Yvette248 Member Username: Yvette248
Post Number: 44 Registered: 10-2006
| Posted on Saturday, November 04, 2006 - 11:15 am: | |
I know this sounds incredible and inflammatory and no one would normally believe this, so I am attaching the link to the Detroit News article: http://www.detnews.com/apps/pb cs.dll/article?AID=/20061104/P OLITICS01/611040362 Ward Connerly, the California man leading a ballot measure to end most affirmative action in Michigan, accepts Ku Klux Klan support for his position in a video clip posted this week on the Internet. |
1953 Member Username: 1953
Post Number: 1077 Registered: 12-2004
| Posted on Saturday, November 04, 2006 - 11:20 am: | |
Ward Connerly have the message straight - equality under the law is the goal. This is hardly a news worthy story. |
Bussey Member Username: Bussey
Post Number: 303 Registered: 12-2003
| Posted on Saturday, November 04, 2006 - 11:21 am: | |
All men are created equal.... |
Detroit_stylin Member Username: Detroit_stylin
Post Number: 3145 Registered: 10-2003
| Posted on Saturday, November 04, 2006 - 11:31 am: | |
Even if a terrorist group says it huh.... I see more and more of yu forumers showing your true colors every day |
Fjw718 Member Username: Fjw718
Post Number: 84 Registered: 11-2005
| Posted on Saturday, November 04, 2006 - 11:36 am: | |
Looks like Bussey and 1953 want to be back in 1953. But in all fairness. How in the hell can you support ANYONE who would take the KKK's endorsement????? I mean seriously, HOW? That should be a red flag right there. |
Misssocks Member Username: Misssocks
Post Number: 8 Registered: 06-2006
| Posted on Saturday, November 04, 2006 - 11:43 am: | |
Do you support the ACLU? Ward Connerly accepts money from the KKK; the American Civil Liberties Union SPENDS money on these people. |
Bussey Member Username: Bussey
Post Number: 304 Registered: 12-2003
| Posted on Saturday, November 04, 2006 - 11:59 am: | |
At issue here is the meaning of equality and justice. The crux of Connerly's polemic is that he supports true Equality regardless of who agrees with him or not. By me typing "All men are created equal..." a statement taken from our Declaration of Independence, it should not make me the equivalent of a terrorist. If justice is blind then we should be too and stop referencing colors, creeds, nationalities, races, and all else too, even if it is the KKK. There is only one race, HUMAN. The guy said he "he does not support hateful activities" and also "Throughout my life I have made absolutely clear my disdain for the KKK." I see his mug on the article not a sheet with eyeholes. Lighten up |
Iheartthed Member Username: Iheartthed
Post Number: 205 Registered: 04-2006
| Posted on Saturday, November 04, 2006 - 1:47 pm: | |
LOL @ quoting the Declaration of Independence. Please remind yourself that some of our ancestors were considered chattel, not men, when that document was written. |
3rdworldcity Member Username: 3rdworldcity
Post Number: 318 Registered: 01-2005
| Posted on Saturday, November 04, 2006 - 2:27 pm: | |
Bussey: AMEN |
Salvadordelmundo Member Username: Salvadordelmundo
Post Number: 53 Registered: 04-2006
| Posted on Saturday, November 04, 2006 - 2:33 pm: | |
Look - I won't take a stand one way or the other on the amendment. But the whole idea that if some odious group backs a measure, that the measure is tainted, is a logical fallacy. For example, the KKK also supports various adopt-a-highway cleanup programs in various states. That doesn't mean the idea of adopting highways and cleaning them up is bad. It just means that the program happens to intersect with the interests of a crappy group. That happens all the time. It's demagogery, not quite honest argument. |
Detroit_stylin Member Username: Detroit_stylin
Post Number: 3149 Registered: 10-2003
| Posted on Saturday, November 04, 2006 - 3:07 pm: | |
And you can equate the adot-a-highway program to one that will potentially affect the rights of generations of minorities and women.... I've never heard of the KKK lynching a highway nor denying its voting rights before. wow.... |
Zug Member Username: Zug
Post Number: 128 Registered: 01-2004
| Posted on Saturday, November 04, 2006 - 4:14 pm: | |
Regardless of where you stand, the question to answer should be WHY DID HE PERSONALLY WELCOME THE ENDORSEMENT FROM THE KKK? So you would find it acceptable if conservatives across the country started to personally accept endorsements from the KKK? I think the war in Iraq was wrong...and so does an evil terrorist named Osama Bin Laden...but I wouldn't shake his hand as if we are viewing the issue in the same light. So, I don't think this should have anything to do with whether you support affirmative action...it just shows us a little more about the people pushing the legislation. To say Prop 2 is about equality, then to personally welcome the endorsement from a group that says that whites are superior and does everything within their means to subdue to rights of non-whites is extremely hypocritical. |
Yvette248 Member Username: Yvette248
Post Number: 55 Registered: 10-2006
