Andrea Mitchell says affirmative action does NOT harm whites!!!!!

[katsteve2012]

Re: "Actually the class/group that uses AA more than any other is white women"

That's possible - Care to back that up ? Given your History of talking out your ass I doubt you can - but hey anythings possible.

I can back her up. Before AA was defanged white women benefitted in larger numbers than any other group.
That has been common knowledge for years.

True.
Affirmative Action Has Helped White Women More Than Anyone | TIME.com

True.

Not one white WOMAN benefited because she was white. To continue to think so means you're yet another idiot that has to rely on it because you're too stupid to be able to compete with the only group not benefiting, white males. The thing is we don't expect to benefit. We can do it on our own. Apparently all other groups can't.

I am retired so I do not NEED to rely on AA, dumbass.

However, during a long career in marketing, bginning in the 70's, when AA began to show a trend of benefitting white females, I witnessed enough decision making by hiring managers to recognize that there was an effort in more than enough cases to see that if there was an opportunity to hire a non white female instead of a white female that more often than not, the white female was hired. And before you say anything, this includes them being hired over more qualified male and female minorities.....not just Blacks!


Are you actually stupid enough to believe that NOT ONE white female has EVER been placed for being female AND white?

In case you are newly minted alt right milennial, there was a time in the force when "decorum" meant "keep the environment as white as possible".

SMGDH.

Since it's inception under Kennedy and it's expansion since then, AA has increased the size of the umbrella for those it's design to protect. Lyndon Johnson, through executive order, expanded it to women. Supreme Court cases have been heard related to it and the Court said using race as a factor for college admittance was OK. Since the reason for it was to help those that were claimed to have been discriminated against, it isn't used to help the race that is regularly blamed for having such privilege they don't need the help.

In other words, are you stupid enough to believe something designed to overcome the perceived white privilege so many supporters claim occurs can benefit the very group it's designed to punish? Seems you are.

Since your words address the perceived white privilege bullshit you whiner bring up, I refer you to the previous question.

As for the double dip, it damn sure benefits those that are black AND female. A 2 for 1.

There was no "percieved white privilege" during the era that I am referring to..... it was a FACT.

Are you a guillible, blindly obedient fool who believes that just because a "policy" is signed into effect that it is immediately complied with 100% by all?

If so, you are ignorantly misinformed.

 

[Conservative65]

I can back her up. Before AA was defanged white women benefitted in larger numbers than any other group.
That has been common knowledge for years.

True.
Affirmative Action Has Helped White Women More Than Anyone | TIME.com

True.

Not one white WOMAN benefited because she was white. To continue to think so means you're yet another idiot that has to rely on it because you're too stupid to be able to compete with the only group not benefiting, white males. The thing is we don't expect to benefit. We can do it on our own. Apparently all other groups can't.

I am retired so I do not NEED to rely on AA, dumbass.

However, during a long career in marketing, bginning in the 70's, when AA began to show a trend of benefitting white females, I witnessed enough decision making by hiring managers to recognize that there was an effort in more than enough cases to see that if there was an opportunity to hire a non white female instead of a white female that more often than not, the white female was hired. And before you say anything, this includes them being hired over more qualified male and female minorities.....not just Blacks!


Are you actually stupid enough to believe that NOT ONE white female has EVER been placed for being female AND white?

In case you are newly minted alt right milennial, there was a time in the force when "decorum" meant "keep the environment as white as possible".

SMGDH.

Since it's inception under Kennedy and it's expansion since then, AA has increased the size of the umbrella for those it's design to protect. Lyndon Johnson, through executive order, expanded it to women. Supreme Court cases have been heard related to it and the Court said using race as a factor for college admittance was OK. Since the reason for it was to help those that were claimed to have been discriminated against, it isn't used to help the race that is regularly blamed for having such privilege they don't need the help.

In other words, are you stupid enough to believe something designed to overcome the perceived white privilege so many supporters claim occurs can benefit the very group it's designed to punish? Seems you are.

Since your words address the perceived white privilege bullshit you whiner bring up, I refer you to the previous question.

As for the double dip, it damn sure benefits those that are black AND female. A 2 for 1.

There was no "percieved white privilege" during the era that I am referring to..... it was a FACT.

Are you a guillible, blindly obedient fool who believes that just because a "policy" is signed into effect that it is immediately complied with 100% by all?

If so, you are ignorantly misinformed.

Unless there was an official program in place at that time where only whites benefitting, it was perceived.

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

The average Nigerian immigrant to the U.S had close to 15 years of education on arrival.

There is no way to verify that, you fool. Of course the tarbabies SAY they are highly educated. We need to insist they take a test like the ACT or SAT and see how well they do on that. THINK

Uh, I clearly posted a source.

I didn't call Blacks intelligent either, but merely pointed out that the Nigerian elite which is a fraction of Nigeria was disproportionately responsible for the high number of years of education completed in Nigerian Americans.

These dumbasses don't understand that Nigeria has 100s of millions of people, just like the whole of the US.

As the Nigerian population continues grow uncontrollably, they will get dumber as a whole.

More than 1/3rd of Nigeria is illiterate.

 

[katsteve2012]

True.
Affirmative Action Has Helped White Women More Than Anyone | TIME.com

True.

Not one white WOMAN benefited because she was white. To continue to think so means you're yet another idiot that has to rely on it because you're too stupid to be able to compete with the only group not benefiting, white males. The thing is we don't expect to benefit. We can do it on our own. Apparently all other groups can't.

I am retired so I do not NEED to rely on AA, dumbass.

However, during a long career in marketing, bginning in the 70's, when AA began to show a trend of benefitting white females, I witnessed enough decision making by hiring managers to recognize that there was an effort in more than enough cases to see that if there was an opportunity to hire a non white female instead of a white female that more often than not, the white female was hired. And before you say anything, this includes them being hired over more qualified male and female minorities.....not just Blacks!


Are you actually stupid enough to believe that NOT ONE white female has EVER been placed for being female AND white?

