A Question That Must Be Asked: Did Hermain Cain Ever Benefit From Affirmative Action?

[Ernie S.]

As for the "A Question That Must Be Asked," it is worthwhile to note the present avatar of USAR.
So, no. That "question" not only need not be asked, it is kind of fucking stupid.

That avatar is disgusting.

This is the first poster here to give me reason to reevaluate my no bad rep policy.

Salt hasnt even prompted that.

Decisions decisions.

Go for it! I found it very liberating.

 

[Liability]

Since this thread started out as a racist tirade, I'm not that inclined to read through the whole thing.

Where has Herman Cain stated his position on Affirmative Action?

Back in '04 he had something to say on the subject:

Affirmative action is negative step | chronicle.augusta.com

 

[Dot Com]

USAR represents the Right's base well Must be all broke-up w/ the revelation about Glen Rice slammin that vanilla coochie and, to put frosting on the cake, Caribou announcing that she's not running

 

[Sky Dancer]

He benefited from the civil rights movement put together by all those "brainwashed" blacks he talks about.

Too bad he didn't participate.

Cain uses hateful rhetoric. Another reason I dislike him.

 

[Foxfyre]

No. The point was to note that your CLAIM (stated as a "fact") was just (in reality) a statement of your baseless opinion.

IF Mr. Cain had ever been the beneficiary of any AA, how is making NOTE of that anything that furthers the "discussion" commenced by the racist stupidity of USAR?

And how is it "hypocritical" anyway, to accept the benefit of a program that should always have been designed to be of very limited duration?

I'm entitled to my opinion. I guess your response is continuing name calling.

Nobody but nobody is disputing that you are entitled to your opinion. That is entirely beside the point.

The point is still that you have been unable (or unwilling) to explain how accepting the benefits of AA (assuming it's even true) somehow makes a "hypocrite" out of Mr. Cain who contends that it is not a valid program at this point.

And show me where my posts include name calling (other than to properly and accurately label a racist like USAR a racist).

You can't because it's not true. So your name-calling isn't even honest.

Is this the best you can offer on this discussion?

Amen.

Unions were once necessary in this country because of the unethical and oppressive policies of companies that literally enslaved their employees. The "company store" embodied in the song "Sixteen Tons" was a reality. It is not hypocritical to note that back then, the unions were a good thing but too often now are more oppressive and counterproductive and unethical as the companies that once prompted their organization.

It is not hypocritical to draw Social Security that you have been required to pay into your entire working life and understand that the system as it currently exists is not sustainable.

It is not hypocritical to accept government benefits that are offered and still believe that the private sector could provide the same benefits more efficiently, effectively, and economically without oppressing the people.

And it is not hypocritical to benefit from Affirmative Action fifty years ago and appreciate that the program is now no longer necessary or useful and is actually handicapping minorities instead of giving them more opportunity to advance.

To call those hypocrite who have moved on from the past is to deny anybody the right to change their mind, learn a better system,, understand new truths, or appreciate that something different is superior to what once was.

 

[Liability]

What is USAR? Spell it out please. You label it racist.

I'm saying, that Mr Cain is against affirmative action, yet he benefited from it. So, it seems to me the message he gives is, "I got mine, who cares about the rest of you." It is valid to question his motivation since he is running for POTUS of ALL the people.

I am asking questions and stating my opinion.

Whew. USAR is the author of the OP, USArmyRetired. His OP is the first post in this thread. Check out his avatar. Then ponder whether he is "asking" this so-called "question" for primarily racist reasons.

USAR's would-be "logic" is that blacks need AA to succeed because blacks are inferior and couldn't succeed without the beneficence of programs crafted by guilty white liberals.

You, I have no doubt, harbor no such overtly racist thinking. On the other hand, you HAVE kind of sided with his suppressed set of premises by questioning the Cain accomplishments in the guise of asking whether he is a hypocrite to the extent he may have been a beneficiary of AA.