| Posted on Saturday, November 04, 2006 - 4:20 pm: | |
Amen Zug. |
Quickdrawmcgraw Member Username: Quickdrawmcgraw
Post Number: 81 Registered: 10-2005
| Posted on Saturday, November 04, 2006 - 4:29 pm: | |
Well said ZUG |
Mayor_sekou Member Username: Mayor_sekou
Post Number: 234 Registered: 09-2006
| Posted on Saturday, November 04, 2006 - 4:34 pm: | |
Indeed Zug good point, Just curious will this recent revelation change any ones opinion on the subject? Will that fact that the KKK personally endorses this legislation change how any fo you vote next week? |
Lmichigan Member Username: Lmichigan
Post Number: 4642 Registered: 10-2003
| Posted on Saturday, November 04, 2006 - 5:08 pm: | |
Zug makes a very good, point. Regardless of what you think of the said goal of Proposal 2, how in the hell can Ward Connerly personally welcome the endorsement of the KKK? Outside of even the actual issue, how in the hell can Ward welcome a group that most certainly hates his guts because of his skin color? It's disgusting ironic. Back on issue, this shouldn't surprise anyone, though. Many of us have known from day one that this MCRI, in its current form, was led by a group with dubious motives, at best, and sinister motives at worst, when they refused to include as a crux of their campaign to add legacy points to the preferences they were trying to eradicate in the first place, only grudgingly (desperately) saying very recently that they'd also be against them, though they are not included in the proposal. On the surface, Proposal 2 is a very noble and idealistic goal to strive for. And, maybe in some other incarnation (but more likely in some later time) I could have actually fully been behind it. But, I don't see how any person with a clear conscience can vote for this specific MCRI proposal knowing all of the preferences that the proposal still excludes, and other inherent flaws in the proposal, as well as finally seeing the motives of the leadership of the MCRI brought full circle. In a future incarnation, a proposal like Proposal 2 (with improvements) could actually be worth voting for. This particular and specific form of the MCRI, though, should be voted down with the quickness. If Affirmative Action has become flawed, you better believe (as shown today by the motives of Connerlly) that the current MCRI is EVEN MORE flawed. Can I get an amen? |
Umstucoach Member Username: Umstucoach
Post Number: 106 Registered: 04-2006
| Posted on Saturday, November 04, 2006 - 5:20 pm: | |
amen |
Bussey Member Username: Bussey
Post Number: 305 Registered: 12-2003
| Posted on Saturday, November 04, 2006 - 5:31 pm: | |
quote:To say Prop 2 is about equality, then to personally welcome the endorsement from a group that says that whites are superior and does everything within their means to subdue to rights of non-whites is extremely hypocritical.
Affirmative Action is the opposite reaction to what groups , people or organizations such as the KKK seek to do; undermine the rights of minorities. By supporting Affirmative Action and opposing the KKK you are contradicting yourself. Where is the logic behind giving special privileges to a select group if the KKK cannot do the same. I clearly don't agree with the KKK's hateful positions and would NEVER endorse anything they sponsor or create but, you have to look at the matter from an objective stance and see how both, KKK and Pro-AA supporters, are equally guilty of racist positions. Mr. Connerly has it right. While he sees the wrong behind the KKK and their bigoted beliefs, he also welcomes their acceptance of ending the racist and sexist AA policies; though they feel this way for entirely different reasons. Sure, the KKK is unequivocally wrong and should not be valued at all as an organization but their mission, at its base, is the same as the AA policies. Passing judgement based strictly on race, gender, or ethnicity, which is WRONG. I don't care if it means a lynching or a new job, a person SHOULD NEVER BE JUDGED BASED ON QUALITIES THEY HAVE NO CONTROL OVER, whether it be for positive OR negative reasons. To endorse only the positive, i.e. Affirmative Action, is to be hypocritical. Our country was founded by slave owners and was based on a racist and bigoted ideology but since then we have emerged as the most progressive country anywhere. Legislation like AA only reverses the great work and strides made by all involved in civil rights since the days of John Brown and Nat Turner. I know that you can be dissuaded by the great atrocities committed by the KKK but AA is based on the same premise as these groups. Passing judgement due to physical qualities, which is exactly what the KKK does as well. |
Lmichigan Member Username: Lmichigan
Post Number: 4643 Registered: 10-2003
| Posted on Saturday, November 04, 2006 - 5:55 pm: | |
