindness as a means of avoiding the topic of racism and accusations of racial discrimination, and that color-blindness is used to undermine group legal rights gained exclusively by some minority groups.

Critics assert that color-blindness allows people to ignore the racial construction of whiteness, and reinforces its privileged and oppressive position. In color-blind situations, whiteness remains the normal standard, and blackness remains different, or marginal. As a result, white people are able to dominate when a color-blind approach is applied because the common experiences are defined in terms which white people can more easily relate to than blacks. Insistence on no reference to race, critics argue, means black people can no longer point out the racism they face.

Critics of color-blindness argue that color-blindness operates under the assumption that we are living in a world that is "post-race", where race no longer matters, when in fact it is still a prevalent issue. While it is true that overt racism is rare today (Bonilla-Silva, Eduardo.; 2006, p. 25), critics insist that more covert forms have taken its place (Bonilla-Silva, Eduardo.; 2006, p. 25). Eduardo Bonilla-Silva suggests that racial practices during the Jim Crow Era were typically overt and clearly racial, whereas today they tend to be covert, institutional, and apparently nonracial. Another criticism is that color-blindness views racism at the individual level (e.g. Lines of reasoning such as "I don't own slaves" or "I have very close black friends" to defend oneself) without looking at the larger social mechanisms in which racism operates. In an article in the journal New Directions for Student Services, Nancy Evans and Robert Reason argued that color-blindness fails to see the "structural, institutional, and societal" levels at which inequalities occur

While the ideal that race should not "matter," critics say, is certainly not a bad thing, the problem lies in asserting that race should not be taken into consideration even when trying to address inequality or remedy past wrongs.

Professor Bonilla-Silva of Duke University lists four main frameworks in which color-blindness operates: "abstract liberalism, biologization of culture, naturalization of racial matters, and minimization of racism."

Abstract liberalism "abstracts and decontextualizes" themes from political and economic liberalism, such as meritocracy and the free market, to argue against the strong presence of racism. It is also often used in discussions of affirmative action. The principle of laissez-faire emphasizes a "hands off" policy in terms of the government's involvement with economic activity. When applied to issues of race, it results in people being for equality in principle but against government action to implement equality, a policy often called laissez-faire racism.

The "biologization of culture" explains the inequality among race today in terms of cultural difference. Where disparities were once explained in terms of biology, they are now being discussed in terms of culture. "Culture" in this framework is seen as something fixed and hard to change. One example form of rhetoric used in this framework is the argument, "if Irish, Jews (or other ethnic groups) have 'made it', how come blacks have not?" Such rhetoric blames blacks and other minority groups for their own situations because other previously disadvantaged groups have managed to 'make it' in American society.

Similarly, certain frameworks "naturalize" aspects of racism, used commonly in discussions of residential and school segregation. For example, using this framework one would say it is simply natural that people of the same race would tend to live together, that it's "just the way it is". This viewpoint, however, ignores the possibility of other factors underlying residential segregation such as the attitude of realtors, bankers, and sellers.

Finally, as color-blindness rests on the idea that racism is no longer a prevalent issue today, a fourth framework seeks to minimize racism. Thus, modern occurrences of racism are seen as rare aberrations committed by the last few racists in society. Because racism is viewed as no longer a problem under this belief, people who ascribe to color-blindness see government programs targeting race as "illegitimate" and no longer necessary.

Robert D. Reason and Nancy J. Evans outline a similar description of color-blindness by Professor T.A. Forman of Emory University, which is based on four beliefs: 1. racial groups receive merit-based privileges, 2. most people do not notice nor are they concerned about race, 3. social inequality today is due to "cultural deficits" of individual people or racial or ethnic groups, and 4. given the previous three assumptions, there is no need to pay "systematic attention" to any current inequities. The prevalence of color-blindness is partially attributed to lack of knowledge or lack of exposure. Due to segregation that exists in housing and education, many Americans may not have direct contact with the discrimination that still exists.

hustonj
08-08-2014, 04:29 PM
I've siad it before and I'll keep saying it:

The longer and louder that you demand equal treatment because you are different, the more imopssible you make it to treat you equally.

Equal treatment comes from not caring about the differences. As long as anybody is still focusing on those differences, equal treatment is not possible.

sandsjames
08-08-2014, 05:41 PM
You're advocating a colorblind approach. I suppose a "sex blind" approach as well. I'm all for a "sex blind" approach when it comes to history. And I don't care what the reasons are against it...I think it causes more problems than it fixes.

Now, if those things are part of a study of civil rights, civil liberties, etc, then I have no problems with it. But just being taught as part of history isn't helping anything.

I also don't think that "color blindness" is at all discounting racism. I do think it's a way to move away from it, however.

Stalwart
08-09-2014, 02:28 AM
I'm all for a "sex blind" approach when it comes to history. And I don't care what the reasons are against it...I think it causes more problems than it fixes.

There are many historical "firsts" that I think are worth noting (first female in space, first black president etc.), but in many cases as time goes on and we attach more and more adjectives (ie. first female black aviator to command a squadron etc.) that I think the point gets diluted.



Now, if those things are part of a study of civil rights, civil liberties, etc, then I have no problems with it. But just being taught as part of history isn't helping anything.

Yep, classes that focus on a particular facet of history (black history, women's history etc.) are very interesting to take ... especially when you are not part of the target demographic.

USN - Retired
08-09-2014, 05:23 AM
I guess those high standards are how white guys get to DUI kill 5 people and get probation huh?

Sentence disparities can be almost completely explained by three factors: the original arrest offense, the defendant’s criminal history, and the prosecutor’s initial choice of charges. If you look at the range of penalties, most of the black-white gaps in criminal sentences disappear when you include initial charges.

garhkal
08-09-2014, 09:50 AM
There are many historical "firsts" that I think are worth noting (first female in space, first black president etc.), but in many cases as time goes on and we attach more and more adjectives (ie. first female black aviator to command a squadron etc.) that I think the point gets diluted.


With the march of the LGBT crowd, i wonder how long it will be before, we are celebrating first gay commander, or first transgendered admiral.

Rainmaker
08-09-2014, 02:43 PM
Rainmaker can't even takes 2 weeks off to go visit the Oracle at Gibtown and go to Vegas wiffout this turd Rusty showin up from the bottom of the bowl again and gettin flushed before Rainmaker can even get back from vacation. Ya'll muhfuggas trippin NomSayin?