In case you are newly minted alt right milennial, there was a time in the force when "decorum" meant "keep the environment as white as possible".

SMGDH.

Since it's inception under Kennedy and it's expansion since then, AA has increased the size of the umbrella for those it's design to protect. Lyndon Johnson, through executive order, expanded it to women. Supreme Court cases have been heard related to it and the Court said using race as a factor for college admittance was OK. Since the reason for it was to help those that were claimed to have been discriminated against, it isn't used to help the race that is regularly blamed for having such privilege they don't need the help.

In other words, are you stupid enough to believe something designed to overcome the perceived white privilege so many supporters claim occurs can benefit the very group it's designed to punish? Seems you are.

Since your words address the perceived white privilege bullshit you whiner bring up, I refer you to the previous question.

As for the double dip, it damn sure benefits those that are black AND female. A 2 for 1.

There was no "percieved white privilege" during the era that I am referring to..... it was a FACT.

Are you a guillible, blindly obedient fool who believes that just because a "policy" is signed into effect that it is immediately complied with 100% by all?

If so, you are ignorantly misinformed.

Unless there was an official program in place at that time where only whites benefitting, it was perceived.

Are you joking? Prior to 1965, it was common practice based on Jim Crow laws that most minorities were only hired in most corporations to sweep floors and serve coffee.


Even with a college degree. And even after AA was introduced thete was not an overnight change.

 

[GreenBean]

I can back her up. Before AA was defanged white women benefitted in larger numbers than any other group.
That has been common knowledge for years.

True.
Affirmative Action Has Helped White Women More Than Anyone | TIME.com

True.

Not one white WOMAN benefited because she was white. To continue to think so means you're yet another idiot that has to rely on it because you're too stupid to be able to compete with the only group not benefiting, white males. The thing is we don't expect to benefit. We can do it on our own. Apparently all other groups can't.

I am retired so I do not NEED to rely on AA, dumbass.

However, during a long career in marketing, bginning in the 70's, when AA began to show a trend of benefitting white females, I witnessed enough decision making by hiring managers to recognize that there was an effort in more than enough cases to see that if there was an opportunity to hire a non white female instead of a white female that more often than not, the white female was hired. And before you say anything, this includes them being hired over more qualified male and female minorities.....not just Blacks!


Are you actually stupid enough to believe that NOT ONE white female has EVER been placed for being female AND white?

In case you are newly minted alt right milennial, there was a time in the force when "decorum" meant "keep the environment as white as possible".

SMGDH.

Since it's inception under Kennedy and it's expansion since then, AA has increased the size of the umbrella for those it's design to protect. Lyndon Johnson, through executive order, expanded it to women. Supreme Court cases have been heard related to it and the Court said using race as a factor for college admittance was OK. Since the reason for it was to help those that were claimed to have been discriminated against, it isn't used to help the race that is regularly blamed for having such privilege they don't need the help.

In other words, are you stupid enough to believe something designed to overcome the perceived white privilege so many supporters claim occurs can benefit the very group it's designed to punish? Seems you are.

Since your words address the perceived white privilege bullshit you whiner bring up, I refer you to the previous question.

As for the double dip, it damn sure benefits those that are black AND female. A 2 for 1.

There was no "percieved white privilege" during the era that I am referring to..... it was a FACT.

Are you a guillible, blindly obedient fool who believes that just because a "policy" is signed into effect that it is immediately complied with 100% by all?

If so, you are ignorantly misinformed.

 

[IM2]

There are more black businesses today than during segregation.

This is the first I've heard of that. You might be right. But rather than engage
you with my personal opinion alone, I will be diplomatic and insert links that best support my premise. That way you and I can remain friends.

Here is a rebuttal to your claim that there are more black businesses now than during segregation. I will stand in for the author as you defend your claim.
How integration led to the decline of black-owned businesses | Barney Blakeney | Charleston City Paper

"Before integration, black-owned businesses flourished, the guy said. In the past, Morris Street in downtown Charleston, along with Spring and Cannon streets, was a vibrant center of activity for black business. Those businesses flourished because blacks were unwelcome in many white-owned businesses.

A classic example of how integration caused the demise of many black-owned businesses is the former Dee Dex Snack Bar. During the late 1960s and 1970s, integration opened the doors of fast food restaurants like Piggy Park on Rutledge Avenue and the Patio on Spring Street. Until then, Dee Dex Snack Bar had been the premier fast food restaurant for blacks downtown.

The business was originally located on Calhoun Street where Gaillard Auditorium is now. The auditorium's construction displaced the snack bar and drugstore owned by the late Deward Wilson and scores of black families. When the business relocated to Spring Street, its business continued to flourish, but its days were numbered.

The old Brooks Motel, formerly located on Morris Street, is another example of how integration has contributed to decreasing numbers of viable black-owned businesses. Built prior to the signing of the Civil Rights Act into law by President Lyndon B. Johnson in 1967, the motel accommodated most of the civil rights leaders when they came to Charleston, including Dr. Martin L. King, Jr. Today, there's no sign of the motel or Brooks Restaurant, across from the motel on Morris Street. Both were demolished to make way for condominiums, which have displaced not only businesses but also families in the traditionally black neighborhood."

I'm black and have been in on the issues affecting blacks at the national level for over 30 years. I do not subscribe to the claim of segregation being beneficial. We have over 2 million black owned businesses today. That's at least 5 times more than we had during segregation. One problem is that the money we make for others is not integrated back into our community. We have 2 million businesses and get only 1/2 of 1 percent of all the sales receipts. Our tax dollars are not returned to our community equitably in the form of services and or community development. Banks full of black folks money refuse to loan the black folks money they are drawing interest on for loans to start businesses in the black community. These things go unnoticed by those who want to make claims pf how integration has hurt us. Integration of trade and investment in our community is what we need. And until that happens there are going to be problems.

Those are great statements, but I'm afraid I'm going to require some proof of your claims.

No, because you guys make all kinds of comments about blacks without ever posting proof even when asked.

