SCOTUS Rules On Race As A Placement Factor

[red states rule]

I didn't ask you what the "answer" was, I asked you if you were suggesting that the school budget dollars per student are the same in inner city schools as they are in white suburbs? yes or no?

now can you quit tapdancing and just type "yes" or "no"?

Yes, libs fall back how the schools are underfunded - and how we need to throw more money at the "problem"

 

[maineman]

Yes

I disagree.

 

[red states rule]

I disagree.

Is this how Twit Man would write a news story for The NY Slimes. Slice and dice the quotes to slant the story the way you want it

 

[maineman]

Is this how Twit Man would write a news story for The NY Slimes. Slice and dice the quotes to slant the story the way you want it

I asked you to type "yes" or "no". The first word in your post was "yes". I figured for once, you had actually answered one of my questions. I guess I was mistaken!

 

[RetiredGySgt]

and if conservatives would put their money where their mouths are, and actually funded schools in minority inner city neigborhoods like they do the all white schools in the 'burbs, then maybe you could bitch.

It is NOT the Federal Governments responsibility to fund eductation in any manner. In fact they do NOT have the authority. It is a STATE Issue, and the States chose to leave it to local communities for the most part to fund schools locally. Done by taxation of property for the most part, or bonds. Locals vote on these issues.

You do not like how your State runs the funding of schools? Do something IN your State about changing the Constitution of said State and the laws Governing funding. It is called Democracy, I realize that to liberals democracy is just a word and means nothing unless it happens to work to their benefit, BUT it is how our Governments operate, Republic Democracy is the law of the land.

Not one dime of my taxes to the Federal Government should be spent for Education , especially not in some other State.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

you forgot to answer this question.

You didn't like his answer, BUT he most assuradly answered your question.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

I didn't ask you what the "answer" was, I asked you if you were suggesting that the school budget dollars per student are the same in inner city schools as they are in white suburbs? yes or no?

now can you quit tapdancing and just type "yes" or "no"?

So, here again we have Maineman trying to force someone to cowtow to HIS opinion on how to answer a question on a public board. As usual it amounts to " I didn't like your answer, so answer they way I demand you to."

 

[lieberalism]

The only thing integration has done is now students have to waste their time learning about black history like it is actually important. oh, and teaching kids how bad our ancestors were. jesse joke-son wants every white kid to have to learn about africa before america. the reason inner city schools suck is because the minorities spend all their money on drugs and alcohol, not schools. why should white people pay for blacks education? that is like saying "hey most of these are gonna grow up to be criminals, lets just educate them more so they are better at stealing from us."

we need to get rid of black history month. hundreds of years of manual labor isnt something to celebrate. besides that, the only african contribution to america is probably jazz music. you can tell that is all theyve done, because bill cosby used to bring it up in almost every episode of the cosby show. they want us to respect africa as the place where civilization started, but they dont even have it there now! how did they have it before and not now?! they dont even have electricity.

we need a reform in this country and liberalism is the first to go.

 

[Chips Rafferty]

Ahh yes, lets be all Star trek now, since you won't admit to Socialist or Communist idealogy. The entire argument your making now is that because someone has more money then someone else that is segregation and I assume your solution would involve coming up with some magic number that everyone should have a set amount of income and BIG BROTHER should take from those that have more and give to those that have less?

Using your logic, Families generally segregate them selfs from non families ( well at least those with children) since they tend to all move into the same housing areas with extra bedrooms. Perhaps we should require that all hoses be built with exactly the same floor plan and same number of rooms and that EVERYONE married, family , single be given their own home? That nasty segregation.

I can further assume that your TOTALLY against the predominately Black Colleges that exist and think each of them should provide preferential treatment at acceptance for whites to "even" out that segregation?

Don't argue with Captain Underpants about prejudice, Larrikin.

As a Mormon, he knows all about segregation 'n' nigras!!

Why, some of his best "wives" are blacker than Midnight's arsehole!

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Don't argue with Captain Underpants about prejudice, Larrikin.

