The apparent start of the White House initiative on Diversity In Our Ivy League Neighborhoods: May, on its face, appear condescending. "Do-Nuts," however, are not yet in the luncheon profile suggested at the Maitre'D level in the West Wing.
Consider how the subject even arises.
Diversity in China is like this: Zhuang, Manchu, Hui, Miao, Uyghurs, Yi, Tujia, Mongols, Tibetan, Buyei, Dong, Yao, Korean, Bai, Hani, Li, Kazak, Dai, She, Lisu, Gelao, Lahu, Dongxiang, Va, Sui, Nakhi, Qiang, Tu, Xibe, Mulao, Kyrgyz, Daur, Jingpo, Salar, Blang, Maonan, Tajik, Pumi, Achang, Nu, Ewenki, Gin, Jino, De'ang, Uzbeks, Russian, Yugur, Bonan, Monba, Oroqen, Derung, Tatars, Hezhen, Lhoba, Gaoshan. (Someone(?) may have put that in Wikipedia.)
So adding to number (3?), then (1) who in fact does any work in China, and (2) how does anyone tell them apart? Do, in fact, (3), they act in tribal manner which tends to confuse and denigrate peoples--not to mention engage, in the killing of their deities?
Diversity --we know--is like in France, which knows about the Moslems--kind of like Spain--or even like Germany, which knows about the Turks. Even England knows about the Poles, Pakistanis, and the Irish, and Italy knows about Albanians, having apparently grown tired of the Morrocans and even the Romanians.
Famous Republicans, who also know about loose shoes, and even warm toilets: Continually want to know who is going to do the needed work in America! We are, after all, a planet of human beings! We need to know about incentives!
The now famous, "teaching experience" incident of Cambridge, MA: Is clearly about this! Ronald Reagan could have set this up--albeit differently--and likely George Bush could have set this up--without even knowing very much about it!
It is recently discovered, and on TV, that there is slavery in Jamaica--with no diversity. Makes anyone wonder just how they do that, in America(?), even backstairs at the. . . .West Wing.
Actually, in America: First we have to find them, then we have to group them, and then eveything turns out OK!
"Crow, James Crow: Shaken, Not Stirred!"
(The Ivy League needs a "teaching moment" about this!?!)
Consider how the subject even arises.
Diversity in China is like this: Zhuang, Manchu, Hui, Miao, Uyghurs, Yi, Tujia, Mongols, Tibetan, Buyei, Dong, Yao, Korean, Bai, Hani, Li, Kazak, Dai, She, Lisu, Gelao, Lahu, Dongxiang, Va, Sui, Nakhi, Qiang, Tu, Xibe, Mulao, Kyrgyz, Daur, Jingpo, Salar, Blang, Maonan, Tajik, Pumi, Achang, Nu, Ewenki, Gin, Jino, De'ang, Uzbeks, Russian, Yugur, Bonan, Monba, Oroqen, Derung, Tatars, Hezhen, Lhoba, Gaoshan. (Someone(?) may have put that in Wikipedia.)
So adding to number (3?), then (1) who in fact does any work in China, and (2) how does anyone tell them apart? Do, in fact, (3), they act in tribal manner which tends to confuse and denigrate peoples--not to mention engage, in the killing of their deities?
Diversity --we know--is like in France, which knows about the Moslems--kind of like Spain--or even like Germany, which knows about the Turks. Even England knows about the Poles, Pakistanis, and the Irish, and Italy knows about Albanians, having apparently grown tired of the Morrocans and even the Romanians.
Famous Republicans, who also know about loose shoes, and even warm toilets: Continually want to know who is going to do the needed work in America! We are, after all, a planet of human beings! We need to know about incentives!
The now famous, "teaching experience" incident of Cambridge, MA: Is clearly about this! Ronald Reagan could have set this up--albeit differently--and likely George Bush could have set this up--without even knowing very much about it!
It is recently discovered, and on TV, that there is slavery in Jamaica--with no diversity. Makes anyone wonder just how they do that, in America(?), even backstairs at the. . . .West Wing.
Actually, in America: First we have to find them, then we have to group them, and then eveything turns out OK!
"Crow, James Crow: Shaken, Not Stirred!"
(The Ivy League needs a "teaching moment" about this!?!)