I don't have to be making up things just because you want to believe something untrue about blacks. You guys believe your crap without questioning one another or by asking for proof.

I appreciate your clear-eyed inability to justify your comments.

You complain that the "money we make for others is not integrated back into our community."Yet, this has been disproven time and again. The per capita tax return to distressed communities is much higher than other cities.

Then, you claim that "We have 2 million businesses and get only 1/2 of 1 percent of all the sales receipts." Of course, you provide this without context, as if we're supposed to accept it on face value. Why is that so? What is the comparison to the other businesses? Black owned businesses constitute what percentage of all businesses?

Oh yeah ... just because I'm not willing to accept your statements, that makes me a racist, right? Sorry - I deal in facts, and you haven't provided any.

I can support what I say, but again you guys make all kinds of comments about blacks, unsupported, never ask for supporting evidence and than you want me to show you all kinds of evidence because you don't want to believe the facts. This is not about my inability to show a mother fucking thing. It IS about me refusing to do so on the basis on which I explained Ito you. I said the money we make for others has not been integrated into our communities because it has not. Distressed communities include small all white rural farm towns, mining communities and poor white neighborhoods. You have accepted racist comments without question, that's why you are a racist. I have presented facts. I believe black businesses are about 7 percent of all businesses, but only get 1/2 of 1 percent of all receipts. We earn over 1.3 trillion dollars per year, most of it with white businesses and what we spend with those businesses and deposited in white banks is not returned equitably to our communities. Those are the facts. There is a reason why the fucking Community Reinvestment Act was passed idiot and there is a reason why it's still law.You want to argue with me about this? Find the facts yourself then present them to me.

 

[Conservative65]

True.

Not one white WOMAN benefited because she was white. To continue to think so means you're yet another idiot that has to rely on it because you're too stupid to be able to compete with the only group not benefiting, white males. The thing is we don't expect to benefit. We can do it on our own. Apparently all other groups can't.

I am retired so I do not NEED to rely on AA, dumbass.

However, during a long career in marketing, bginning in the 70's, when AA began to show a trend of benefitting white females, I witnessed enough decision making by hiring managers to recognize that there was an effort in more than enough cases to see that if there was an opportunity to hire a non white female instead of a white female that more often than not, the white female was hired. And before you say anything, this includes them being hired over more qualified male and female minorities.....not just Blacks!


Are you actually stupid enough to believe that NOT ONE white female has EVER been placed for being female AND white?

In case you are newly minted alt right milennial, there was a time in the force when "decorum" meant "keep the environment as white as possible".

SMGDH.

Since it's inception under Kennedy and it's expansion since then, AA has increased the size of the umbrella for those it's design to protect. Lyndon Johnson, through executive order, expanded it to women. Supreme Court cases have been heard related to it and the Court said using race as a factor for college admittance was OK. Since the reason for it was to help those that were claimed to have been discriminated against, it isn't used to help the race that is regularly blamed for having such privilege they don't need the help.

In other words, are you stupid enough to believe something designed to overcome the perceived white privilege so many supporters claim occurs can benefit the very group it's designed to punish? Seems you are.

Since your words address the perceived white privilege bullshit you whiner bring up, I refer you to the previous question.

As for the double dip, it damn sure benefits those that are black AND female. A 2 for 1.

There was no "percieved white privilege" during the era that I am referring to..... it was a FACT.

Are you a guillible, blindly obedient fool who believes that just because a "policy" is signed into effect that it is immediately complied with 100% by all?

If so, you are ignorantly misinformed.

Unless there was an official program in place at that time where only whites benefitting, it was perceived.

Are you joking? Prior to 1965, it was common practice based on Jim Crow laws that most minorities were only hired in most corporations to sweep floors and serve coffee.


Even with a college degree. And even after AA was introduced thete was not an overnight change.

It's been 55 years since AA was introduced and the same arguments in support of it exist today as when it was first introduced.

From the time I was in first grade, I attended schools with all races/ethnicities. We sat in the same classes, used the same books, had the same teachers, used the same desks, received the same lessons, etc. To hear people my age today say they didn't have the same opportunities as I did is bullshit.

 

[Conservative65]

This is the first I've heard of that. You might be right. But rather than engage
you with my personal opinion alone, I will be diplomatic and insert links that best support my premise. That way you and I can remain friends.

Here is a rebuttal to your claim that there are more black businesses now than during segregation. I will stand in for the author as you defend your claim.
How integration led to the decline of black-owned businesses | Barney Blakeney | Charleston City Paper

"Before integration, black-owned businesses flourished, the guy said. In the past, Morris Street in downtown Charleston, along with Spring and Cannon streets, was a vibrant center of activity for black business. Those businesses flourished because blacks were unwelcome in many white-owned businesses.

A classic example of how integration caused the demise of many black-owned businesses is the former Dee Dex Snack Bar. During the late 1960s and 1970s, integration opened the doors of fast food restaurants like Piggy Park on Rutledge Avenue and the Patio on Spring Street. Until then, Dee Dex Snack Bar had been the premier fast food restaurant for blacks downtown.

The business was originally located on Calhoun Street where Gaillard Auditorium is now. The auditorium's construction displaced the snack bar and drugstore owned by the late Deward Wilson and scores of black families. When the business relocated to Spring Street, its business continued to flourish, but its days were numbered.

The old Brooks Motel, formerly located on Morris Street, is another example of how integration has contributed to decreasing numbers of viable black-owned businesses. Built prior to the signing of the Civil Rights Act into law by President Lyndon B. Johnson in 1967, the motel accommodated most of the civil rights leaders when they came to Charleston, including Dr. Martin L. King, Jr. Today, there's no sign of the motel or Brooks Restaurant, across from the motel on Morris Street. Both were demolished to make way for condominiums, which have displaced not only businesses but also families in the traditionally black neighborhood."