The message Cain gives is that AA as a social engineering program comes replete with a BUNCH of unexpected and unintended baggage. IF he was a beneficiary of the incipient stages of AA back in his younger days, that doesn't undermine or undercut the validity of his position now. Nor does it make him a hypocrite. Nor does it suggest that he is saying "I got mine, the hell with you."

One can stake out a position on the issue of AA regardless of whether one has ever benefited from it, regardless of one's race and regardless even of whether one has changed one's original point of view.

You are perfectly free to question his motivation in light of the fact that he seeks the Presidency. But the basis for such "questioning" ought to be fair and reasonable. Yours really aren't.

Let's see if I get this. YOU call the opening poster a racist, but object to me noticing you name call. Then you continue to name call by saying that white liberals are guilty. I'm a white liberal. I don't feel guilty a bit. I am completely committed to equity in hiring and firing and I do feel that we are not free from racism and discrimination in the US.

Whether you think it is "reasonable or fair" for me to question Mr Cain, I do question him. I don't like him as a candidate.

I'm sharing what I think and feel, and I'm doing so politely. Like it or not.

YOU fear labels, not I.

In my estimation it has always been perfectly ok to call a potted plant a potted plant. It is ok to say a guy is short rather than claiming he is vertically challenged. It is not only "ok," but it is desirable to call a racist a racist.

A proper label is not "name calling," your irrational thinking to the contrary notwithstanding.

USAR is a racist. It's not even debatable. Look at his fucking avie for Pete's sake.

Snap out of it.

I support equality, too, but I don't support equality of outcome in most cases. I have supported and still support equality of opportunity. This is why I, as a conservative, have felt some sympathy for the notion of a LIMITED Affirmative Action program. Lots of my fellow conservatives disagree with me on that for very principled reasons.

So don't bother trying to paint me into one of your ill-conceived corners. I am not very susceptible to that kind of thing especially from one who attempts it in the plodding and transparent fashion you choose.

Let's see if we can get you re-focused (it looks like you prefer to wander around aimlessly for SOME reason):

None of your answers support your claim that Mr. Cain might be a "hypocrite" if he ever accepted any of the benefits of the AA program back in his youth. His stated positions on AA today are either meritorious in their own right (or at least worthy of debate on those merits) or they aren't. Care to address ON THE MERITS, what he actually SAYS on the topic, or would you prefer to continue with the cheap rhetoric of pretending that you have identified him as a "hypocrite?"

 

[Sky Dancer]

Whew. USAR is the author of the OP, USArmyRetired. His OP is the first post in this thread. Check out his avatar. Then ponder whether he is "asking" this so-called "question" for primarily racist reasons.

USAR's would-be "logic" is that blacks need AA to succeed because blacks are inferior and couldn't succeed without the beneficence of programs crafted by guilty white liberals.

You, I have no doubt, harbor no such overtly racist thinking. On the other hand, you HAVE kind of sided with his suppressed set of premises by questioning the Cain accomplishments in the guise of asking whether he is a hypocrite to the extent he may have been a beneficiary of AA.

The message Cain gives is that AA as a social engineering program comes replete with a BUNCH of unexpected and unintended baggage. IF he was a beneficiary of the incipient stages of AA back in his younger days, that doesn't undermine or undercut the validity of his position now. Nor does it make him a hypocrite. Nor does it suggest that he is saying "I got mine, the hell with you."

One can stake out a position on the issue of AA regardless of whether one has ever benefited from it, regardless of one's race and regardless even of whether one has changed one's original point of view.

You are perfectly free to question his motivation in light of the fact that he seeks the Presidency. But the basis for such "questioning" ought to be fair and reasonable. Yours really aren't.

Let's see if I get this. YOU call the opening poster a racist, but object to me noticing you name call. Then you continue to name call by saying that white liberals are guilty. I'm a white liberal. I don't feel guilty a bit. I am completely committed to equity in hiring and firing and I do feel that we are not free from racism and discrimination in the US.

Whether you think it is "reasonable or fair" for me to question Mr Cain, I do question him. I don't like him as a candidate.

