I It Time To Stop Allowing Reverse Discrimination?

[mgifford]

This is a post I made on another thread about a woman who placed a sign in her yard, saying she only wanted to rent to white people.
As the thread went on, I posted this as my "heart felt"" answer to the situation.

Of course I'll be called a "racist". Of course I'll be called a racist, but is that what I am because I believe it's time for all Americans to be treated the same in America? I believe it's time we see that the time of, not giving a crap about the white man has lost it's luster.

I lived in Atlanta during the "Civil Rights Movement". Then, as I was in Vietnam fighting for freedom for all Americans, I watched the riots in my town on the news.

I believe the Civil Rights "Goal" has been reached, but nobody was watching. It's time for America to treat all of us the same now, no matter what color we are. We have elected a black man as president and that's about as AA as you can get.

Please read my thoughts and give your opinion. Maybe one day soon we can wake up and see what the Democrats have done to America by "vote buying" each election time.

Originally Posted by mgifford

Some people are tired of diversity, PC by now. We've spent too many years swimming in "white guilt" in America, and it's nearly ruined America. That's why we have an idiot (who is the ultimate AA position of ridiculous proportion) making America look more idiotic than we ever have.

Want to see "racism" in it's very finest form? Look at: ACORN, CRA, TARP, Maxine Waters, NCLC, JJ Jackson, Al, the Sharpie, welfare, Rev. Wright, or Farrahkan (Wrong) just to name a few. Maybe it's time we simply got down to treating all Americans the same.

I wonder if it's time that white people won't be discriminated against anymore. I remember the very first hint that it was time for white people to pay for their sins of the past. I remember the riots of the 60's, the burning of neighborhoods and the marches, I was here.

I remember when blacks were given jobs (especially in government) over white people in hopes that AA would finally make things right. Then, as people began to see that AA had done nothing but made white people the victims in reverse, other groups were added to the cause, such as women, to keep the thing going.

It worked for years that discrimination was Law and had to be adhered to. It hasn't been too many years ago that people again started asking, "how much longer until white people have paid enough".

So there were new words to try and justify "reverse discrimination", those words were "Level Playing Field". LPF has been a way to pay back the white man for some time now, but it really doesn't cut it, because of the years of "reverse discrimination" we've sucked up much.

Americans are Americans but we seem to have just forgotten that. Anyway, we have the "AA president" in office now that will screw America in a way she's never been screwed before, simply to make the white man pay even more.

AA has been on it's way to destroying America for a long time now, with the president in office who hasn't got a clue, maybe people of all colors need to speak up for themselves.

[BillyBobUSA]

After what white people have done to Amerindians, all the other nations of the globe, to black people and to nature herself, the record wont be balanced untill all white people spend a few centuries in slavery, poverty and as conquored subjects like all their victims.

That is what I was told in college anyway.

I'd guess the double standard that tells whites to shut up and just be glad we arent being robbed daily is here to stay for a very long time.

[mgifford]

After what white people have done to Amerindians, all the other nations of the globe, to black people and to nature herself, the record wont be balanced untill all white people spend a few centuries in slavery, poverty and as conquored subjects like all their victims.

That is what I was told in college anyway.

I'd guess the double standard that tells whites to shut up and just be glad we arent being robbed daily is here to stay for a very long time.

A nation which discriminates against anyone can't survive at all. That's why America is in such a mess now. Ever since the 60's when the government decided it was it's sole duty to mold every Americans life, problems spun from civil rights for one man and basically none for another.

Thank God the black man received his civil rights, but it shouldn't be at the expense of the white man's rights. That becomes punishment toward one American for sins of another, done in the far back past.

When I was coming up there were a number of black people in our lives. We loved them and sure as hell never mistreated them, at all.
A terrible wrong was committed against them, but it's now been made right, so let's act like it.

[ImNewHere]

After what white people have done to Amerindians, all the other nations of the globe, to black people and to nature herself, the record wont be balanced untill all white people spend a few centuries in slavery, poverty and as conquored subjects like all their victims.

Actually, Obama's economic policies will do just that.

[mgifford]

Actually, Obama's economic policies will do just that.

Yes, but your average, American Obama voter, can't see that!

[EmmanuelGoldstein]

Reverse Discrimination

No such animal.

[F9thRet]

After what white people have done to Amerindians, all the other nations of the globe, to black people and to nature herself, the record wont be balanced untill all white people spend a few centuries in slavery, poverty and as conquored subjects like all their victims.

That is what I was told in college anyway.

I'd guess the double standard that tells whites to shut up and just be glad we arent being robbed daily is here to stay for a very long time.

There has been plenty of times in history The white man has been held in slavery. Probably more so then any other race.

Stephen

[mgifford]

There has been plenty of times in history The white man has been held in slavery. Probably more so then any other race.

Stephen

America, in the 60's traded racism against blacks for blatant racism toward whites and at the same time made it legal. At first it was made law that blacks couldn't be discriminated against, then the law said "in order to achieve the goal law was made to legally discriminate against whites".

[mgifford]

BTW, liberals don't have the guts to admit that the white man has suffered enough for the sins of the Americans of many years ago. That's why I believe it's time the white man spreads it around anyway himself.

[F9thRet]

America, in the 60's traded racism against blacks for blatant racism toward whites and at the same time made it legal. At first it was made law that blacks couldn't be discriminated against, then the law said "in order to achieve the goal law was made to legally discriminate against whites".

No argument from me there.

Stephen

[mgifford]

No argument from me there.

Stephen

Good for you, Stephen.

[Vaard]

There has been plenty of times in history The white man has been held in slavery. Probably more so then any other race.

Stephen

thgats got to be one of the funniest things i ever read.......

[Vaard]

A nation which discriminates against anyone can't survive at all. That's why America is in such a mess now. Ever since the 60's when the government decided it was it's sole duty to mold every Americans life, problems spun from civil rights for one man and basically none for another.

Thank God the black man received his civil rights, but it shouldn't be at the expense of the white man's rights. That becomes punishment toward one American for sins of another, done in the far back past.

When I was coming up there were a number of black people in our lives. We loved them and sure as hell never mistreated them, at all.
A terrible wrong was committed against them, but it's now been made right, so let's act like it.


the years when the black man was blantantly discriminated against are considered some of the best times in american history by many republicans........


it was when blakcs stopped being blantly discriminated agaisnt when republican feel this country started going to hell in a handbasket......

[Dr. Funkenstein]

the years when the black man was blantantly discriminated against are considered some of the best times in american history by many republicans........


it was when blakcs stopped being blantly discriminated agaisnt when republican feel this country started going to hell in a handbasket......

I figure I'll throw in now that Vaard (and by my agreement, myself) is referring to CURRENT Republicans, not the old guard. Obviously, we're all aware that the Republican Party voted in higher concentration for the Civil Rights Act, so if we can just nip that tangent in the bud I think it'd be better for all of us.

Back to your regularly scheduled arguing...;)

[DaGooseMon]

the years when the black man was blantantly discriminated against are considered some of the best times in american history by many republicans........


it was when blakcs stopped being blantly discriminated agaisnt when republican feel this country started going to hell in a handbasket......


Mere coincidence of timing. You make it sound like cause and effect. That's not the case at all.

We started going down hill with Woodrow Wilson, it continued with Roosevelt, and really took off with Johnson and the Great Society. Now, we have people calling the cops because they can't get their chicken mcnuggets.