I'm black and have been in on the issues affecting blacks at the national level for over 30 years. I do not subscribe to the claim of segregation being beneficial. We have over 2 million black owned businesses today. That's at least 5 times more than we had during segregation. One problem is that the money we make for others is not integrated back into our community. We have 2 million businesses and get only 1/2 of 1 percent of all the sales receipts. Our tax dollars are not returned to our community equitably in the form of services and or community development. Banks full of black folks money refuse to loan the black folks money they are drawing interest on for loans to start businesses in the black community. These things go unnoticed by those who want to make claims pf how integration has hurt us. Integration of trade and investment in our community is what we need. And until that happens there are going to be problems.

Those are great statements, but I'm afraid I'm going to require some proof of your claims.

No, because you guys make all kinds of comments about blacks without ever posting proof even when asked.

I don't have to be making up things just because you want to believe something untrue about blacks. You guys believe your crap without questioning one another or by asking for proof.

I appreciate your clear-eyed inability to justify your comments.

You complain that the "money we make for others is not integrated back into our community."Yet, this has been disproven time and again. The per capita tax return to distressed communities is much higher than other cities.

Then, you claim that "We have 2 million businesses and get only 1/2 of 1 percent of all the sales receipts." Of course, you provide this without context, as if we're supposed to accept it on face value. Why is that so? What is the comparison to the other businesses? Black owned businesses constitute what percentage of all businesses?

Oh yeah ... just because I'm not willing to accept your statements, that makes me a racist, right? Sorry - I deal in facts, and you haven't provided any.

I can support what I say, but again you guys make all kinds of comments about blacks, unsupported, never ask for supporting evidence and than you want me to show you all kinds of evidence because you don't want to believe the facts. This is not about my inability to show a mother fucking thing. It IS about me refusing to do so on the basis on which I explained Ito you. I said the money we make for others has not been integrated into our communities because it has not. Distressed communities include small all white rural farm towns, mining communities and poor white neighborhoods. You have accepted racist comments without question, that's why you are a racist. I have presented facts. I believe black businesses are about 7 percent of all businesses, but only get 1/2 of 1 percent of all receipts. We earn over 1.3 trillion dollars per year, most of it with white businesses and what we spend with those businesses and deposited in white banks is not returned equitably to our communities. Those are the facts. There is a reason why the fucking Community Reinvestment Act was passed idiot and there is a reason why it's still law.You want to argue with me about this? Find the facts yourself then present them to me.

I've posted that blacks produce bastards at a 3 out of 4 rate. I've provided evidence to support it. I've posted that blacks use food stamps at a 1 in every 3 1/2 rate and have provided evidence to support it. ]

If blacks want to help their communities, let them get their own house in order before demanding others do it for them.

 

[IM2]

Geezz. I wasn't talking about your OPost. I was talking about the sketchy back up material that you linked to.

The link was clear enough for those who are prone to objectivuty. For those who just won't accept Blacks as equals there is always something to pick at. If the link was not good enough for you, there are hundreds more on the same topic saying the same thing in different words.

That's BS about blacks at the pinnacle of academic achievement not being hired. In terms of those IMMIGRANT (student VISA) kids, this could be true. Because it applies to ALL FOREIGN students who must get some kind of Green Card to remain and WORK in the US.

I'm not sure green carders are the immigrants mentioned in the article.
I did notice a reference to the American born progeny of African immigrants who wouldn't need a green card since they are citizens. Yet, the inference was that they too, despite superior academic achievements, were among the underemployed.

And the diff between your foreign Black students and American Black kids is that ALL of the "immigrant" students were ALREADY the "cream of the crop" in their country and I'll bet MOST come from the top 1% of the economic stratas of their home country as well.

I'm a bit chagrined by your reference to bright Nigerian immigrants as the "cream of the crop" in their country as if to devalue their achievments here.That's sort of a veiled put down. You seem to have a mental block that won't allow you to see them as the cream of the crop in the diverse USA. Too bad...the facts are public...

NO COMPARISON at ALL between students on Visas and getting educational parity HERE at home for Black kids.

Before you can conclude that, you have to show some reasonable proof that the immigrants referenced in the article are mostly on visas. The word immigrant can also be applied to those who have attained citizenship.

You don't magically get INFUSED with goals and inspiration BY a College. If you choose a bad major -- that's ON YOU --- not a requirement of White Racists that you be a Sports Comme

You claim to have read the links I provided, yet you missed some of the most important data indicating that Blacks and hispanics are graduating from tech scools at twice the rate they are being hired.

How about a Physicist or a Plastic Surgeon or a Chemical Engineer or an Aerospace designer

You are falling behind the times..join the NAACP or something...that might be of some value in helping you to understand. some of your darker fellow Americans.

If a black uses affirmative action to get something, they aren't equal. If they were, they wouldn't have to use it.

The part you're not getting is WHY they apply from "unequal" status.

If an Alaskan Inuit Indian went to a wise man in the Yukon for tutoring and got "fairly decent" grades and a "good" SAT score and was otherwise qualified to attend the college --- SHOULD THAT DISADVANTAGE of previous opportunity be taked into account?? Need an answer here....

It's not about remedying INHERENT inequality because of race. It's about remedying ACTUAL inequity in the opportunities that the govt and society that they had to SURPASS to get to the college application..

It's about using race to benefit a group whose entire argument in support of such programs is about how using race is those situations is wrong. If one is going to argue using race was wrong when it denied, arguing that using race because it helps you doesn't make it OK.

This is a dumb statement that denies exactly why this policy was made. It was made to provide equal opportunity. Now the only reason why anyone white argues against this is they believe that 100 percent white is equal opportunity.

A black can't use affirmative action to get shit. We can't just go up to a school and apply for affirmative action. Maybe you whites need to learn how things really are instead of listening to a bunch of idiot college dropout white radio talk show hosts.

 

[IM2]

I am retired so I do not NEED to rely on AA, dumbass.

However, during a long career in marketing, bginning in the 70's, when AA began to show a trend of benefitting white females, I witnessed enough decision making by hiring managers to recognize that there was an effort in more than enough cases to see that if there was an opportunity to hire a non white female instead of a white female that more often than not, the white female was hired. And before you say anything, this includes them being hired over more qualified male and female minorities.....not just Blacks!