I'm sharing what I think and feel, and I'm doing so politely. Like it or not.

YOU fear labels, not I.

In my estimation it has always been perfectly ok to call a potted plant a potted plant. It is ok to say a guy is short rather than claiming he is vertically challenged. It is not only "ok," but it is desirable to call a racist a racist.

A proper label is not "name calling," your irrational thinking to the contrary notwithstanding.

USAR is a racist. It's not even debatable. Look at his fucking avie for Pete's sake.

Snap out of it.

I support equality, too, but I don't support equality of outcome in most cases. I have supported and still support equality of opportunity. This is why I, as a conservative, have felt some sympathy for the notion of a LIMITED Affirmative Action program. Lots of my fellow conservatives disagree with me on that for very principled reasons.

So don't bother trying to paint me into one of your ill-conceived corners. I am not very susceptible to that kind of thing especially from one who attempts it in the plodding and transparent fashion you choose.

Let's see if we can get you re-focused (it looks like you prefer to wander around aimlessly for SOME reason):

None of your answers support your claim that Mr. Cain might be a "hypocrite" if he ever accepted any of the benefits of the AA program back in his youth. His stated positions on AA today are either meritorious in their own right (or at least worthy of debate on those merits) or they aren't. Care to address ON THE MERITS, what he actually SAYS on the topic, or would you prefer to continue with the cheap rhetoric of pretending that you have identified him as a "hypocrite?"

I said that benefiting from AA while criticising it MAY be hypocritical. I did not call Mr Cain a hypocrite.

I'm not going to name call, and I invite to do the same. If you don't, that's fine, I'll just stop talking to you.

Your posts are filled with personal insults. I'm trying to turn over a new leaf. I'm not going to respond to character assassination.

 

[Amelia]

Since this thread started out as a racist tirade, I'm not that inclined to read through the whole thing.

Where has Herman Cain stated his position on Affirmative Action?

Back in '04 he had something to say on the subject:

Affirmative action is negative step | chronicle.augusta.com

thank you.



p.s., sounds like Cain didn't need affirmative action. He seems singularly competent. Working full time for the navy while working on a masters in computer science while still in his early 20's?

Sounds like someone who just needed to make sure a door wasn't slammed in his face because of his color, not someone who needed anyone to lower any standards to artificially say he was qualified.

 

[Liability]

Having quoted Mr. Cain's piece from 2004, let's hear the man himself (courtesy of a YouTube clip), shall we?

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mR2Xr7DPGv4]Cain on affirmative action - YouTube[/ame]

I find the man to be remarkably clear in his thinking and also remarkable in his willingness to directly and forthrightly answer direct questions.

Further, I agree with him that quotas are a terrible idea.

Further, I agree with him that Affirmative Action can lead (and has led) to stigmatization of the beneficiaries of AA -- or of black people who didn't even GET any benefits out of AA. And that's doubly unfair.

It permits guys like USAR to portray the President as unqualified and only "there" because he was handed something in a discriminatory and preferential manner. And it undermines the credentials and accomplishments of guys like Mr. Cain.

 

[Sky Dancer]

I'm entitled to my opinion. I guess your response is continuing name calling.

Nobody but nobody is disputing that you are entitled to your opinion. That is entirely beside the point.

The point is still that you have been unable (or unwilling) to explain how accepting the benefits of AA (assuming it's even true) somehow makes a "hypocrite" out of Mr. Cain who contends that it is not a valid program at this point.

And show me where my posts include name calling (other than to properly and accurately label a racist like USAR a racist).

You can't because it's not true. So your name-calling isn't even honest.

Is this the best you can offer on this discussion?

Amen.

Unions were once necessary in this country because of the unethical and oppressive policies of companies that literally enslaved their employees. The "company store" embodied in the song "Sixteen Tons" was a reality. It is not hypocritical to note that back then, the unions were a good thing but too often now are more oppressive and counterproductive and unethical as the companies that once prompted their organization.