Common sense has left us as a society. We've created dependency through entitlements, replaced common sense with an 800 number where you have to press one for English, all the while paying abled bodied people to NOT work. And then bitch about the fact that there are jobs Americans won't do. That's right, I spelled it with a capital A. Unlike you.

Some will blame it on the communist agitators, funded by the KGB in the 60s, some will blame it on affirmitive action. Hell, some might even blame the natural progression of any society. I blame it on people being soft.

I blame it on Dr. Spok and all his ********. I blame it on these crybabies that weep because they have no self esteem, and yet refuse to do anything that would actually make them feel good about themselves, like work. Nothing better for the soul than a hard days work, that will always be followed by a good nights sleep. Truth is, if you can't sleep at night, you need to work harder. Works every time.

I blame it on people being spoiled rotten with every modern day convenience known to man. We want it in 30 minutes or less or we're crying to our Congressman about it.

And as if the gooberment hasn't screwed up enough things, they've managed to destroy our economy with more gooberment interference in our housing market. Well, thanks for that. See where that's gotten us? The gooberment tried to forcibly level the playing field for home ownership and how has that turned out?

You set me off on a rant there with your liberal "white people bad" ********. But you clearly have no idea what "most" republicans think. You're not one, so quit trying to speak for "most" of them. We can speak for ourselves, thank you very much...

[Greyclouds]

Mere coincidence of timing. You make it sound like cause and effect. That's not the case at all.

We started going down hill with Woodrow Wilson, it continued with Roosevelt, and really took off with Johnson and the Great Society. Now, we have people calling the cops because they can't get their chicken mcnuggets.

Common sense has left us as a society. We've created dependency through entitlements, replaced common sense with an 800 number where you have to press one for English, all the while paying abled bodied people to NOT work. And then bitch about the fact that there are jobs Americans won't do. That's right, I spelled it with a capital A. Unlike you.

Some will blame it on the communist agitators, funded by the KGB in the 60s, some will blame it on affirmitive action. Hell, some might even blame the natural progression of any society. I blame it on people being soft.

I blame it on Dr. Spok and all his ********. I blame it on these crybabies that weep because they have no self esteem, and yet refuse to do anything that would actually make them feel good about themselves, like work. Nothing better for the soul than a hard days work, that will always be followed by a good nights sleep. Truth is, if you can't sleep at night, you need to work harder. Works every time.

I blame it on people being spoiled rotten with every modern day convenience known to man. We want it in 30 minutes or less or we're crying to our Congressman about it.

And as if the gooberment hasn't screwed up enough things, they've managed to destroy our economy with more gooberment interference in our housing market. Well, thanks for that. See where that's gotten us? The gooberment tried to forcibly level the playing field for home ownership and how has that turned out?

You set me off on a rant there with your liberal "white people bad" ********. But you clearly have no idea what "most" republicans think. You're not one, so quite trying to speak for "most" of them. We can speak for ourselves, thank you very much...

You bring up an excellent point:

Technology as the "softener" of civilization. Ibn Khaldun, the Arab philosopher, talked about the same thing when he detailed the rise and fall of civilizations.

Luxuries and amenities weaken a civilization's resolve whereas deprivation of niceties causes barbarians/nomads to gain strength. When the civilization gets too weak, it is easily taken over by the barbarians.


Now, we must ask ourselves this: should we deprive ourselves of ALL luxuries in order to survive as a civilization, OR will such deprivation destroy our culture without a shot being fired?

[Dr. Funkenstein]

Mere coincidence of timing. You make it sound like cause and effect. That's not the case at all.

We started going down hill with Woodrow Wilson, it continued with Roosevelt, and really took off with Johnson and the Great Society. Now, we have people calling the cops because they can't get their chicken mcnuggets.

Common sense has left us as a society. We've created dependency through entitlements, replaced common sense with an 800 number where you have to press one for English, all the while paying abled bodied people to NOT work. And then bitch about the fact that there are jobs Americans won't do. That's right, I spelled it with a capital A. Unlike you.

Some will blame it on the communist agitators, funded by the KGB in the 60s, some will blame it on affirmitive action. Hell, some might even blame the natural progression of any society. I blame it on people being soft.

I blame it on Dr. Spok and all his ********. I blame it on these crybabies that weep because they have no self esteem, and yet refuse to do anything that would actually make them feel good about themselves, like work. Nothing better for the soul than a hard days work, that will always be followed by a good nights sleep. Truth is, if you can't sleep at night, you need to work harder. Works every time.

I blame it on people being spoiled rotten with every modern day convenience known to man. We want it in 30 minutes or less or we're crying to our Congressman about it.

And as if the gooberment hasn't screwed up enough things, they've managed to destroy our economy with more gooberment interference in our housing market. Well, thanks for that. See where that's gotten us? The gooberment tried to forcibly level the playing field for home ownership and how has that turned out?

You set me off on a rant there with your liberal "white people bad" ********. But you clearly have no idea what "most" republicans think. You're not one, so quit trying to speak for "most" of them. We can speak for ourselves, thank you very much...

Every mention of that just cracks me up. I can't open the thread about it because I'll fall apart and I'm still at work.

I don't disagree that as a society we've gone soft.

And to be fair...Vaard doesn't capitalize much in his posts.

[DaGooseMon]

Every mention of that just cracks me up. I can't open the thread about it because I'll fall apart and I'm still at work.

I don't disagree that as a society we've gone soft.

And to be fair...Vaard doesn't capitalize much in his posts.

To be fair? It's that kind of ******** that leads to the problems we're facing. To be fair, Johnny Poorboy didn't have a father, grew up in a tough neighborhood, and is not as smart as the other guy, so let's take money from somebody else and give it to him. To be fair... :rolleyes:

Quit lowering expectations Funk. When we lower expectations in order to be fair, all we end up doing is lowering productivity. Vaard doesn't hold himself accountable for his grammar and spelling, and you want to be fair and say, "to be fair, well he never does." He never does because he doesn't hold himself to an acceptable standard. Your example is a perfect microcosm of our overall societal problems.

We want to be fair. To do that, we must lower the expectations of those that may have it a little bit tougher than the next guy. Here's an idea; Don't lower the expectations of output. Require much more effort of input.

The promise of America has never been a free ride. The promise of America has never been we'll provide for you. The promise of America has been "You are free to accomplish everything you want to accomplish."

That should be the goal Funk. Fairness is not an outcome based concept. It's an input based concept. Fair is getting out of life everything you put INTO it. That's fair.

[Greyclouds]

To be fair? It's that kind of ******** that leads to the problems we're facing. To be fair, Johnny Poorboy didn't have a father, grew up in a tough neighborhood, and is not as smart as the other guy, so let's take money from somebody else and give it to him. To be fair... :rolleyes:

Quit lowering expectations Funk. When we lower expectations in order to be fair, all we end up doing is lowering productivity. Vaard doesn't hold himself accountable for his grammar and spelling, and you want to be fair and say, "to be fair, well he never does." He never does because he doesn't hold himself to an acceptable standard. Your example is a perfect microcosm of our overall societal problems.

We want to be fair. To do that, we must lower the expectations of those that may have it a little bit tougher than the next guy. Here's an idea; Don't lower the expectations of output. Require much more effort of input.

The promise of America has never been a free ride. The promise of America has never been we'll provide for you. The promise of America has been "You are free to accomplish everything you want to accomplish."

That should be the goal Funk. Fairness is not an outcome based concept. It's an input based concept. Fair is getting out of life everything you put INTO it. That's fair.