Are you actually stupid enough to believe that NOT ONE white female has EVER been placed for being female AND white?

In case you are newly minted alt right milennial, there was a time in the force when "decorum" meant "keep the environment as white as possible".

SMGDH.

Since it's inception under Kennedy and it's expansion since then, AA has increased the size of the umbrella for those it's design to protect. Lyndon Johnson, through executive order, expanded it to women. Supreme Court cases have been heard related to it and the Court said using race as a factor for college admittance was OK. Since the reason for it was to help those that were claimed to have been discriminated against, it isn't used to help the race that is regularly blamed for having such privilege they don't need the help.

In other words, are you stupid enough to believe something designed to overcome the perceived white privilege so many supporters claim occurs can benefit the very group it's designed to punish? Seems you are.

Since your words address the perceived white privilege bullshit you whiner bring up, I refer you to the previous question.

As for the double dip, it damn sure benefits those that are black AND female. A 2 for 1.

There was no "percieved white privilege" during the era that I am referring to..... it was a FACT.

Are you a guillible, blindly obedient fool who believes that just because a "policy" is signed into effect that it is immediately complied with 100% by all?

If so, you are ignorantly misinformed.

Unless there was an official program in place at that time where only whites benefitting, it was perceived.

Are you joking? Prior to 1965, it was common practice based on Jim Crow laws that most minorities were only hired in most corporations to sweep floors and serve coffee.


Even with a college degree. And even after AA was introduced thete was not an overnight change.

It's been 55 years since AA was introduced and the same arguments in support of it exist today as when it was first introduced.

From the time I was in first grade, I attended schools with all races/ethnicities. We sat in the same classes, used the same books, had the same teachers, used the same desks, received the same lessons, etc. To hear people my age today say they didn't have the same opportunities as I did is bullshit.

Because the same things exist. Yeah people your age can say they don't have the same opportunities as you and be right. You went to schools with all races, which means you could have had one black in your class. You do not know the attitudes of the teachers towards the, Then after everyone left school you don't now what opportunities were denied.

 

[IM2]

I'm black and have been in on the issues affecting blacks at the national level for over 30 years. I do not subscribe to the claim of segregation being beneficial. We have over 2 million black owned businesses today. That's at least 5 times more than we had during segregation. One problem is that the money we make for others is not integrated back into our community. We have 2 million businesses and get only 1/2 of 1 percent of all the sales receipts. Our tax dollars are not returned to our community equitably in the form of services and or community development. Banks full of black folks money refuse to loan the black folks money they are drawing interest on for loans to start businesses in the black community. These things go unnoticed by those who want to make claims pf how integration has hurt us. Integration of trade and investment in our community is what we need. And until that happens there are going to be problems.

Those are great statements, but I'm afraid I'm going to require some proof of your claims.

No, because you guys make all kinds of comments about blacks without ever posting proof even when asked.

I don't have to be making up things just because you want to believe something untrue about blacks. You guys believe your crap without questioning one another or by asking for proof.

I appreciate your clear-eyed inability to justify your comments.

You complain that the "money we make for others is not integrated back into our community."Yet, this has been disproven time and again. The per capita tax return to distressed communities is much higher than other cities.

Then, you claim that "We have 2 million businesses and get only 1/2 of 1 percent of all the sales receipts." Of course, you provide this without context, as if we're supposed to accept it on face value. Why is that so? What is the comparison to the other businesses? Black owned businesses constitute what percentage of all businesses?

Oh yeah ... just because I'm not willing to accept your statements, that makes me a racist, right? Sorry - I deal in facts, and you haven't provided any.

I can support what I say, but again you guys make all kinds of comments about blacks, unsupported, never ask for supporting evidence and than you want me to show you all kinds of evidence because you don't want to believe the facts. This is not about my inability to show a mother fucking thing. It IS about me refusing to do so on the basis on which I explained Ito you. I said the money we make for others has not been integrated into our communities because it has not. Distressed communities include small all white rural farm towns, mining communities and poor white neighborhoods. You have accepted racist comments without question, that's why you are a racist. I have presented facts. I believe black businesses are about 7 percent of all businesses, but only get 1/2 of 1 percent of all receipts. We earn over 1.3 trillion dollars per year, most of it with white businesses and what we spend with those businesses and deposited in white banks is not returned equitably to our communities. Those are the facts. There is a reason why the fucking Community Reinvestment Act was passed idiot and there is a reason why it's still law.You want to argue with me about this? Find the facts yourself then present them to me.

I've posted that blacks produce bastards at a 3 out of 4 rate. I've provided evidence to support it. I've posted that blacks use food stamps at a 1 in every 3 1/2 rate and have provided evidence to support it. ]

If blacks want to help their communities, let them get their own house in order before demanding others do it for them.

Well you are wrong. What you don't post is that blacks live at double the rate of poverty while whites live at a rate 8 times less than their population. You also don't mention the rate of married blacks having children declined and that those kids you call bastards are only bastards because the couple is not married. If they live together that's an unwed birth and you call that kid a bastard, yet he has a mom and dad in the home. So your posts are inaccurate and based upon your racism, not fact. So when one talks about house cleaning, whites need to do that in their own community. Because no one is asking your white asses to do shit for them. DO YOU UNDERSTAND?

 

[IM2]

True.
Affirmative Action Has Helped White Women More Than Anyone | TIME.com

True.

Not one white WOMAN benefited because she was white. To continue to think so means you're yet another idiot that has to rely on it because you're too stupid to be able to compete with the only group not benefiting, white males. The thing is we don't expect to benefit. We can do it on our own. Apparently all other groups can't.

I am retired so I do not NEED to rely on AA, dumbass.

However, during a long career in marketing, bginning in the 70's, when AA began to show a trend of benefitting white females, I witnessed enough decision making by hiring managers to recognize that there was an effort in more than enough cases to see that if there was an opportunity to hire a non white female instead of a white female that more often than not, the white female was hired. And before you say anything, this includes them being hired over more qualified male and female minorities.....not just Blacks!