It is not hypocritical to draw Social Security that you have been required to pay into your entire working life and understand that the system as it currently exists is not sustainable.

It is not hypocritical to accept government benefits that are offered and still believe that the private sector could provide the same benefits more efficiently, effectively, and economically without oppressing the people.

And it is not hypocritical to benefit from Affirmative Action fifty years ago and appreciate that the program is now no longer necessary or useful and is actually handicapping minorities instead of giving them more opportunity to advance.

To call those hypocrite who have moved on from the past is to deny anybody the right to change their mind, learn a better system,, understand new truths, or appreciate that something different is superior to what once was.

He benefited from a system he now wants to tear down because he personally has no more need of it.

You may try to address my point.

Herman Cain uses hateful rhetoric and you support him. Cain wants the Government to ban everything that's against his religious beliefs while at the same time he's saying he's small government. Some real disconnects there.

He has no problem using the Christian Bible as a weapon to enforce his religious beliefs on the rest of America, but is afraid of “Sharia law?”

Cain campaigns on economy and small government, but once he gets in office he will focus on making Evangelical Christianity the law of the land. During the campaign he talks about how he is
going to protect U.S. jobs and reduce my taxes, but one he gets in office he wants to dictate whether or not I have access to birth control and who I can marry.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Since this thread started out as a racist tirade, I'm not that inclined to read through the whole thing.

Where has Herman Cain stated his position on Affirmative Action?

Back in '04 he had something to say on the subject:

Affirmative action is negative step | chronicle.augusta.com

thank you.



p.s., sounds like Cain didn't need affirmative action. He seems singularly competent. Working full time for the navy while working on a masters in computer science while still in his early 20's?

Sounds like someone who just needed to make sure a door wasn't slammed in his face because of his color, not someone who needed anyone to lower any standards to artificially say he was qualified.

I have yet to see any evidence that Herman Cain benefitted from AA, much less deliberately sought it out. Lots of people are saying these things as though they're self-evident fact, and I refuse to discuss them as such without proof.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kH1F5n7S5x4]Cain vs Obama: Racial Empowerment vs Entitlement - YouTube[/ame]


That is hateful?

 

[Liability]

Let's see if I get this. YOU call the opening poster a racist, but object to me noticing you name call. Then you continue to name call by saying that white liberals are guilty. I'm a white liberal. I don't feel guilty a bit. I am completely committed to equity in hiring and firing and I do feel that we are not free from racism and discrimination in the US.

Whether you think it is "reasonable or fair" for me to question Mr Cain, I do question him. I don't like him as a candidate.

I'm sharing what I think and feel, and I'm doing so politely. Like it or not.

YOU fear labels, not I.

In my estimation it has always been perfectly ok to call a potted plant a potted plant. It is ok to say a guy is short rather than claiming he is vertically challenged. It is not only "ok," but it is desirable to call a racist a racist.

A proper label is not "name calling," your irrational thinking to the contrary notwithstanding.

USAR is a racist. It's not even debatable. Look at his fucking avie for Pete's sake.

Snap out of it.

I support equality, too, but I don't support equality of outcome in most cases. I have supported and still support equality of opportunity. This is why I, as a conservative, have felt some sympathy for the notion of a LIMITED Affirmative Action program. Lots of my fellow conservatives disagree with me on that for very principled reasons.

So don't bother trying to paint me into one of your ill-conceived corners. I am not very susceptible to that kind of thing especially from one who attempts it in the plodding and transparent fashion you choose.

Let's see if we can get you re-focused (it looks like you prefer to wander around aimlessly for SOME reason):

None of your answers support your claim that Mr. Cain might be a "hypocrite" if he ever accepted any of the benefits of the AA program back in his youth. His stated positions on AA today are either meritorious in their own right (or at least worthy of debate on those merits) or they aren't. Care to address ON THE MERITS, what he actually SAYS on the topic, or would you prefer to continue with the cheap rhetoric of pretending that you have identified him as a "hypocrite?"