As a Mormon, he knows all about segregation 'n' nigras!!

Why, some of his best "wives" are blacker than Midnight's arsehole!

You are as ignorant as the people you claim to attack.

Lets see, Joseph Smith lived in the early 1800's. There wer a LOT of people that were white that did more than claim blacks were descendents of Cain and cursed. Same with Brigham Young and the third Prophet of the Church.

The 10th Prophet was quite some time ago also.

Your ignorance is astounding. You are aware of course that Mormons do NOT practice pologomy anymore? That the church through the Prophet declared it unacceptable before the turn of the 20th Century?

Further you are aware the Church has allowed blacks to be members for a VERY long time? The restriction being they could not be ordained in the Priesthoods or be allowed to attend Temple ( a lot of Mormons never gain the right to go to Temple).

The way it works , for the unenlightened, is that the leader of the Church is considered a Prophet of God. This means he can receive Divine Guidance from God. In 1978 such occurred and was also delivered to the 12.

For those unaware the church requires that each member be informed of this Guidance and that they pray and through the guidance of pray accept the word.

Were the original Mormons bigots? Most likely they were, as was the vast majority of people living in that time. Are present day Mormons bigots? I am sure, since we are humans, some are. But the Church is not. And the Church believed, correctly, what was taught by the Prophets. Just as the Church now accepts that the curse has been lifted and all members are granted the ability to be ordained in the priesthoods and hold any office in the church.

The real bigot here is Chips, he hates religion, all religion and anyone that believes in God through organized religion. Well at least Christian religions.

 

[red states rule]

Now the liberal media is openly showing their contempt for Judges that uphold the US Constitution


Not One More Roberts or Alito
By E. J. Dionne

Just say no.

The Senate's Democratic majority -- joined by all Republicans who purport to be moderate -- must tell President Bush that this will be their answer to any controversial nominee to the Supreme Court or the appellate courts.

The Senate should refuse even to hold hearings on Bush's next Supreme Court choice, should a vacancy occur, unless the president reaches agreement with the Senate majority on a mutually acceptable list of nominees.


And no Bush nominee to a lower court deserves any deference now that we learn that U.S. Appeals Court Judge Brett Kavanaugh may have misled the Senate during his confirmation hearings. Kavanaugh claimed he was not involved in administration discussions about setting the rules for the treatment of enemy combatants. The Post reported that he was.

Although a spokeswoman for Kavanaugh insisted that his testimony was "accurate," Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy said, "I don't believe that he was truthful with us."

As for the Supreme Court, we now know that the president's two nominees, Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito, are exactly what many of us thought they were: activist conservatives intent on leading a judicial counterrevolution. Yesterday's 5 to 4 ruling tossing out two school desegregation plans was another milestone on the court's march to the right.

Even after he was confirmed, Roberts was talking about something other than the 5 to 4 conservative court we saw this year on case after case. In a speech at Georgetown University Law School in May 2006, Roberts rightly argued that "the rule of law is strengthened when there is greater coherence and agreement about what the law is." It's a shame this quest for broader majorities had so little bearing on the 2007 Roberts-led court.

for the complete article

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2007/06/not_one_more_roberts_or_alito.html

 

[maineman]

So, here again we have Maineman trying to force someone to cowtow to HIS opinion on how to answer a question on a public board. As usual it amounts to " I didn't like your answer, so answer they way I demand you to."

If I ask you who you like better in this weekend's series between the Boston Red Sox and the Texas Rangers, and you "answer" by saying that baseball is not a very exciting sport and is nowhere near as captivating as ice hockey.....

you really never "answered" my question!

 

[red states rule]

If I ask you who you like better in this weekend's series between the Boston Red Sox and the Texas Rangers, and you "answer" by saying that baseball is not a very exciting sport and is nowhere near as captivating as ice hockey.....

you really never "answered" my question!

