Is Bush A Racist?

[5stringJeff]

Originally posted by LoneVoice
Simple approach...
First, resolve the discrimination issues in America. After we complete that process, then, eliminate the counter discimination.

OK.... here's another tact. We know you want to resolve discrimination by removing Affirmative Action.

What other solutions do you have for resolving the other discrimination issues in America?

And again, you've ignored my post that racial discrimination on the part of "the oppressive majority" is nothing like you claim it is. The majority of whites could care less about race. Yet we have affirmative action, which encourages discrimination against the very people who aren't obsessed with race!

 

[LoneVoice]

Originally posted by gop_jeff
And again, you've ignored my post that racial discrimination on the part of "the oppressive majority" is nothing like you claim it is. The majority of whites could care less about race. Yet we have affirmative action, which encourages discrimination against the very people who aren't obsessed with race!

The net affect of affirmative action is the inclusion of people (previously discriminated against) into the workforce. Do you agree or disagree with that?

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Originally posted by LoneVoice
Simple approach...
First, resolve the discrimination issues in America. After we complete that process, then, eliminate the counter discimination.

OK.... here's another tact. We know you want to resolve discrimination by removing Affirmative Action.

What other solutions do you have for resolving the other discrimination issues in America?

I already informed you of the idiocy of your arbitrary ordering of events. I don't know what else I can do put pray for your soul.

 

[LoneVoice]

Originally posted by rtwngAvngr
I already informed you of the idiocy of your arbitrary ordering of events. I don't know what else I can do put pray for your soul.

Are you telling me that you have no other solutions for resolving discrimination in America?

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Originally posted by LoneVoice
Are you telling me that you have no other solutions for resolving discrimination in America?

I told you this once. It will take time and continued education about treating individuals on their own merits and not on notions that may or may not be true regarding trends in their racial group. I know this doesn't feed into your socialist agenda and vote buying, but it is fair.

 

[cptpwichita]

1.to tell someone who to hire is unconstitutional.even if a person is racist he has the constitutional right to be racist as long as he does not act out physically against an individual.
2.the free market will demonstrate if diversity works.if it does work don't you think employers would rush to diversify their work force if it meant more money in the owner/owners pocket.
3.are all races identical?or are there differences in intelligence,work ethic,communication, etc.
4.people will boycott products if they think employers are unfair in their hiring practices(why do you think the rev. jesse jackson scares the hell out of corporations).
5.this seems to be a one-way street.do you care if their are mostly black colleges,black owned businesses who hire predominately blacks,and what if like the naacp whites had an national association for the advancement of caucasion people,do you think that would go over very well?

 

[LoneVoice]

Originally posted by rtwngAvngr
I told you this once. It will take time and continued education about treating individuals on their own merits.

I agree with that. And during the time and the continued education period, affirmative action helps to resolve the discrimination issues as well.

 

[OCA]

Originally posted by gop_jeff
If that happens on its own, that's great. But you are still ignoring my main argument about affirmative action:
1. Affirmative action is discrimination.
2. Discrimination is wrong.
3. Therefore, affirmative action is wrong.

On those 3 points I agree completely as I am a clorblind conservative and would like to see ALL individuals judged on merit and character content. My problem is this, how do we guarantee that everybody would adhere to judging only on merit and character especially given this country's history and the racism that runs deep in our society? If we were to get rid of affirmative action all together(which personally would be awesome) would this country fall into anarchy as far as hiring, scholarships, career advancement etc. etc. It is very hard for me to stomach that maybe some sort of check and balance is needed but it is increasingly clear to me that we aren't quite developed enough socially to handle something like this without checks and balances.

 

[LoneVoice]

Agreed...

 

[5stringJeff]

Originally posted by LoneVoice
The net affect of affirmative action is the inclusion of people (previously discriminated against) into the workforce. Do you agree or disagree with that?

The net affect of affirmative action is the inclusion of people previously discriminated against into the workforce at the cost of excluding others based on the same principles that excluded the first group.

Again, two wrongs don't make a right. Discrimination is still discrimination, no matter which way you are looking at it.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Originally posted by OCA
On those 3 points I agree completely as I am a clorblind conservative and would like to see ALL individuals judged on merit and character content. My problem is this, how do we guarantee that everybody would adhere to judging only on merit and character especially given this country's history and the racism that runs deep in our society? If we were to get rid of affirmative action all together(which personally would be awesome) would this country fall into anarchy as far as hiring, scholarships, career advancement etc. etc. It is very hard for me to stomach that maybe some sort of check and balance is needed but it is increasingly clear to me that we aren't quite developed enough socially to handle something like this without checks and balances.

I find it hard to believe you're a conservative.

 

[kcmcdonald]

if a empoler hires a unqualified white man over a qualified black man that is racism. However if an empoler hires a unqualified black man over a qualified white man that's afermative action. Does anybody else see how unfair and two sided that policy is. look in princaple it is a good step towards an equal society. However the step should be short and not forever and not at teh cost of the greater good for society. look peopel are racsits theres no way around that. But there is a law on the books saying it is illegal to not hire based on race. Instead of forcing employers to met so called qoutas we should be teahing the youth that it is merit and law that will get you to the top. not the color of your skin or lack there of.

 

[LoneVoice]

Originally posted by kcmcdonald
if a empoler hires a unqualified white man over a qualified black man that is racism. However if an empoler hires a unqualified black man over a qualified white man that's afermative action. Does anybody else see how unfair and two sided that policy is. look in princaple it is a good step towards an equal society. However the step should be short and not forever and not at teh cost of the greater good for society. look peopel are racsits theres no way around that. But there is a law on the books saying it is illegal to not hire based on race. Instead of forcing employers to met so called qoutas we should be teahing the youth that it is merit and law that will get you to the top. not the color of your skin or lack there of.