I said that benefiting from AA while criticising it MAY be hypocritical. I did not call Mr Cain a hypocrite.

I'm not going to name call, and I invite to do the same. If you don't, that's fine, I'll just stop talking to you.

Your posts are filled with personal insults. I'm trying to turn over a new leaf. I'm not going to respond to character assassination.

Again, I have not engaged in name calling in this thread. If you want to PRETEND that labeling a racist as a racist is "name calling," you are free to do so. I reject that sophistry.

You noted that if Mr. Cain benefited from AA that MIGHT constitute hypocrisy. But it might not. And you didn't even know if he ever got any. So your entire "point" was really quite pointless.

I don't care with whom you choose to communicate. But I see no reason not to call bullshit on you when you are so busy flinging such poo.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

YOU fear labels, not I.

In my estimation it has always been perfectly ok to call a potted plant a potted plant. It is ok to say a guy is short rather than claiming he is vertically challenged. It is not only "ok," but it is desirable to call a racist a racist.

A proper label is not "name calling," your irrational thinking to the contrary notwithstanding.

USAR is a racist. It's not even debatable. Look at his fucking avie for Pete's sake.

Snap out of it.

I support equality, too, but I don't support equality of outcome in most cases. I have supported and still support equality of opportunity. This is why I, as a conservative, have felt some sympathy for the notion of a LIMITED Affirmative Action program. Lots of my fellow conservatives disagree with me on that for very principled reasons.

So don't bother trying to paint me into one of your ill-conceived corners. I am not very susceptible to that kind of thing especially from one who attempts it in the plodding and transparent fashion you choose.

Let's see if we can get you re-focused (it looks like you prefer to wander around aimlessly for SOME reason):

None of your answers support your claim that Mr. Cain might be a "hypocrite" if he ever accepted any of the benefits of the AA program back in his youth. His stated positions on AA today are either meritorious in their own right (or at least worthy of debate on those merits) or they aren't. Care to address ON THE MERITS, what he actually SAYS on the topic, or would you prefer to continue with the cheap rhetoric of pretending that you have identified him as a "hypocrite?"

I said that benefiting from AA while criticising it MAY be hypocritical. I did not call Mr Cain a hypocrite.

I'm not going to name call, and I invite to do the same. If you don't, that's fine, I'll just stop talking to you.

Your posts are filled with personal insults. I'm trying to turn over a new leaf. I'm not going to respond to character assassination.

Again, I have not engaged in name calling in this thread. If you want to PRETEND that labeling a racist as a racist is "name calling," you are free to do so. I reject that sophistry.

You noted that if Mr. Cain benefited from AA that MIGHT constitute hypocrisy. But it might not. And you didn't even know if he ever got any. So your entire "point" was really quite pointless.

I don't care with whom you choose to communicate. But I see no reason not to call bullshit on you when you are so busy flinging such poo.

This thread has gone for too many pages without any actual proof that cain did, or did not, receive help from any govt affirmative action program.

 

[Sky Dancer]

YOU fear labels, not I.

In my estimation it has always been perfectly ok to call a potted plant a potted plant. It is ok to say a guy is short rather than claiming he is vertically challenged. It is not only "ok," but it is desirable to call a racist a racist.

A proper label is not "name calling," your irrational thinking to the contrary notwithstanding.

USAR is a racist. It's not even debatable. Look at his fucking avie for Pete's sake.

Snap out of it.

I support equality, too, but I don't support equality of outcome in most cases. I have supported and still support equality of opportunity. This is why I, as a conservative, have felt some sympathy for the notion of a LIMITED Affirmative Action program. Lots of my fellow conservatives disagree with me on that for very principled reasons.

So don't bother trying to paint me into one of your ill-conceived corners. I am not very susceptible to that kind of thing especially from one who attempts it in the plodding and transparent fashion you choose.