That's all well and good, but noone wants to be the "working slave" of the Pullman sleeper car company for the good of the nation.

Our desire for fairness is borne out of our culture's respect of human individuality. It's hard to differentiate people into necessary social classes with SOME mode of social advancement when each person exists as an individual.

If you truly wanted the above ideal, you'd advocate more for a nationalistic focus rather than a per-person basis of rights. The person earning 17 cents a week working on the rail-lines would be doing it for the benefit of the nation, and not the other way around. He/she is entirely free to consider NOT working.

[Dr. Funkenstein]

To be fair? It's that kind of ******** that leads to the problems we're facing. To be fair, Johnny Poorboy didn't have a father, grew up in a tough neighborhood, and is not as smart as the other guy, so let's take money from somebody else and give it to him. To be fair... :rolleyes:

Quit lowering expectations Funk. When we lower expectations in order to be fair, all we end up doing is lowering productivity. Vaard doesn't hold himself accountable for his grammar and spelling, and you want to be fair and say, "to be fair, well he never does." He never does because he doesn't hold himself to an acceptable standard. Your example is a perfect microcosm of our overall societal problems.

We want to be fair. To do that, we must lower the expectations of those that may have it a little bit tougher than the next guy. Here's an idea; Don't lower the expectations of output. Require much more effort of input.

The promise of America has never been a free ride. The promise of America has never been we'll provide for you. The promise of America has been "You are free to accomplish everything you want to accomplish."

That should be the goal Funk. Fairness is not an outcome based concept. It's an input based concept. Fair is getting out of life everything you put INTO it. That's fair.

Down boy. I know you've got your Irish up today, but it's gonna be okay. Grab a couple shots of Jack or a valium...we'll get you through this, big fella ;)

I have high expectations of people in real life. I do...I expect people to know that "supposably" is not a word, for example.

My expectations for the capitalization habits of posters on a political message board? As high as the amount I actually care if they do it. IOW...not much.

[DaGooseMon]

That's all well and good, but noone wants to be the "working slave" of the Pullman sleeper car company for the good of the nation.

Our desire for fairness is borne out of our culture's respect of human individuality. It's hard to differentiate people into necessary social classes with SOME mode of social advancement when each person exists as an individual.

If you truly wanted the above ideal, you'd advocate more for a nationalistic focus rather than a per-person basis of rights. The person earning 17 cents a week working on the rail-lines would be doing it for the benefit of the nation, and not the other way around. He/she is entirely free to consider NOT working.


My ideal is the American ideal. And our rights are all based on the individual. The American ideal has worked, better than any other system because of those individual rights. That's the entire idea of America. Individual rights and freedoms.

We're one of the richest countries in the world, and that is while being one of the youngest. You accomplish that through freedom. Not some nationalistic focus. The national rewards come from the individual input.

And I honestly think there is too much focus on fairness. Fairness is an illusion. It's an opinion. What's fair to you, may not be fair to me. Quit worrying about what's fair and get to work. The rest will work itself out.

[Greyclouds]

My ideal is the American ideal. And our rights are all based on the individual. The American ideal has worked, better than any other system because of those individual rights. That's the entire idea of America. Individual rights and freedoms.

We're one of the richest countries in the world, and that is while being one of the youngest. You accomplish that through freedom. Not some nationalistic focus. The national rewards come from the individual input.

And I honestly think there is too much focus on fairness. Fairness is an illusion. It's an opinion. What's fair to you, may not be fair to me. Quit worrying about what's fair and get to work. The rest will work itself out.

Now we return to your other point:

America has been so successful as to provide luxuries to all of its citizens. Said luxuries have softened American citizens to the point that they seek a proliferation of MORE luxuries.

How do we "harden" American citizens again, and promote an ideal of hard work is proportional to benefits received? The only way that I see is through the limitation or prohibition of luxury items to the lower classes.

[DaGooseMon]

Down boy. I know you've got your Irish up today, but it's gonna be okay. Grab a couple shots of Jack or a valium...we'll get you through this, big fella ;)

I have high expectations of people in real life. I do...I expect people to know that "supposably" is not a word, for example.

My expectations for the capitalization habits of posters on a political message board? As high as the amount I actually care if they do it. IOW...not much.


Obviously, I was making a point. "Fairness" has become the art of lowering expectations of some, at the expense of others. I'm sorry, that's ********.

So, yeah, I went a little overboard with the spelling analogy, but it was to make a point. And I was talking about the expectations of ones self.

Whish just leads to the broader point. Remember a time when it was embarrassing for a man to not be able to provide for his family? It was expected, that a man would provide for his wife and kids. Then, we somehow stopped expecting it. It was no longer an embarrassment for a man to need financial help from his wife. Think about that for a second. Now we have both parent working, 10 kids for every one daycare worker, and we wonder why our children don't have self esteem or a work ethic, or any core values.

So, we dropped that expectation, and has it been good for our society, or has it been bad? Lowering that expectation, IMO, has hurt this nation.

[Dr. Funkenstein]

Obviously, I was making a point. "Fairness" has become the art of lowering expectations of some, at the expense of others. I'm sorry, that's ********.

So, yeah, I went a little overboard with the spelling analogy, but it was to make a point. And I was talking about the expectations of ones self.

Whish just leads to the broader point. Remember a time when it was embarrassing for a man to not be able to provide for his family? It was expected, that a man would provide for his wife and kids. Then, we somehow stopped expecting it. It was no longer an embarrassment for a man to need financial help from his wife. Think about that for a second. Now we have both parent working, 10 kids for every one daycare worker, and we wonder why our children don't have self esteem or a work ethic, or any core values.

So, we dropped that expectation, and has it been good for our society, or has it been bad? Lowering that expectation, IMO, has hurt this nation.

I agree with you on that.

[DaGooseMon]

Now we return to your other point:

America has been so successful as to provide luxuries to all of its citizens. Said luxuries have softened American citizens to the point that they seek a proliferation of MORE luxuries.

How do we "harden" American citizens again, and promote an ideal of hard work is proportional to benefits received? The only way that I see is through the limitation or prohibition of luxury items to the lower classes.

The only way to limit, or prohibit the lower classes (your term, not mine) is to stop paying abled bodied people to not work. You eliminate the handout, and they have to hand it to themselves. The only way to do that, is for them to get off their but and get it done. Thus making them stronger, setting a better example for their kids, and over time, this country has no choice but to become a better place.

Individual freedom and individual responsibility are the key to a great society. It's really that simple. It's not a new concept. It's been around for nearly 250 years...

[mtdim]

BTW, liberals don't have the guts to admit that the white man has suffered enough for the sins of the Americans of many years ago. That's why I believe it's time the white man spreads it around anyway himself.

How, pray tell, has "the white man" suffered in this nation, ever?

[DaGooseMon]

How, pray tell, has "the white man" suffered in this nation, ever?

You think suffering soley belongs to minorities? Wow.


Try reading up on the treatment of the Irish, the Italians, the Germans, throughout American history. I'm not expert on it, but yeah, it was very real.

[mtdim]

You think suffering soley belongs to minorities? Wow.


Try reading up on the treatment of the Irish, the Italians, the Germans, throughout American history. I'm not expert on it, but yeah, it was very real.

I didn't say white people haven't suffered, only that they haven't suffered because of the color of their skin. Irish or Italian does not equal "the white man" any more than Ugandan or Sri Lanken equals "the black man."