Are you actually stupid enough to believe that NOT ONE white female has EVER been placed for being female AND white?

In case you are newly minted alt right milennial, there was a time in the force when "decorum" meant "keep the environment as white as possible".

SMGDH.

Since it's inception under Kennedy and it's expansion since then, AA has increased the size of the umbrella for those it's design to protect. Lyndon Johnson, through executive order, expanded it to women. Supreme Court cases have been heard related to it and the Court said using race as a factor for college admittance was OK. Since the reason for it was to help those that were claimed to have been discriminated against, it isn't used to help the race that is regularly blamed for having such privilege they don't need the help.

In other words, are you stupid enough to believe something designed to overcome the perceived white privilege so many supporters claim occurs can benefit the very group it's designed to punish? Seems you are.

Since your words address the perceived white privilege bullshit you whiner bring up, I refer you to the previous question.

As for the double dip, it damn sure benefits those that are black AND female. A 2 for 1.

There was no "percieved white privilege" during the era that I am referring to..... it was a FACT.

Are you a guillible, blindly obedient fool who believes that just because a "policy" is signed into effect that it is immediately complied with 100% by all?

If so, you are ignorantly misinformed.

Unless there was an official program in place at that time where only whites benefitting, it was perceived.

.What the fuck do you think segregation was idiot? It was nation wide and the policies and laws only benefited whites.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

The average Nigerian immigrant to the U.S had close to 15 years of education on arrival.

There is no way to verify that, you fool. Of course the tarbabies SAY they are highly educated. We need to insist they take a test like the ACT or SAT and see how well they do on that. THINK

Uh, I clearly posted a source.

I didn't call Blacks intelligent either, but merely pointed out that the Nigerian elite which is a fraction of Nigeria was disproportionately responsible for the high number of years of education completed in Nigerian Americans.

So what.? ASIANS have been sending their best and brightest too. So where was your proportional argument then?
You just hate Blacks to the extent that you will never accept any positive achievements they make. And you are not alone. Hundreds of racist authors have responded with frivolous rebuttals
and pseudo scientific reasoning to explain away their worst nightmare: the unveiling of superintelligent Africans.
But even in the segregated history of this nation many Black American achievements should have predicted the hidden human talent that would one day rise from the dark continent. The Tuskeegee airmen....Vivian Thomas...
Ben Carson...George Washington Carver..and other. Black contributors to this great nation, in effect, prophesied the present phenomenon.

The larger significance, though, is that Black Africans have elevated themselves beyond the stereotypical view relegating the lot of them to universal mental inferiority. These modern day high achlevers have all but validated the argument that their ancestors or people like them kick started civilization in ancient KMT which fell as did the later Greco-Roman Empire which supplanted them.

Asian Americans are actually dumber than the elite in Asia.

Asians who come here merely had the money to do so, while Asians who are recognized as the intellectual elite in Asian countries actually had to prove that they are just that, multiple times.

Rote Is Rot

Being able to memorize Confucius is what stupid people think is an intellectual achievement.

 

[Conservative65]

Geezz. I wasn't talking about your OPost. I was talking about the sketchy back up material that you linked to.

The link was clear enough for those who are prone to objectivuty. For those who just won't accept Blacks as equals there is always something to pick at. If the link was not good enough for you, there are hundreds more on the same topic saying the same thing in different words.

That's BS about blacks at the pinnacle of academic achievement not being hired. In terms of those IMMIGRANT (student VISA) kids, this could be true. Because it applies to ALL FOREIGN students who must get some kind of Green Card to remain and WORK in the US.

I'm not sure green carders are the immigrants mentioned in the article.
I did notice a reference to the American born progeny of African immigrants who wouldn't need a green card since they are citizens. Yet, the inference was that they too, despite superior academic achievements, were among the underemployed.

And the diff between your foreign Black students and American Black kids is that ALL of the "immigrant" students were ALREADY the "cream of the crop" in their country and I'll bet MOST come from the top 1% of the economic stratas of their home country as well.

I'm a bit chagrined by your reference to bright Nigerian immigrants as the "cream of the crop" in their country as if to devalue their achievments here.That's sort of a veiled put down. You seem to have a mental block that won't allow you to see them as the cream of the crop in the diverse USA. Too bad...the facts are public...

NO COMPARISON at ALL between students on Visas and getting educational parity HERE at home for Black kids.

Before you can conclude that, you have to show some reasonable proof that the immigrants referenced in the article are mostly on visas. The word immigrant can also be applied to those who have attained citizenship.

You don't magically get INFUSED with goals and inspiration BY a College. If you choose a bad major -- that's ON YOU --- not a requirement of White Racists that you be a Sports Comme

You claim to have read the links I provided, yet you missed some of the most important data indicating that Blacks and hispanics are graduating from tech scools at twice the rate they are being hired.

How about a Physicist or a Plastic Surgeon or a Chemical Engineer or an Aerospace designer

You are falling behind the times..join the NAACP or something...that might be of some value in helping you to understand. some of your darker fellow Americans.

If a black uses affirmative action to get something, they aren't equal. If they were, they wouldn't have to use it.

The part you're not getting is WHY they apply from "unequal" status.

If an Alaskan Inuit Indian went to a wise man in the Yukon for tutoring and got "fairly decent" grades and a "good" SAT score and was otherwise qualified to attend the college --- SHOULD THAT DISADVANTAGE of previous opportunity be taked into account?? Need an answer here....

It's not about remedying INHERENT inequality because of race. It's about remedying ACTUAL inequity in the opportunities that the govt and society that they had to SURPASS to get to the college application..

It's about using race to benefit a group whose entire argument in support of such programs is about how using race is those situations is wrong. If one is going to argue using race was wrong when it denied, arguing that using race because it helps you doesn't make it OK.