I guess Martin Luther King, Jr. and a plethora of other leaders who fought and died in the Civil Rights Movement got it wrong, then, because these men and women were solidly behind the original concept of AA. I guess the real and hard question behind AA is whether it is a necessary evil to level the playing field by bringing one group up and one down to put them on an equal plain? Personally, to pretend that the Civil Rights Act magically brought everyone to the same spot in the race, and put them on an equal track (without the multiple shackles that had weighed everyone down but white men) to start the race over again, is just that, to pretend. Killing AA doesn't work toward the goal of elevating everyone to the same level to the point where things like AA won't be needed. The Civil Rights Act and the movement didn't instantly result in the leveling of the playing field, which is something so many people don't get. What it simply did was offer the opportunity for minorities and women to play catch-up. Remember, it was not the wish of minorities and women to divide along these lines. They were not the ones that brought these classifications on/to themselves. They were brought, lead, and forced on/to these classifications by laws, and important today, customs and traditions, that made it quite clear that there was a divide on these lines. And there still is. Does anyone really think minorities and women want to constantly have to fight for minority protection/rights? I personally find the idea that white men are more the victim of modern society than women or minorities, still, pretty offensive. (Message edited by lmichigan on November 04, 2006) |
Rocket_city Member Username: Rocket_city
Post Number: 131 Registered: 04-2006
| Posted on Saturday, November 04, 2006 - 7:28 pm: | |
Anyone who supports the KKK supports the hatred of all races. |
Mayor_sekou Member Username: Mayor_sekou
Post Number: 235 Registered: 09-2006
| Posted on Saturday, November 04, 2006 - 8:10 pm: | |
"If the Ku Klux Klan thinks that equality is right, God bless them," Connerly says. Connerly is such a sellout. He should be stoned to death for treason. Oh, and Amen Lmich. |
Tetsua Member Username: Tetsua
Post Number: 851 Registered: 01-2004
| Posted on Saturday, November 04, 2006 - 8:42 pm: | |
I was hoping this ass would've disappear years ago. Connerly has got to be the first black man, who has fought to make sure white guys get a fair shake in America. I honestly feel sorry for the guy, there's something wrong with him. His own children have refused to acknowledge him for for a while now. |
Detroit_stylin Member Username: Detroit_stylin
Post Number: 3153 Registered: 10-2003
| Posted on Saturday, November 04, 2006 - 8:46 pm: | |
really tetsua, how do you know that? Is that online somewhere? |
Tetsua Member Username: Tetsua
Post Number: 852 Registered: 01-2004
| Posted on Saturday, November 04, 2006 - 8:51 pm: | |
It was on one of the Sunday morning political shows, several years ago though. |
Detroit_stylin Member Username: Detroit_stylin
Post Number: 3155 Registered: 10-2003
| Posted on Saturday, November 04, 2006 - 9:03 pm: | |
Oh Ok |
Lmichigan Member Username: Lmichigan
Post Number: 4644 Registered: 10-2003
| Posted on Saturday, November 04, 2006 - 10:20 pm: | |
Gob bless equality! God bless America! And, God bless the Klu Klux Klan! USA! USA! Seriously, if the anti-Prop 2 groups don't take that quote and run with it before Tuesday like the GOP tried to run with Kerry's botched joke against the President Bush, well... (Message edited by lmichigan on November 04, 2006) |
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus
Post Number: 314 Registered: 06-2006
| Posted on Saturday, November 04, 2006 - 10:52 pm: | |
Wow that's F-ed up...but I'm still voting Yes on 2... |
Jimaz Member Username: Jimaz
Post Number: 930 Registered: 12-2005
| Posted on Saturday, November 04, 2006 - 11:10 pm: | |
These threads need to be woven: https://www.atdetroit.net/forum/mes sages/5/86374.html?1162688624 |
Zug Member Username: Zug
Post Number: 129 Registered: 01-2004
| Posted on Sunday, November 05, 2006 - 5:47 am: | |
Many people have poor parents...parents with no connections to get access to well-paying jobs...that do not own businesses...that have no money to send their children to top tier schools. The children in these cases have no choice in this matter. How come people act as if eliminating affirmative action automatically creates an equal society. How come the unfair advantages of the children of the elite are not considered unfair to those who do not have these benefits. Honestly, some of you have too simplistic of an understanding of opportunities (economic, educational, etc.) in our sociopolitical landscape. How come most politicians, business leaders, and even tenured professors in this country are white men? If you honestly think it is because white men are always the most qualified, you are completely ignoring the history of this country. A history in which cronyism, racism, sexism, and the passing down of power from white male patriarch to white male heirs (who are either biological sons or someone in which they "relate best with") has ensured that relatively wealthy white males will have the most opportunities and assistance in their lives. I personally believe that affirmative action needs to remain until the highest levels of power is more