A Ugandan in this country several decades ago would not have been treated badly for being Ugandan, but for being black. An Irishman, on the other hand, would have been treated badly for being Irish, not for being white.

[ConstitutionHugger]

The only way to limit, or prohibit the lower classes (your term, not mine) is to stop paying abled bodied people to not work. You eliminate the handout, and they have to hand it to themselves. The only way to do that, is for them to get off their but and get it done. Thus making them stronger, setting a better example for their kids, and over time, this country has no choice but to become a better place.

Individual freedom and individual responsibility are the key to a great society. It's really that simple. It's not a new concept. It's been around for nearly 250 years...

Very well put Goose!!! Ever think about running for POTUS? From your positions I'd vote for ya, even if you looked like your Avie.

The thing that is hurting our society is that it has become lazy and too dependant on a crooked regime no better than the mafia, that is our current govt.

[mgifford]

Mere coincidence of timing. You make it sound like cause and effect. That's not the case at all.

We started going down hill with Woodrow Wilson, it continued with Roosevelt, and really took off with Johnson and the Great Society. Now, we have people calling the cops because they can't get their chicken mcnuggets.

Common sense has left us as a society. We've created dependency through entitlements, replaced common sense with an 800 number where you have to press one for English, all the while paying abled bodied people to NOT work. And then bitch about the fact that there are jobs Americans won't do. That's right, I spelled it with a capital A. Unlike you.

Some will blame it on the communist agitators, funded by the KGB in the 60s, some will blame it on affirmitive action. Hell, some might even blame the natural progression of any society. I blame it on people being soft.

I blame it on Dr. Spok and all his ********. I blame it on these crybabies that weep because they have no self esteem, and yet refuse to do anything that would actually make them feel good about themselves, like work. Nothing better for the soul than a hard days work, that will always be followed by a good nights sleep. Truth is, if you can't sleep at night, you need to work harder. Works every time.

I blame it on people being spoiled rotten with every modern day convenience known to man. We want it in 30 minutes or less or we're crying to our Congressman about it.

And as if the gooberment hasn't screwed up enough things, they've managed to destroy our economy with more gooberment interference in our housing market. Well, thanks for that. See where that's gotten us? The gooberment tried to forcibly level the playing field for home ownership and how has that turned out?

You set me off on a rant there with your liberal "white people bad" ********. But you clearly have no idea what "most" republicans think. You're not one, so quit trying to speak for "most" of them. We can speak for ourselves, thank you very much...

Good one!

[mgifford]

My ideal is the American ideal. And our rights are all based on the individual. The American ideal has worked, better than any other system because of those individual rights. That's the entire idea of America. Individual rights and freedoms.

We're one of the richest countries in the world, and that is while being one of the youngest. You accomplish that through freedom. Not some nationalistic focus. The national rewards come from the individual input.

And I honestly think there is too much focus on fairness. Fairness is an illusion. It's an opinion. What's fair to you, may not be fair to me. Quit worrying about what's fair and get to work. The rest will work itself out.

Measure us to countries that are Thousands of years old and wonder why we're so great compared to them.

[DaGooseMon]

I didn't say white people haven't suffered, only that they haven't suffered because of the color of their skin. Irish or Italian does not equal "the white man" any more than Ugandan or Sri Lanken equals "the black man."

A Ugandan in this country several decades ago would not have been treated badly for being Ugandan, but for being black. An Irishman, on the other hand, would have been treated badly for being Irish, not for being white.

You asked how has the white man suffered in this country, ever. You didn't ask how they suffered because they were white. And what does color have to do with it anyway? Being treated poorly based on being Irish or Slovak is no different than being treated poorly based on being black. It's based on ignorance and bigotry, and therefore it is every bit as wrong.

Why should black suffering get higher billing in your mind? That's the question you should be asking. Not, how the white man has suffered in this country, ever.

Wrong is wrong. Color has absolutely nothing to do with it.

[angelicmadrigal]

Oh lord, it's the same tired "poor white man" argument. Look, it doesn't work on me when a minority or a woman tries to put on this ridiculous "feel bad for me I'm so oppressed" act. It really reeks of little kids going "But, but, his piece of the cookie is bigger than mine! That's not fair!" You know the fun thing about that both cookies could be entirely equal, but one or the other kid will whine and cry.

No one likes being on the end of a bargain they think is "unequal" and one guy is always going to try and get more than the next guy. Anyone that tells you they want only what's "fair" is a liar. All he wants is more than what he's getting right now, and that's irrelvant to race or gender.

[DaGooseMon]

Oh lord, it's the same tired "poor white man" argument. Look, it doesn't work on me when a minority or a woman tries to put on this ridiculous "feel bad for me I'm so oppressed" act. It really reeks of little kids going "But, but, his piece of the cookie is bigger than mine! That's not fair!" You know the fun thing about that both cookies could be entirely equal, but one or the other kid will whine and cry.

No one likes being on the end of a bargain they think is "unequal" and one guy is always going to try and get more than the next guy. Anyone that tells you they want only what's "fair" is a liar. All he wants is more than what he's getting right now, and that's irrelvant to race or gender.

And I wasn't making a "feel bad for me" argument. If you read the exchange between us, you'd know I was simply pointing out that black people are not the only people that suffered injustices in the history of this country.

Personally, I think anyone that clings to that type of argument is weak is merely making excuses. But that doesn't mean we can't acknowledge the facts that history teaches us. Which is exactly what I was doing in that exchange with mtdim.

Now, if you weren't directing your comments at me, then nevermind.

[angelicmadrigal]

Now, if you weren't directing your comments at me, then nevermind.

The OP in general. Honestly, the whole idea of this thread just ticks me off. I didn't read your exchange with whomever, I responded directly after reading the first post in this thread in order to show my distaste for the whole topic.

[angelicmadrigal]

Ya know what ticks me off? Its when you take the time to specifically order "tag-a-longs" from the "cute lil cookie nazis" aka Girl Scouts, and then to your utter shock you receive nothin but an order of "thin mints".....

Be happy you got any at all.....I haven't had a gil scout come by my house in EONS...::grumps:: I don't get a chance for even that mitaken box of cookies...::cries:: And I used to sell the damned things....got me addicted for 12 years and now I can't get my fix....::cries::

[mgifford]

The OP in general. Honestly, the whole idea of this thread just ticks me off. I didn't read your exchange with whomever, I responded directly after reading the first post in this thread in order to show my distaste for the whole topic.

Your distaste is a GOOD reason for you to refrain from joining in. That's your right, you know.

[Dreamy]

Ya know what ticks me off? Its when you take the time to specifically order "tag-a-longs" from the "cute lil cookie nazis" aka Girl Scouts, and then to your utter shock you receive nothin but an order of "thin mints".....


Hey I was once a Girl Scout! Back off bud! :twisted:Thin mints are better anyhow.


Ok now that the Cookie Monster has been slain let me say this:

Racism is very much a money making business now. It must always be fanned and flamed by those making their livelihoods off of it. Oh sure people will wax and wane and pontificate on all the inroads made and all the roads left to travel but in truth some of these racist promoting mouthpieces are doing just fine in their American dream lifestyles.

[BillyBobUSA]

thgats got to be one of the funniest things i ever read.......

Slavery has existed since about 5000 BC and almost all of them were whites, at least in the Western world.

So, white slavery amuses you?

That is pathetic.