The point of affirmative action is not to hire unqualified anybody. The point is to hire qualified blacks and qualified whites. Before affirmative action there were numerous cases of qualified blacks not getting hired or promoted. Often times these cases were so blatant that they were provable in court. And, when you looked at the net effect of the whole, the conclusions were blatantly discriminatory. Now, with affirmative action qualified whites and qualified blacks, women, and other minorities are getting hired fairly.

Most of you who are anti affirmative action only want to try to look at extreme worst case scenarios, which is not the intention nor the design of the policy. Instead, consider the full picture. Worst case scenarios, best case scenarios for ALL sides for both pre and post affirmative action.

When you look at the overall picture in its entirety, you'll see how effectively the legislation has worked. People from all sides agree that affirmative action has broken down discrimination barriers in numerous aspects of the work environment.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Originally posted by LoneVoice
The point of affirmative action is not to hire unqualified anybody. The point is to hire qualified blacks and qualified whites. Before affirmative action there were numerous cases of qualified blacks not getting hired or promoted. Often times these cases were so blatant that they were provable in court. And, when you looked at the net effect of the whole, the conclusions were blatantly discriminatory. Now, with affirmative action qualified whites and qualified blacks, women, and other minorities are getting hired fairly.

Most of you who are anti affirmative action only want to try to look at extreme worst case scenarios, which is not the intention nor the design of the policy. Instead, consider the full picture. Worst case scenarios, best case scenarios for ALL sides for both pre and post affirmative action.

When you look at the overall picture in its entirety, you'll see how effectively the legislation has worked. People from all sides agree that affirmative action has broken down discrimination barriers in numerous aspects of the work environment.

But what happens in your system, is that unqualified or less qualified blacks will be hire and qualified or more qualifed whites will not. Do you deny this?

You say: Why can't it be that we hire on ability and race? Because it's two different sets of data, you must make a choice. You don't even make sense.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Yes, the very success of the evil white man on the planet must be actively hampered with public policy for fairness's sake. WIth all due repect lonevoice, fuck you and your racist views.

 

[OCA]

Originally posted by kcmcdonald
if a empoler hires a unqualified white man over a qualified black man that is racism. However if an empoler hires a unqualified black man over a qualified white man that's afermative action. Does anybody else see how unfair and two sided that policy is. look in princaple it is a good step towards an equal society. However the step should be short and not forever and not at teh cost of the greater good for society. look peopel are racsits theres no way around that. But there is a law on the books saying it is illegal to not hire based on race. Instead of forcing employers to met so called qoutas we should be teahing the youth that it is merit and law that will get you to the top. not the color of your skin or lack there of.

I completely agree with you on the teaching part but it would take at least a couple of generations before you could drop the affirmative action laws as it would take that long to get the attitudes changed in the workplace.

 

[5stringJeff]

I don't think anyone would argue that we should repeal equal opportunity laws that require employers not to discriminate based on race/gender/age/etc. But affirmative action is something totally different. AA is the deliberate hiring of a less qualified individual based solely on that person's race/gender/age/etc. That, Lone Voice, is what I am trying to get you to understand.

 

[OCA]

Just to make my position perfectly clear, I don't advocate the forced hiring of any dumbass over a qualified applicant no matter the racial situation. However I do believe without some sort of check and balance that that is just the sort of thing that will happen as people aren't responsible or unbiased enough yet to hire based solely on qualification and merit in todays America.

 

[William Joyce]

I don't think anyone would argue that we should repeal equal opportunity laws that require employers not to discriminate based on race/gender/age/etc.

I would so argue.

People can have valid reasons for making a race a central criterion for a job. From my perspective, I would not want to hire black people because, in my experience, they are generally very poor workers with a very bad attitude toward work in general and white bosses, specifically.

I'm not alone. Honda Motor Corp., USA, located its American plant in Ohio largely because they sought a mostly-white, or at least non-black, demographic for their factory. Would you deny Honda this right? Would you force it to locate its factory in the Bronx?

How would that be different from economic socialism? That's just "social" socialism: denying people the very right of association and forcing them to associate with those they choose not to associate with. That's about as simple and decent a human right as I can think of. But a "conservative" would deny it to us!

Preposterous.

Hondas are good cars. They run well. That's because they're built by smart Japanese or attentive whites, for the most part.

We can have "racial equality" and drive around in crappy cars, or we can have a right of association and drive good cars.

I choose the latter.

 

[LoneVoice]

Originally posted by William Joyce
I would so argue.

People can have valid reasons for making a race a central criterion for a job. From my perspective, I would not want to hire black people because, in my experience, they are generally very poor workers with a very bad attitude toward work in general and white bosses, specifically.

I'm not alone. Honda Motor Corp., USA, located its American plant in Ohio largely because they sought a mostly-white, or at least non-black, demographic for their factory. Would you deny Honda this right? Would you force it to locate its factory in the Bronx?

How would that be different from economic socialism? That's just "social" socialism: denying people the very right of association and forcing them to associate with those they choose not to associate with. That's about as simple and decent a human right as I can think of. But a "conservative" would deny it to us!

Preposterous.

Hondas are good cars. They run well. That's because they're built by smart Japanese or attentive whites, for the most part.

We can have "racial equality" and drive around in crappy cars, or we can have a right of association and drive good cars.

I choose the latter.

LOL You're so funny...
The things that you spew out of your mouth...

:wank:

You're such a great example, and prove my point every time you speak.