This is a dumb statement that denies exactly why this policy was made. It was made to provide equal opportunity. Now the only reason why anyone white argues against this is they believe that 100 percent white is equal opportunity.

A black can't use affirmative action to get shit. We can't just go up to a school and apply for affirmative action. Maybe you whites need to learn how things really are instead of listening to a bunch of idiot college dropout white radio talk show hosts.

By using unequal considerations?

I didn't say they "used" it. I said they benefited from it. By simply putting their race on the application, they've done all they have to do. As usual, they get something for nothing and think they actually earned it.

 

[Conservative65]

Since it's inception under Kennedy and it's expansion since then, AA has increased the size of the umbrella for those it's design to protect. Lyndon Johnson, through executive order, expanded it to women. Supreme Court cases have been heard related to it and the Court said using race as a factor for college admittance was OK. Since the reason for it was to help those that were claimed to have been discriminated against, it isn't used to help the race that is regularly blamed for having such privilege they don't need the help.

In other words, are you stupid enough to believe something designed to overcome the perceived white privilege so many supporters claim occurs can benefit the very group it's designed to punish? Seems you are.

Since your words address the perceived white privilege bullshit you whiner bring up, I refer you to the previous question.

As for the double dip, it damn sure benefits those that are black AND female. A 2 for 1.

There was no "percieved white privilege" during the era that I am referring to..... it was a FACT.

Are you a guillible, blindly obedient fool who believes that just because a "policy" is signed into effect that it is immediately complied with 100% by all?

If so, you are ignorantly misinformed.

Unless there was an official program in place at that time where only whites benefitting, it was perceived.

Are you joking? Prior to 1965, it was common practice based on Jim Crow laws that most minorities were only hired in most corporations to sweep floors and serve coffee.


Even with a college degree. And even after AA was introduced thete was not an overnight change.

It's been 55 years since AA was introduced and the same arguments in support of it exist today as when it was first introduced.

From the time I was in first grade, I attended schools with all races/ethnicities. We sat in the same classes, used the same books, had the same teachers, used the same desks, received the same lessons, etc. To hear people my age today say they didn't have the same opportunities as I did is bullshit.

Because the same things exist. Yeah people your age can say they don't have the same opportunities as you and be right. You went to schools with all races, which means you could have had one black in your class. You do not know the attitudes of the teachers towards the, Then after everyone left school you don't now what opportunities were denied.

More excuses. It's all you have. Those good at making them are rarely good for anything else. In other words, you're good for nothing.

If, as you imply, the attitudes toward blacks by white teachers could have been bad, do you agree that the attitudes toward whites by black teachers could have been bad?

Once they left school, personal problems are their problems not for the white people to make up for.

 

[Conservative65]

True.

Not one white WOMAN benefited because she was white. To continue to think so means you're yet another idiot that has to rely on it because you're too stupid to be able to compete with the only group not benefiting, white males. The thing is we don't expect to benefit. We can do it on our own. Apparently all other groups can't.

I am retired so I do not NEED to rely on AA, dumbass.

However, during a long career in marketing, bginning in the 70's, when AA began to show a trend of benefitting white females, I witnessed enough decision making by hiring managers to recognize that there was an effort in more than enough cases to see that if there was an opportunity to hire a non white female instead of a white female that more often than not, the white female was hired. And before you say anything, this includes them being hired over more qualified male and female minorities.....not just Blacks!


Are you actually stupid enough to believe that NOT ONE white female has EVER been placed for being female AND white?

In case you are newly minted alt right milennial, there was a time in the force when "decorum" meant "keep the environment as white as possible".

SMGDH.

Since it's inception under Kennedy and it's expansion since then, AA has increased the size of the umbrella for those it's design to protect. Lyndon Johnson, through executive order, expanded it to women. Supreme Court cases have been heard related to it and the Court said using race as a factor for college admittance was OK. Since the reason for it was to help those that were claimed to have been discriminated against, it isn't used to help the race that is regularly blamed for having such privilege they don't need the help.

In other words, are you stupid enough to believe something designed to overcome the perceived white privilege so many supporters claim occurs can benefit the very group it's designed to punish? Seems you are.

Since your words address the perceived white privilege bullshit you whiner bring up, I refer you to the previous question.

As for the double dip, it damn sure benefits those that are black AND female. A 2 for 1.

There was no "percieved white privilege" during the era that I am referring to..... it was a FACT.

Are you a guillible, blindly obedient fool who believes that just because a "policy" is signed into effect that it is immediately complied with 100% by all?

If so, you are ignorantly misinformed.

Unless there was an official program in place at that time where only whites benefitting, it was perceived.

.What the fuck do you think segregation was idiot? It was nation wide and the policies and laws only benefited whites.

Separation.. How was there a benefit for one group and not the other. We had Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) for separate but EQUAL.

 

[IM2]

The link was clear enough for those who are prone to objectivuty. For those who just won't accept Blacks as equals there is always something to pick at. If the link was not good enough for you, there are hundreds more on the same topic saying the same thing in different words.


I'm not sure green carders are the immigrants mentioned in the article.
I did notice a reference to the American born progeny of African immigrants who wouldn't need a green card since they are citizens. Yet, the inference was that they too, despite superior academic achievements, were among the underemployed.

I'm a bit chagrined by your reference to bright Nigerian immigrants as the "cream of the crop" in their country as if to devalue their achievments here.That's sort of a veiled put down. You seem to have a mental block that won't allow you to see them as the cream of the crop in the diverse USA. Too bad...the facts are public...

Before you can conclude that, you have to show some reasonable proof that the immigrants referenced in the article are mostly on visas. The word immigrant can also be applied to those who have attained citizenship.

You claim to have read the links I provided, yet you missed some of the most important data indicating that Blacks and hispanics are graduating from tech scools at twice the rate they are being hired.

You are falling behind the times..join the NAACP or something...that might be of some value in helping you to understand. some of your darker fellow Americans.

If a black uses affirmative action to get something, they aren't equal. If they were, they wouldn't have to use it.

The part you're not getting is WHY they apply from "unequal" status.