[BillyBobUSA]

Oh lord, it's the same tired "poor white man" argument. . blah, blah, blah

So what?

I dont particularly care what you find 'tired'.

Your ignorance of history is palpable and your sense of what is just simply retarded.

Go whine somewhere else if you dont like this thread.

[Dreamy]

"Racism is a money making business right now"? Is that what you stated? Where? Please dont say what i think your gonna say.


Where shall I begin. Race baiters promote "racism" as widespread so as to help book revenues rise,speaking engagements,school funding,political fundraising,government jobs and on and on.

"Victims" can be like the cash cow for those who keep them in the victim mindset.

[BillyBobUSA]

Where shall I begin. Race baiters promote "racism" as widespread so as to help book revenues rise,speaking engagements,school funding,political fundraising,government jobs and on and on.

"Victims" can be like the cash cow for those who keep them in the victim mindset.


Your right, and we all know it.

But the looney-tunes keep on playing their same ole tune.

[F9thRet]

thgats got to be one of the funniest things i ever read.......

Really, why so? was there no history of Britian or Scotland where you are from? How about White slavery around the Barbery coast? We haven't even went as far back as Egyptian/Biblical times.

Even Ancient Greece held White slaves.

So why is this so funny to you?

Stephen

[angelicmadrigal]

Your distaste is a GOOD reason for you to refrain from joining in. That's your right, you know.

Nope, it's a subject that annoys me greatly, and when something annoys me I speak up.

[angelicmadrigal]

So what?
Hey if you don't have a problem with your arguement being exactly like one, one of my preschoolers would make over a cookie that's your bussiness.


I dont particularly care what you find 'tired'.
And I'm not particularly interested in whether you care or not.


Your ignorance of history is palpable and your sense of what is just simply retarded.
I don't recall referenceing any historical facts. What I recall referenceing was human nature and that human beings are self serving liars that like to pretend they are righting some wrong in order to get more from the other guy. As I said before that mentality is independant of any actual REAL race issue.


Go whine somewhere else if you dont like this thread.
I'll go into whatever thraed I damn well please and say whatever I damn well want. If you can't take it, that isn't my problem. If you can't take that someone finds your opinion tired and boring and frankly a veiled attempt at acting like a 3 year old whining over a toy or candy bar and trying to SOUND like it's only your "just"due, then I'd suggest the ignore feature and learning how to make use of it.

[Dreamy]

Vaard probably thinks its funny because its not "cool" or "hip" to think that whites were slaves as well. It wouldnt look cool on a t-shirt or to rap about on Mtv.

Or perhaps the masses have been educated poorly and thus they are only taught about black slavery. If the media was your only source of information you would believe that to be true.

[angelicmadrigal]

"Victims" can be like the cash cow for those who keep them in the victim mindset.

But doesn't yammering on about "reverse racism" stink of the exact same "victim's" mentality?

Just call it what it is on both sides, human greed.

[angelicmadrigal]

Or perhaps the masses have been educated poorly and thus they are only taught about black slavery. If the media was your only source of information you would believe that to be true.

I don't think most people are ignorant that slavery is a historic practice. It's in the Bible for god's sake. Everyone knows the Roman's had slaves too (from all people's they conquered). Lot's of cultural groups have practiced slavery I don't think most people actually believe that only American's practiced slavery. I also think most people recognize that MANY groups were involved in modern era slave trading. It's not a huge secret.

If you look at some modern day slave trade, more than one cultural group is involved. I dont' think anyone can ignore that slavery happens intra-race and extra-race.

[Dreamy]

But doesn't yammering on about "reverse racism" stink of the exact same "victim's" mentality?

Just call it what it is on both sides, human greed.


Reverse racism? Is it simply what is often defined as positive discrimination but in truth voting because of skin color or voting against skin color is racism but in truth I find it to be more along the lines of stupidism. lol

If all you demand is that someone look like you to cast your vote for them then this country is in trouble.

Nothing about the hue of an epidermis will help a person do his job better or worse.

[angelicmadrigal]

Reverse racism?
Well it is what the OP is about afterall. And in this case it seems to be rather than "the man" or "white man" is keeping me down it's the term white guys use to say "the minority man" or "women" are keeping me down. You know that everyone is so afraid of loooking racist they become anti-white or favor minorities and women more.


Is it simply what is often defined as positive discrimination but in truth voting because of skin color or voting against skin color is racism but in truth I find it to be more along the lines of stupidism. lol
Well in my opinion in this day and age, I feel like anyone that even brings race up is just trying to start something, and it's usually how his/her race is being shafted....because it's become such an easy way of getting what you want (to claim you're being discriminated against)...or at least getting people to pay attention to you.


If all you demand is that someone look like you to cast your vote for them then this country is in trouble.
Well you know some people are just that simple I suppose. Some people look at thier race as an "us"vs"them" kinda thing. It really is stupid.


Nothing about the hue of an epidermis will help a person do his job better or worse.
Normal, rational people know this.

[Livey]

After what white people have done to Amerindians, all the other nations of the globe, to black people and to nature herself, the record wont be balanced untill all white people spend a few centuries in slavery, poverty and as conquored subjects like all their victims.

That is what I was told in college anyway.

I'd guess the double standard that tells whites to shut up and just be glad we arent being robbed daily is here to stay for a very long time.

Obama was taught that his entire life, and now he is the President. I am so hopeful. Aren't you.

[F9thRet]

Vaard probably thinks its funny because its not "cool" or "hip" to think that whites were slaves as well. It wouldnt look cool on a t-shirt or to rap about on Mtv.

It might be. It might also be he was simply unaware of this, Or that he was being obtuse, or that he really finds White Slavery funny.

I'm hoping it was that he was unaware of this.

Stephen

[Livey]

But doesn't yammering on about "reverse racism" stink of the exact same "victim's" mentality?

Just call it what it is on both sides, human greed.

So there are never any actual victims?

[angelicmadrigal]

So there are never any actual victims?

Of ACTUAL blatant, malicious racism? Much less in this day and age, then in ages past. I'm very skeptical of people that try to use race in a conversation of any kind.

[ogibillm]

i'm a white male. i've never, ever been discriminated against because of my race or sex.

i'd love to hear a sob story from some white male out there that thinks he has though.

[ogibillm]

Really? You have never personally experienced racism in your life?

nothing comes to mind. i've never lost a job, been called names on the street, not allowed to move into a place, asked to sit at the back of the bus, or not allowed custom in a place of business because of my race.

[ogibillm]

Wow.....Hmm, then thats a good thing i would say.

one would think... but with the way people bitch and moan about 'reverse racism' i must be the anomaly. that's why i'd love to hear from some of those poor discriminated against white males out there. i want to show them my solidarity in their struggle against oppression.

[ogibillm]

Well, When i lived in Hawaii i went to apply for a job at a surf shop that clearly was hiring with the "Were hiring for all positions". When i walked inside it was obviously "Locally owned"(Simoa owned). Had i known that i woulda never stepped foot in the door. So when i asked them about the job 6 hawaiians stood up and said "Yeah we're hiring but not today or any other day you walk in here again". Most Hawaiians/Simoans hate white people.

that sucks. sorry to hear that.

do you think what happened to you is generally the exception or the rule?

[BillyBobUSA]

i'm a white male. i've never, ever been discriminated against because of my race or sex.

i'd love to hear a sob story from some white male out there that thinks he has though.


OK, I got layed off from a job though I had seniority and was the only white male developer on the staff. We had two Chinese women developers, two from India, two from Russia and a young black womanjust out of college.