Keith distorts stuff almost as bad as MM

Olbermann Blog Falsely Asserts Supreme Court Overturned Brown v. Board of Education Ruling
Posted by Ken Shepherd on June 30, 2007 - 03:45.
The following was written by Jason Aslinger, a private practice attorney from Greenville, Ohio. Portions in bold below reflect the editor's emphasis.

The media’s contempt for the conservative U.S. Supreme Court reached new lows this week when it used a dishonest play on words to imply that the Court was against racial diversity in public schools.

That distortion, however, paled in comparison to MSNBC's Keith Olbermann, who announced on his blog (appropriately named “The News Hole”) that the landmark case of Brown v. Board of Education had been overturned!

Olbermann would have you believe that the U.S. Supreme Court had returned us to the days of segregated public schools.

http://newsbusters.org/node/13845

 

[Larkinn]

You can take race out by ignoring the color of all the kids - and treating them all equally

Something libs can't do

Really?

So you consider schools that are all white and all black in a diverse city to be "taking out race"?

Right...they just get to be segregated by a pure freak of nature, right?

Why are you for school segregation rsr...secret racist tendencies?

It is NOT the Federal Governments responsibility to fund eductation in any manner. In fact they do NOT have the authority.

Really? The Feds can pay for whatever they want. Nothing in the Constitution about that.

Yes, libs fall back how the schools are underfunded - and how we need to throw more money at the "problem"

Ah its just a coincidence that the public schools in rich neighborhoods are substantially better than those in poor neighborhoods, right?

 

[Larkinn]

Keith distorts stuff almost as bad as MM

Olbermann Blog Falsely Asserts Supreme Court Overturned Brown v. Board of Education Ruling
Posted by Ken Shepherd on June 30, 2007 - 03:45.
The following was written by Jason Aslinger, a private practice attorney from Greenville, Ohio. Portions in bold below reflect the editor's emphasis.

The media’s contempt for the conservative U.S. Supreme Court reached new lows this week when it used a dishonest play on words to imply that the Court was against racial diversity in public schools.

That distortion, however, paled in comparison to MSNBC's Keith Olbermann, who announced on his blog (appropriately named “The News Hole”) that the landmark case of Brown v. Board of Education had been overturned!

Olbermann would have you believe that the U.S. Supreme Court had returned us to the days of segregated public schools.

http://newsbusters.org/node/13845

Umm, actually this is a blow to racial diversity in schools. So saying that isn't a "dishonest ploy" its actually the truth. And it hasn't overturned Brown v. Board of Ed, but it certainly went against the spirit of it.

 

[red states rule]

Really?

So you consider schools that are all white and all black in a diverse city to be "taking out race"?

Right...they just get to be segregated by a pure freak of nature, right?

Why are you for school segregation rsr...secret racist tendencies?



Really? The Feds can pay for whatever they want. Nothing in the Constitution about that.



Ah its just a coincidence that the public schools in rich neighborhoods are substantially better than those in poor neighborhoods, right?

Typical of a liberal

When they can't counter the factual arguments they draw the race card faster the Jesse James drew his gun

 

[Larkinn]

Typical of a liberal

When they can't counter the factual arguments they draw the race card faster the Jesse James drew his gun

Read the court case. Its about race. This is obvious to everyone except yourself.

 

[red states rule]

Read the court case. Its about race. This is obvious to everyone except yourself.

It is about taking race out of the issue

How busing kids across town is going to solve anything is the question. Besides making libs feel good - there is nothing else this is accomplishing

 

[Larkinn]

It is about taking race out of the issue

How busing kids across town is going to solve anything is the question. Besides making libs feel good - there is nothing else this is accomplishing

The issue is about race, you can't take it out. Its like saying you want to take race out of slavery in the US...then talking about it becomes incoherent. You have nothing to say if you take race out of this issue, because its about race.

 

[red states rule]

The issue is about race, you can't take it out. Its like saying you want to take race out of slavery in the US...then talking about it becomes incoherent. You have nothing to say if you take race out of this issue, because its about race.

It is about trying to make libs feel good while using black kids as props (and doing nothing to get them a better education)