If an Alaskan Inuit Indian went to a wise man in the Yukon for tutoring and got "fairly decent" grades and a "good" SAT score and was otherwise qualified to attend the college --- SHOULD THAT DISADVANTAGE of previous opportunity be taked into account?? Need an answer here....

It's not about remedying INHERENT inequality because of race. It's about remedying ACTUAL inequity in the opportunities that the govt and society that they had to SURPASS to get to the college application..

It's about using race to benefit a group whose entire argument in support of such programs is about how using race is those situations is wrong. If one is going to argue using race was wrong when it denied, arguing that using race because it helps you doesn't make it OK.

This is a dumb statement that denies exactly why this policy was made. It was made to provide equal opportunity. Now the only reason why anyone white argues against this is they believe that 100 percent white is equal opportunity.

A black can't use affirmative action to get shit. We can't just go up to a school and apply for affirmative action. Maybe you whites need to learn how things really are instead of listening to a bunch of idiot college dropout white radio talk show hosts.

By using unequal considerations?

I didn't say they "used" it. I said they benefited from it. By simply putting their race on the application, they've done all they have to do. As usual, they get something for nothing and think they actually earned it.

Like whites have done for 241 years.

 

[bodecea]

I am retired so I do not NEED to rely on AA, dumbass.

However, during a long career in marketing, bginning in the 70's, when AA began to show a trend of benefitting white females, I witnessed enough decision making by hiring managers to recognize that there was an effort in more than enough cases to see that if there was an opportunity to hire a non white female instead of a white female that more often than not, the white female was hired. And before you say anything, this includes them being hired over more qualified male and female minorities.....not just Blacks!


Are you actually stupid enough to believe that NOT ONE white female has EVER been placed for being female AND white?

In case you are newly minted alt right milennial, there was a time in the force when "decorum" meant "keep the environment as white as possible".

SMGDH.

Since it's inception under Kennedy and it's expansion since then, AA has increased the size of the umbrella for those it's design to protect. Lyndon Johnson, through executive order, expanded it to women. Supreme Court cases have been heard related to it and the Court said using race as a factor for college admittance was OK. Since the reason for it was to help those that were claimed to have been discriminated against, it isn't used to help the race that is regularly blamed for having such privilege they don't need the help.

In other words, are you stupid enough to believe something designed to overcome the perceived white privilege so many supporters claim occurs can benefit the very group it's designed to punish? Seems you are.

Since your words address the perceived white privilege bullshit you whiner bring up, I refer you to the previous question.

As for the double dip, it damn sure benefits those that are black AND female. A 2 for 1.

There was no "percieved white privilege" during the era that I am referring to..... it was a FACT.

Are you a guillible, blindly obedient fool who believes that just because a "policy" is signed into effect that it is immediately complied with 100% by all?

If so, you are ignorantly misinformed.

Unless there was an official program in place at that time where only whites benefitting, it was perceived.

.What the fuck do you think segregation was idiot? It was nation wide and the policies and laws only benefited whites.

Separation.. How was there a benefit for one group and not the other. We had Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) for separate but EQUAL.

And Brown v. Board of Ed proved that that was a lie.

 

[Conservative65]

If a black uses affirmative action to get something, they aren't equal. If they were, they wouldn't have to use it.

The part you're not getting is WHY they apply from "unequal" status.

If an Alaskan Inuit Indian went to a wise man in the Yukon for tutoring and got "fairly decent" grades and a "good" SAT score and was otherwise qualified to attend the college --- SHOULD THAT DISADVANTAGE of previous opportunity be taked into account?? Need an answer here....

It's not about remedying INHERENT inequality because of race. It's about remedying ACTUAL inequity in the opportunities that the govt and society that they had to SURPASS to get to the college application..

It's about using race to benefit a group whose entire argument in support of such programs is about how using race is those situations is wrong. If one is going to argue using race was wrong when it denied, arguing that using race because it helps you doesn't make it OK.

This is a dumb statement that denies exactly why this policy was made. It was made to provide equal opportunity. Now the only reason why anyone white argues against this is they believe that 100 percent white is equal opportunity.

A black can't use affirmative action to get shit. We can't just go up to a school and apply for affirmative action. Maybe you whites need to learn how things really are instead of listening to a bunch of idiot college dropout white radio talk show hosts.

By using unequal considerations?

I didn't say they "used" it. I said they benefited from it. By simply putting their race on the application, they've done all they have to do. As usual, they get something for nothing and think they actually earned it.

Like whites have done for 241 years.

I wish you would have told me that before I put forth all the effort studying and working hard to get where I am today. According to you, all I would have had to done is put "I'm white" on my application.

 

[Conservative65]

Since it's inception under Kennedy and it's expansion since then, AA has increased the size of the umbrella for those it's design to protect. Lyndon Johnson, through executive order, expanded it to women. Supreme Court cases have been heard related to it and the Court said using race as a factor for college admittance was OK. Since the reason for it was to help those that were claimed to have been discriminated against, it isn't used to help the race that is regularly blamed for having such privilege they don't need the help.

In other words, are you stupid enough to believe something designed to overcome the perceived white privilege so many supporters claim occurs can benefit the very group it's designed to punish? Seems you are.

Since your words address the perceived white privilege bullshit you whiner bring up, I refer you to the previous question.

As for the double dip, it damn sure benefits those that are black AND female. A 2 for 1.

There was no "percieved white privilege" during the era that I am referring to..... it was a FACT.

Are you a guillible, blindly obedient fool who believes that just because a "policy" is signed into effect that it is immediately complied with 100% by all?

If so, you are ignorantly misinformed.

Unless there was an official program in place at that time where only whites benefitting, it was perceived.

.What the fuck do you think segregation was idiot? It was nation wide and the policies and laws only benefited whites.

Separation.. How was there a benefit for one group and not the other. We had Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) for separate but EQUAL.

And Brown v. Board of Ed proved that that was a lie.

Separate but equal wasn't a lie. The blacks simply didn't like it.