I regularly fixed more bugs and wrote more code than anyone else there.

And *I* jut happened to get laid off.

Oh yes, and the two chinese and two Indians were also H1-B visa holders, supposedly in the country because no American citizens could be found to do the job.

You are being dense and willfully blind.

The WW2 generation got the white working middle class a better set of benefits, pay and working conditions than any working generation has ever had before, and we are letting ourselves get screwed out of it by simply being inattentive dullards.

[BillyBobUSA]

that sucks. sorry to hear that.

do you think what happened to you is generally the exception or the rule?


Of course its not.

Wake up.

[BillyBobUSA]

Of ACTUAL blatant, malicious racism? Much less in this day and age, then in ages past. I'm very skeptical of people that try to use race in a conversation of any kind.


Because you would rather not beleive it, twinky.

[BillyBobUSA]

Hey if you don't have a problem with your arguement being exactly like one, one of my preschoolers would make over a cookie that's your bussiness.

No, you just dont grasp the points made because you would rather close your eyes, cover your ears and go nananananana and pretend the workd is polyana rosey.

Which I dont care about, there are silly little girls all over this country, big deal.

But do try to stay out of the grown ups way, darlin.


And I'm not particularly interested in whether you care or not.

You dont care about ANYTHING except your treats.


I don't recall referenceing any historical facts.

Lol, as if you had any facts.


What I recall referenceing was human nature and that human beings are self serving liars that like to pretend they are righting some wrong in order to get more from the other guy. As I said before that mentality is independant of any actual REAL race issue.

So this cracker barrel philosophy you have adopted erases thousands of years of history?

Up untill Western Civilization started liberating its serfs, through the vast majority of mankinds history 98% of the population was either serfs, slaves or peasants, etc. We were ruled over by those who were willing to kill us if we did not do as we were told.

But with the advances made in technology, more leisure time became available and some began to realise that maybe this is not a fair way to run society. So they began to extend more rights, wealth and freedoms to the lower classes.

These wiser ancestors of ours took these advantages and ran with them, drawing yet more and more from the rulers till it became the masses of working class peole that ruled, and not the nobility, the class of proffessional murderers and their organisers.

But this has only been true for the last 200 years or so, a mere blink in the eye of history. We still have the descendants of our old rulers around, and they still run a great many things. Take a look at the Warners, the Cohens, the Madoffs, the Warburgs the Hapsburgs, the Romanovs, etc etc etc all still powerful and quite willing to reduce the working classes around the globe to peasantry.

They may be doing so right now.

And one of the favorite techniques used as recently as the European colonization era was to promote a small minority to a privileged postion within the colony and rule through them. Rwandas Tutsi ruling over the Hutus are an example of this.

This is how the real world works, girlie. One faction crushes another and sucks the marrow from their bones. We workers have been getting crushed fairly regularly untill we broke out of it not too long ago.

And niave ignorance like yours is the biggest factor in our getting put back down into the mud of history, if it happens.


I'll go into whatever thraed I damn well please and say whatever I damn well want. If you can't take it, that isn't my problem. If you can't take that someone finds your opinion tired and boring and frankly a veiled attempt at acting like a 3 year old whining over a toy or candy bar and trying to SOUND like it's only your "just"due, then I'd suggest the ignore feature and learning how to make use of it.

I am simply telling you that this issue is important to a great many people, and your ****y posts are unwelcome in my view and make you look like a shallow empty headed waif.

But if that is cool with you post away, sweet heart.

[mgifford]

i'm a white male. i've never, ever been discriminated against because of my race or sex.

i'd love to hear a sob story from some white male out there that thinks he has though.

Honest questions: What is your age, status in life and have you ever had to compete with black people for a job or position? If you're as old as 50ish, you had reverse discrimination all around you.
If you're as young as 25ish, you missed all the fun.

BTW, for those of you who detest even the thought that reverse discrimination exists. Is it that such a thing couldn't happen in America, or that the subject is ridiculous? Also, do you detest discrimination towards any person or color?

I suppose some of you didn't read my post about the Italian, recent graduate, girl, who was discriminated against when she applied for a job in her field. She complained to the hospital where she applied about AA hiring a black who wasn't near as qualified for that position.

The complaint did no good, so she (being naive and new to the workforce) called the NAACP. She asked the NAACP to help her because she was discriminated against, they said LOL! "we don't represent white people, just black people", LOL!

AA requires that a certain number of blacks be hired in all companies, and all positions, or law suits will be filed. Now, we can debate all day long but, that is fact. Want to argue it? There is no argument!

[EmmanuelGoldstein]

BTW, for those of you who detest even the thought that reverse discrimination exists.
Again, no such animal.

[mgifford]

Again, no such animal.

EMMA, generally I don't bother to answer some of your posts, because of statements such as this but, REALLY? LOL! For the sake of typing energy, one LOL will have to suffice, imagine LOL's as far as the eye can see back to you. LOL!

[EmmanuelGoldstein]

EMMA, generally I don't bother to answer some of your posts, because of statements such as this but, REALLY? LOL! For the sake of typing energy, one LOL will have to suffice, imagine LOL's as far as the eye can see back to you. LOL!
Well while you're laughing as far as the eye can see, consider this:

Discrimination is discrimination. "Reverse" discrimination would be impartiality.

But do carry on.

[mgifford]

Well while you're laughing as far as the eye can see, consider this:

Discrimination is discrimination. "Reverse" discrimination would be impartiality.

But do carry on.

Millions of Americans believe that you can only discriminate against the black people, so the phrase, RD stands as apropos.

[DaGooseMon]

Well while you're laughing as far as the eye can see, consider this:

Discrimination is discrimination. "Reverse" discrimination would be impartiality.

But do carry on.

As much as it pains me to say it, she's absolutely right. There is no reverse racism, there's just racism. There's no reverse discrimination, there's just discrimination. It doesn't matter what side is doing it, it is what it is.

[DaGooseMon]

Millions of Americans believe that you can only discriminate against the black people, so the phrase, RD stands as apropos.

Then millions of Americans, including yourself, would be wrong. Discrimination is not defined by who is doing it. It has it's own definition.

So therefore, it doesn't stand.

[mgifford]

However, it's in the Dictionary. Anytime I wonder if a certain animal exists, I look in the Dictionary, if I find it, I believe it.

reverse discrimination - 3 dictionary results
OnlineHarassment Training
Award Winning Course, Free Demo Includes Your Policy
www.HRtrain.com
Present Your Case - Free
Employment Lawyers Respond Fast, Easy, & 100% Secure
www.LawyersLegalLaws.com
Prevent Work Harassment
Freshen Up YOUR Harassment Program Consultant for Seven Phase Approach
jksuccessenterprises.com Sponsored Results
reverse discrimination 
–noun the unfair treatment of members of majority groups resulting from preferential policies, as in college admissions or employment, intended to remedy earlier discrimination against minorities.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Origin:
1965–70
Dictionary.com Unabridged
Based on the Random House Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2009.
Cite This Source
OnlineHarassment Training
Award Winning Course, Free Demo Includes Your Policy
www.HRtrain.com
Present Your Case - Free
Employment Lawyers Respond Fast, Easy, & 100% Secure
www.LawyersLegalLaws.com Sponsored Results
reverse discrimination
n. Discrimination against members of a dominant or majority group, especially when resulting from policies established to correct discrimination against members of a minority or disadvantaged group.