reflective of the actual make-up of society. There are no legitimate studies that prove that men are smarter than women, nor are there proven differences in intellectual/leadership capacities between our socially constructed racial categories. Therefore, I refuse to say that inequalities are due to "natural" differences. And if you do think these inequalities are "natural", then you are a sexist and racist (either consciously or unconsciously). If you do think inequalities are natural, then I'd like to hear your evidence that proves that Dick Devos has a wealthy gene which made him rich at birth, and he was born with the intelligence and leadership abilities that eventually gave him the opportunity to be the most qualified candidate in the world to lead Amway...his parents didn't have a thing to do with his opportunities...and he earned all he has because he out-competed everyone on the unequal playing field that benefits women and minorities. |
Pistonian_revolution Member Username: Pistonian_revolution
Post Number: 32 Registered: 05-2006
| Posted on Sunday, November 05, 2006 - 9:35 am: | |
im always amazed at how many americans are out of touch with reality. not everyone is a blatant racist like the KKK. but there are plenty of people who have unconscious racism and are unaware of their privilege in our society. but, then again- moving up in the social ladder then trying to shut the door behind you has been a practice thats gone on for at least 800 years in anglo saxon society. americans have social darwinism indoctrinated into their brains early on in elementary school. i have little hope that our society that so celebrates freedom would ever do anything serious to combat the injustices of poverty and disparate privilege. |
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus
Post Number: 316 Registered: 06-2006
| Posted on Sunday, November 05, 2006 - 10:38 am: | |
Zug: The short answer to your question is that the logical result of passing proposal 2 will be the emergence of Affirmative Action programs based on socio-economic status rather than race...and this is a good thing all around... This way, the children you speak of whose parents have no access to well paying jobs will still benefit...but the programs will no linger be able to exclude certain children because of the color of their skin... Likewise, minorities from privileged backgrounds who currently benefit from Affirmative Action programs because of their race will no longer be able to do so...instead, the help will go to those who actually need it... Eliminating Affirmative Action discrimination does not automatically create an equal society...it's just creates a marginally better one than we have now... And until someone comes up with a better solution, I'm going to support measures like proposal 2 |
Zug Member Username: Zug
Post Number: 130 Registered: 01-2004
| Posted on Sunday, November 05, 2006 - 1:03 pm: | |
I know where you're coming from Thejesus, but everyone I heard who publicly promote Prop 2 say it will create equality. I have never heard anyone say they will seek out an SES-based affirmative action. And I think that since affirmative action addresses some aspects of equality in America (because gender and race are correlated with opportunities) that if we eliminate it we will have a society in which inequality will widen once again. I agree that an SES-based affirmative action is probably a better way to go...but no where in the country are there proposals to replace gender/race based affirmative action with SES-based ones. The message is always to end all forms of affirmative action. I don't think its a coincidence that those with power overlook their institutionalized benefits (as I mentioned above), but can easily frame things that benefit others as "unfair". (Message edited by Zug on November 05, 2006) |
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus
Post Number: 320 Registered: 06-2006
| Posted on Sunday, November 05, 2006 - 2:27 pm: | |
Zug: You don't need legislation to create SES-based AA programs...they will logically follow from Proposal 2 being passed, as Prop 2 intentionally leaves the door open for such programs... Once Prop. 2 passes, it will be illegal for U of M, for example, to discriminate or give preferential treatment based on race...but they will still have an interest in creating a diverse student body, so AA programs based on SES is what they will turn to... This is exactly what happened in California 10 years ago... And just to give you an idea of how the people behind this proposal feel about SES-based AA, Jennifer Gratz has publicly stated her support for AA programs based on SES... |
Detroit_stylin Member Username: Detroit_stylin
Post Number: 3161 Registered: 10-2003
| Posted on Sunday, November 05, 2006 - 2:32 pm: | |
Why is everyone so focused on AA giving preferences out based on race? Its almost as if you all are fixated on that fact. Once again, the biggest beneficiaries of AA are WHITE WOMEN, since they are the largest minority in the country. This really lets me know what a lot of your motivations for this passing is, since no one (aside from those advocating on its behalf) seems to mention GENDER, or SEXUAL ORIENTATION. Affirmative Action is not about race. As alot of you who seem to be showing your true colors really want others to think and believe... |