Let's see if we can get you re-focused (it looks like you prefer to wander around aimlessly for SOME reason):

None of your answers support your claim that Mr. Cain might be a "hypocrite" if he ever accepted any of the benefits of the AA program back in his youth. His stated positions on AA today are either meritorious in their own right (or at least worthy of debate on those merits) or they aren't. Care to address ON THE MERITS, what he actually SAYS on the topic, or would you prefer to continue with the cheap rhetoric of pretending that you have identified him as a "hypocrite?"

I said that benefiting from AA while criticising it MAY be hypocritical. I did not call Mr Cain a hypocrite.

I'm not going to name call, and I invite to do the same. If you don't, that's fine, I'll just stop talking to you.

Your posts are filled with personal insults. I'm trying to turn over a new leaf. I'm not going to respond to character assassination.

Again, I have not engaged in name calling in this thread. If you want to PRETEND that labeling a racist as a racist is "name calling," you are free to do so. I reject that sophistry.

You noted that if Mr. Cain benefited from AA that MIGHT constitute hypocrisy. But it might not. And you didn't even know if he ever got any. So your entire "point" was really quite pointless.

I don't care with whom you choose to communicate. But I see no reason not to call bullshit on you when you are so busy flinging such poo.

"Guilty white liberals", "racist". Name calling.

 

[Amelia]

I said that benefiting from AA while criticising it MAY be hypocritical. I did not call Mr Cain a hypocrite.

I'm not going to name call, and I invite to do the same. If you don't, that's fine, I'll just stop talking to you.

Your posts are filled with personal insults. I'm trying to turn over a new leaf. I'm not going to respond to character assassination.

Again, I have not engaged in name calling in this thread. If you want to PRETEND that labeling a racist as a racist is "name calling," you are free to do so. I reject that sophistry.

You noted that if Mr. Cain benefited from AA that MIGHT constitute hypocrisy. But it might not. And you didn't even know if he ever got any. So your entire "point" was really quite pointless.

I don't care with whom you choose to communicate. But I see no reason not to call bullshit on you when you are so busy flinging such poo.

This thread has gone for too many pages without any actual proof that cain did, or did not, receive help from any govt affirmative action program.

agreed.

 

[California Girl]

That is ridiculous. No one wants anyone to be victimized. I sure don't want to "keep my power". LOL. What power would that be anyway? Racism is not over. Discrimination still exists.

Herman Cain is running for POTUS, that makes his record open for criticism.

Stop demonizing the left, Fox. We're allowed to disagree with you.

I love how you spin things to make the left racist.

And yet, I don't see you protesting when the left do the same to the right. Fucking hypocrite.

 

[Sky Dancer]

Cain received an affirmative action promotion at Pillsbury. They promoted him because they were being sued for racial discrimination, a case that Pillsbury lost. With affirmative action helping him and Pillsburys money he couldn't go wrong. When Pillsbury bought Godfathers Pizza they were intended to buy just Burger King stores. Godfathers Pizza was not the major reason for the acquisition. Pillsbury, not Herman Cain saved Godfathers Pizza. After Cain took over he never posted any profits and loss statements.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

I'll be completely respectful skydancer.

Please show me the proof that Cain was a beneficiary of affirmative action. If he was we shall discuss it, if there is no proof then this topic is over.

 

[California Girl]

I said that benefiting from AA while criticising it MAY be hypocritical. I did not call Mr Cain a hypocrite.

I'm not going to name call, and I invite to do the same. If you don't, that's fine, I'll just stop talking to you.

Your posts are filled with personal insults. I'm trying to turn over a new leaf. I'm not going to respond to character assassination.

Again, I have not engaged in name calling in this thread. If you want to PRETEND that labeling a racist as a racist is "name calling," you are free to do so. I reject that sophistry.

You noted that if Mr. Cain benefited from AA that MIGHT constitute hypocrisy. But it might not. And you didn't even know if he ever got any. So your entire "point" was really quite pointless.

I don't care with whom you choose to communicate. But I see no reason not to call bullshit on you when you are so busy flinging such poo.

This thread has gone for too many pages without any actual proof that cain did, or did not, receive help from any govt affirmative action program.

Since when did the left give a shit about proof?