The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition
Copyright © 2006 by Houghton Mifflin Company.
Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.
Cite This Source

Main Entry: reverse discrimination
Function: noun
: discrimination against whites or males (as in employment or education)
Merriam-Webster's Dictionary of Law, © 1996 Merriam-Webster, Inc.
Cite This Source

[EmmanuelGoldstein]

As much as it pains me to say it, she's absolutely right.

Bookmarked!

[DaGooseMon]

Webster's is wrong.

And they constantly put in definitions of slang and what people believe the words mean. It also contains definitions for phat and gangsta. That doesn't mean you should use those terms.

And more to the point...

dis⋅crim⋅i⋅na⋅tion   

–noun

1. an act or instance of discriminating.
2. treatment or consideration of, or making a distinction in favor of or against, a person or thing based on the group, class, or category to which that person or thing belongs rather than on individual merit: racial and religious intolerance and discrimination.
3. the power of making fine distinctions; discriminating judgment: She chose the colors with great discrimination.
4. Archaic. something that serves to differentiate.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Discrimination?qsrc=2888


Is that not what you're talking about? Just because Dictionary.com has a phrase listed, doesn't mean you should use it.

[Greyclouds]

The only way to limit, or prohibit the lower classes (your term, not mine) is to stop paying abled bodied people to not work. You eliminate the handout, and they have to hand it to themselves. The only way to do that, is for them to get off their but and get it done. Thus making them stronger, setting a better example for their kids, and over time, this country has no choice but to become a better place.

So, you'd cancel unemployment benefits, social security and welfare? Alright, but how will you provide employment for all the unemployed? Provide government incentives for military service? Increase tariffs on foreign imports in order to encourage industrial growth here in America?



Individual freedom and individual responsibility are the key to a great society. It's really that simple. It's not a new concept. It's been around for nearly 250 years...

Yes, but will the dissolution of all social services to the poor/lower middle class really enforce a policy of individual responsibility? Or will they start turning towards crime in order to cheat the system?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hooverville

Sure, its fun to punish the "cheaters," but isn't that a pernicious plan that has already been tried before?

Instead, I'd like to propose a moderate solution. Have a minor social safety net (unemployment, etc) and KEEP current incentives for working SMARTER (working "harder" doesn't necessarily result in increased pay. Just ask the McDonalds workers of the world).

[mgifford]

Webster's is wrong.

And they constantly put in definitions of slang and what people believe the words mean. It also contains definitions for phat and gangsta. That doesn't mean you should use those terms.

And more to the point...

dis⋅crim⋅i⋅na⋅tion   

–noun

1. an act or instance of discriminating.
2. treatment or consideration of, or making a distinction in favor of or against, a person or thing based on the group, class, or category to which that person or thing belongs rather than on individual merit: racial and religious intolerance and discrimination.
3. the power of making fine distinctions; discriminating judgment: She chose the colors with great discrimination.
4. Archaic. something that serves to differentiate.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Discrimination?qsrc=2888


Is that not what you're talking about? Just because Dictionary.com has a phrase listed, doesn't mean you should use it.

I concede. I didn't really care anyway.

[Dreamy]

Webster's is wrong.

And they constantly put in definitions of slang and what people believe the words mean. It also contains definitions for phat and gangsta. That doesn't mean you should use those terms.

And more to the point...

dis⋅crim⋅i⋅na⋅tion   

–noun

1. an act or instance of discriminating.
2. treatment or consideration of, or making a distinction in favor of or against, a person or thing based on the group, class, or category to which that person or thing belongs rather than on individual merit: racial and religious intolerance and discrimination.
3. the power of making fine distinctions; discriminating judgment: She chose the colors with great discrimination.
4. Archaic. something that serves to differentiate.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Discrimination?qsrc=2888


Is that not what you're talking about? Just because Dictionary.com has a phrase listed, doesn't mean you should use it.

I do believe Affirmative Action often helped promote the term reverse discrimination. Often it is use when one group is given "special" treatment under the law. Preferential hiring can be one of the -isms but the "reverse" comes into affect when you discriminate FOR(versus AGAINST) someone based on color,creed,gender etc....

Yes all in all they all fall under the broader term "discrimination" except for the reasoning for the discrimination.

[mtdim]

You asked how has the white man suffered in this country, ever. You didn't ask how they suffered because they were white.

I was responding to a poster who said that whites suffer under our current society because they are white. Hence, in context, "suffering of the white man" obviously refers to suffering due to skin color. Why would I bother making the distinction white men if I was talking about suffering for other reasons?


And what does color have to do with it anyway? Being treated poorly based on being Irish or Slovak is no different than being treated poorly based on being black. It's based on ignorance and bigotry, and therefore it is every bit as wrong.

Why should black suffering get higher billing in your mind? That's the question you should be asking. Not, how the white man has suffered in this country, ever.

Wrong is wrong. Color has absolutely nothing to do with it.

I agree, color doesn't have anything to do with it. I was just challenging another poster's absurd assertion that "the white man" suffers under our current society.

[BillyBobUSA]

Again, no such animal.


Another ditsy, eyes-closed-means-it-aint-there response.

:rolleyes:

[BillyBobUSA]

I do believe Affirmative Action often helped promote the term reverse discrimination. Often it is use when one group is given "special" treatment under the law. Preferential hiring can be one of the -isms but the "reverse" comes into affect when you discriminate FOR(versus AGAINST) someone based on color,creed,gender etc....

Yes all in all they all fall under the broader term "discrimination" except for the reasoning for the discrimination.


I agree that there is need for some affirmative action, but not quotas as they are inherently discriminatory.

[BillyBobUSA]

Obama was taught that his entire life, and now he is the President. I am so hopeful. Aren't you.


Somewhat, believe it or not.

He is a daily reminder of what we have accomplished regarding race relations though we still have a long way to go.

[BillyBobUSA]

Millions of Americans believe that you can only discriminate against the black people, so the phrase, RD stands as apropos.


Agreed.

Aside from Emma simply ignoring/begging the main point; the government, laws and regulations of the United States of America allow for whites to be discriminated against legally.

Her pointing out the technical definition of 'discrimination' is not relevant as the meanings of words change and this one most certainky has.

She is trying to obscure the topic, not make it plainer.

[EnchantedFrog]

Why does the EQUAL OPPORTUNITY Employment Commission employ almost 50% blacks?

[EmmanuelGoldstein]

Why does the EQUAL OPPORTUNITY Employment Commission employ almost 50% blacks?
:lol:

You are hilarious.

[EnchantedFrog]

:lol:

You are hilarious.
You are deflecting.

The 2003 OPM report shows that in FY 2001, at the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the agency charged with defending the hiring privileges of selected races, blacks were overhired by 614.3% vs. their proportion in the civilian labor force. (It is no surprise that few non-minorities have ever won a favorable ruling from the EEOC in a reverse discrimination complaint.)

Source:

US Office of Personnel Management (http://www.adversity.net/fed_stats/OPM2003/opm2003_MainFrame.htm)

[ExDem]

Doing anything based on skin pigmentation is idiotic, so I think the woman that doesn't want to rent to blacks is an idiot. However, I also believe that you should be able to rent to whomever you wish if you are the owner of the property. Government has no business telling you who you have to rent your own property to.

[EmmanuelGoldstein]

You are deflecting.