Lmichigan Member Username: Lmichigan
Post Number: 4649 Registered: 10-2003
| Posted on Sunday, November 05, 2006 - 5:10 pm: | |
Pistonian_revolution really hit upon the point of the ruling class, and those poor fools they are able to influence, steadily climbing the social ladder and then trying to break apart the section they just climbed, or kicking those below them climbing it straight in the face. Regardless of all of the good people they have been allowed to climb up the ladder right behind the ruling class, they must question their leadership who's motives are dubious, at best, and sinister at worst. |
Bussey Member Username: Bussey
Post Number: 308 Registered: 12-2003
| Posted on Sunday, November 05, 2006 - 5:18 pm: | |
I wish Cindy Lauper would have never made that damn song.. |
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus
Post Number: 321 Registered: 06-2006
| Posted on Sunday, November 05, 2006 - 5:27 pm: | |
detroit_stylin: that may be true in the arena of private employment, but this propsal doesn't affect AA in private employment... and as far as college admissions go, women in general (not just white women) score slightly better on tests and do better in school than men, so allowing college admissions to be based on merit is not really going to affect women in a negative way, which is probably why you don't hear a lot of talk about gender (Message edited by thejesus on November 05, 2006) |
Yvette248 Member Username: Yvette248
Post Number: 66 Registered: 10-2006
| Posted on Sunday, November 05, 2006 - 6:05 pm: | |
Thejesus you are right on the money. A lot of you may be surprised to learn that, with the preponderance of women students, there is actually a trend where "less qualified" males are being admitted into college to create a more balanced learning environment. The article was written in the NY Times where admission directors wrote an apology "To all the girls I rejected." If I can find the article, I will post it. If proposal 2 passes, this new practice (which I personally support) benefiting men will become illegal also. Once again, THIS PROPOSAL IS NOT ABOUT RACE!!! |
Lmichigan Member Username: Lmichigan
Post Number: 4653 Registered: 10-2003
| Posted on Sunday, November 05, 2006 - 7:44 pm: | |
It is, too. It's just about more than race. It's about race/ethnicity and gender. If it wasn't also about race, than Ward and Jennifer wouldn't be making this a race issue in their recent commercial. |
Detroit_stylin Member Username: Detroit_stylin
Post Number: 3166 Registered: 10-2003
| Posted on Sunday, November 05, 2006 - 7:58 pm: | |
I give you that on the issue of women and test scores TJ, however until the unbalance between poorer districts (where the majority of AA recipients reside), and suburban (where the bulk of more affluent school districts are), is overcome with the poorer districts receiving the same resources and learning opportunities as their more affluent counterparts, then of course there will be disparities in the instruction that each respective set of students will receive. But speaking from a demographic POV, while there are a lot of poor white males that live in depressed communities (urban and rural and this is where I personally feel that AA as it stands now needs to be tweaked), there are far more People of Color that fall below federal (and actual) poverty levels therefore they are forced to go to schools in these districts. Its not the fact that People of Color are benefiting at the expense of whites, its the fact that minorities, (and African Americans and Latinos specifically), as disproportionately poorer that white americans. Its an American fact of life. Therefore while AA is far from perfect and can be tweaked and refined, it is nonetheless needed. PLUS of all the naysayers that are determined to vote against it, I havent read in the majority of them any proposed alternatives. |
Lmichigan Member Username: Lmichigan
Post Number: 4655 Registered: 10-2003
| Posted on Sunday, November 05, 2006 - 9:14 pm: | |
You haven't read any because that doesn't concern them enough to come up with one. It's kind of like those that complained about the SBT only to have no plan to replace it, and then it was found out the SBT really didn't hurt the state, much. |
Detroit_stylin Member Username: Detroit_stylin
Post Number: 3171 Registered: 10-2003
| Posted on Sunday, November 05, 2006 - 9:16 pm: | |
But yet they still want it gone |
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus
Post Number: 322 Registered: 06-2006
| Posted on Sunday, November 05, 2006 - 9:51 pm: | |