The 2003 OPM report shows that in FY 2001, at the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the agency charged with defending the hiring privileges of selected races, blacks were overhired by 614.3% vs. their proportion in the civilian labor force. (It is no surprise that few non-minorities have ever won a favorable ruling from the EEOC in a reverse discrimination complaint.)

Source:

US Office of Personnel Management (http://www.adversity.net/fed_stats/OPM2003/opm2003_MainFrame.htm)

A little paranoid ?

[mgifford]

In all the posts on both sides of the issue, NOBODY ever addresses the small reason people do like this woman. It's so easy to just simply say "she's racist", "she hates black people", or something else that gets passed around, which may or not be true.

I'd love to see some of you who favor the belief that she's racists, make a decision to research her. Have any of you gone further to see exactly why this woman wants only to rent to whites?

Could it be that she simply has all the money in this downturn economy she could ever need? So that she just decided that she could get along financially in life without renting to anyone but whites, or is there another reason?

Has she been taken by people such as blacks, who tear her property up, won't pay their rent, then move out when they get good and ready, when the law evicts them? (eviction takes a long time)

Another question: Say that she has had no problem with the renters in the past who are black, WHY would she, in any manner, for any reason, ever in a lifetime want to keep blacks from renting her property if she can make money?

In answering these questions, a few things may be taken into consideration:
How old are you?

Are you old enough to have lived thru the "civil rights movement"?
Did you live in the "Deep South" in the 60's?
If so, can you honestly say that nothing has changed, come on?

Do you judge people today by their qualities, or do you simply say that, anyone you hear about on the news, like the above woman is automatically racists?

Did you learn about racism in "liberal" schools?
If you were educated in liberals school, did you simply take it for granted that your instructors and books were always, uh, unbiased?

Someone earlier told how the school books that describe our history tell a different story of Americans, from the Civil War until today. Again, how much have any of you bothered to learn about the South?

I remember being 15, when the "Movement" came to Atlanta (MLK's) birthplace and beginning of civil rights marches. Do you think I know what happened? LOL!

I say that many things have changed since the 60's, even tho the same old rants are used by the same old "do-gooders" to make white people look racist

Guilt held inside by many white people elected a black man to the WH, who obviously hasn't a clue what to do, so he just makes a lot of dumb decisions. Do I care if he's black, sure don't? There are black men that I would vote for and do in politics.

Anyway, I could care less what is said about this woman, because I already know that "she's tired of renting to blacks who destroy and don't pay".

Any of you can find more info about her if you try.

[mgifford]

Why does the EQUAL OPPORTUNITY Employment Commission employ almost 50% blacks?

Because blacks are 50% of our population right? LOL!

[mgifford]

Agreed.

Aside from Emma simply ignoring/begging the main point; the government, laws and regulations of the United States of America allow for whites to be discriminated against legally.

Her pointing out the technical definition of 'discrimination' is not relevant as the meanings of words change and this one most certainky has.

She is trying to obscure the topic, not make it plainer.

Yup!

[mgifford]

BTW, are there any posters who would care to offer a statement that "America has come a LONG way since the 60"s, and we should be encouraged? From what I see, the liberals will go to the grave believing that "racism" is as bad or worse than the 60's.

[Dreamy]

BTW, are there any posters who would care to offer a statement that "America has come a LONG way since the 60"s, and we should be encouraged? From what I see, the liberals will go to the grave believing that "racism" is as a bad or worse than the 60's.

I will.

I will add what I often do on these type of threads....

We have cradle to grave victims in this country and those who enable them or profit from them.

We also have people who need an ...ism to explain their own failings or ineptitude.

[mgifford]

I will.

I will add what I often do on these type of threads....

We have cradle to grave victims in this country and those who enable them or profit from them.

We also have people who need an ...ism to explain their own failings or ineptitude.

Thank you sir. You're so correct, the "race pimps" want to keep it going for a reason.

[mgifford]

Umpbay!

[Dreamy]

Thank you sir. You're so correct, the "race pimps" want to keep it going for a reason.

Ma'am but that's ok. I be a girl. lol

[mgifford]

Ma'am but that's ok. I be a girl. lol

I knew that Dreamy, I just for got.

[BillyBobUSA]

You are deflecting.



That is her one note she pounds day to day, post after post.

[BillyBobUSA]

A little paranoid ?

See what I mean?

[BillyBobUSA]

BTW, are there any posters who would care to offer a statement that "America has come a LONG way since the 60"s, and we should be encouraged? From what I see, the liberals will go to the grave believing that "racism" is as bad or worse than the 60's.


Yeah, I think things have improved and Obama's election proves it.

Racism is never going to completely disappear as it exists in the form of bigotry (which isnt *real* racism, in my book) in almost every society, even ones without a history of institutional racism like we have.

But hings have definately improved and it is a cause for celebration for most of us, but fear and dread for those whose living depends on the perpetual perception of the racist boogyman behind every bush.

[mtdim]

Racism is never going to completely disappear as it exists in the form of bigotry (which isnt *real* racism, in my book)


Could you clarify what you mean by that?

I need to know if it's time to get into a huge argument with you about racism. :D

[BillyBobUSA]

Could you clarify what you mean by that?

I need to know if it's time to get into a huge argument with you about racism. :D


lol, sure.

Racism is a system of thought that values people on the basis of race to any degree and that calls for the law of the land to discriminate against one race or races for the good/bemeft of another.

Bigotry is just the natural instinct to want to be with those similar to oneself and to justify that preference with rationalizations that essentially imply the other race is not up to personal standards.

That help?

[mgifford]

lol, sure.

Racism is a system of thought that values people on the basis of race to any degree and that calls for the law of the land to discriminate against one race or races for the good/bemeft of another.

Bigotry is just the natural instinct to want to be with those similar to oneself and to justify that preference with rationalizations that essentially imply the other race is not up to personal standards.

That help?

Actually, ALL Americans are "prejudice"!

[BillyBobUSA]

Actually, ALL Americans are "prejudice"!

Not sure what you mean by the use of 'prejudice'.

We all use prejudice every day as we dont conduct research before every possible choice to derive an exact decision for that specific situation.

We use inductive logic to form general conclusions and then apply those conclusions using deductive logic unless there is a good reason to do otherwise.

That is 'prejudice'.

To use 'prejudice' to deny someone unemployment based purely on the persons race is immoral, IMO, and I think illegal too. Our economy was getting some good expansion with the dismissal of many irrational forms of prejudice when it was used in inappropriate ways.

Besides, using prejudice to evaluate a person based on irrelevant characteristics like race and religion is a form of dehumanization that treats people like mere objects, devoid of humane consideration.

But prejudice itself is not a bad thing at all.

[croupier101]

We have elected a black man as president and that's about as AA as you can get.


If AA is the only way a black person can be elected President as you contend in your OP, then obviously your other theory that there is no longer need for AA would be inaccurate. You can't make both arguments at the same time.

[mtdim]

lol, sure.

Racism is a system of thought that values people on the basis of race to any degree and that calls for the law of the land to discriminate against one race or races for the good/bemeft of another.

Bigotry is just the natural instinct to want to be with those similar to oneself and to justify that preference with rationalizations that essentially imply the other race is not up to personal standards.

That help?

Ah, I see. I disagree slightly, though; I wouldn't say that bigotry isn't real racism, I'd say that it isn't necessarily real racism. While the natural instinct to associate with those similar to oneself may not be real racism, if that bigotry manifests itself in the form of my being less inclined to hire members of different races, then I think it is elevated to that status.