detroit_stylin: Everything you just said is true and it is why we need AA programs based on socio-economic status, rather than race...and that's exactly what this proposal will do... The minorites that come from underprivileged backgrounds will still benefit from these programs just as they always have...but the non-minorities who also come from those backgrounds will no loger fall through the cracks in the system.... And in response to your point about the disparities between uper-class school districts and districts with 'People of Color', you can bet your ass that those disparities will never be addressed as long as race-based AA is around...instead of fixing the problem, the officials in government that could do something about it will just blow it off and say, "yeah, there are disparities, but we have AA to make up for that, so why bother going through the trouble of fixing the problem?" |
Detroit_stylin Member Username: Detroit_stylin
Post Number: 3173 Registered: 10-2003
| Posted on Sunday, November 05, 2006 - 10:06 pm: | |
Ummm actually no TJ, if you think that we for the most part are just sitting back and enjoy sending our kids to underperforming school districts then you really need to take a trip to the hood and find out what the people who actually live the life really think and feel instead of making false assumptions to bolster your personal feelings... I know its a little chilly out, but no thanks for the blanket you just threw out there... |
Zug Member Username: Zug
Post Number: 131 Registered: 01-2004
| Posted on Monday, November 06, 2006 - 12:45 pm: | |
I was thinking about this, and SES-based affirmative action may work for college admissions. Although I still have my doubts that without something on the books (like an officially passed SES affirmative action) that many institutions would not care. But how could SES affirmative action work in terms of employment and contracting? I don't think people would want to base it on average income per zip code, because there are many flaws in that type of system. And contracting would be even more difficult. SES based programs may work in some cases, but it still ignores the institutionalized forms of discrimination that exist for women and minorities. |
Tetsua Member Username: Tetsua
Post Number: 855 Registered: 01-2004
| Posted on Monday, November 06, 2006 - 12:52 pm: | |
This guy is such as ass, I just saw the video for the first time. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =qhxis5k2Dmw |
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus
Post Number: 323 Registered: 06-2006
| Posted on Monday, November 06, 2006 - 12:53 pm: | |
detroit_stylin: I really don't understand your response... Nothing in my post suggested that you enjoy sending your kids to underprivileged schools...I never even addressed that one way or the other... I didn't make any assumptions in my last post, let alone a false one... Please clarify what you are talking about... |
Karl Member Username: Karl
Post Number: 4858 Registered: 09-2005
| Posted on Monday, November 06, 2006 - 1:04 pm: | |
Thejesus - don't spend alot of time trying to get thru to Stylin. He whines about schools, yet won't support vouchers. He whines about the KKK, yet supports abortion, which kills more African Americans every 3 days than the KKK killed in its entire existence. He will send you down endless rabbitholes yet support the most detrimental positions for African Americans. Ignore him. |
Detroit_stylin Member Username: Detroit_stylin
Post Number: 3179 Registered: 10-2003
| Posted on Monday, November 06, 2006 - 2:57 pm: | |
As I was trying to state TJ before the human butt plug chimed in... it seems (at least to me I wont speak for anyone else), that you are not getting the correlation with poverty, race, and affirmative action. I will take the time to explain that in further detail later. As of right now, I am committed to something else. I just happened to pop in for a min. But details are forthcoming. (Message edited by Detroit_stylin on November 06, 2006) |
Zug Member Username: Zug
Post Number: 132 Registered: 01-2004
| Posted on Monday, November 06, 2006 - 3:09 pm: | |
Could someone answer a question for me: Are there any politicians or major organizations, other than the KKK , that is in public support of proposal 2? I have only come across groups or people in opposition: Granholm, DeVos, Detroit News, Detroit Free Press, Oakland Press, teachers unions, Archdiocese of Detroit, AARP, UAW. This is is not to make a point... I am genuinely interested in knowing who publicly supports Proposal 2. |
Detroit_stylin Member Username: Detroit_stylin
Post Number: 3180 Registered: 10-2003
| Posted on Monday, November 06, 2006 - 3:11 pm: | |
The KKK, and Karl are in support of it Zug... |
Karl Member Username: Karl
Post Number: 4862 Registered: 09-2005
| Posted on Monday, November 06, 2006 - 4:00 pm: | |
While Stylin plays at recess and resorts to namecalling, let's stick to the issues: Regarding affirmative action and arguments raised, there is virtually no liberal academic, commentator, clergyman or politician (or Stylin) who will say that the problem of black crime in America is primarily due to moral issues within parts of the black community. Rather it is American society's fault. (credit: Dennis Prager) And so it appears to be with other issues of schooling, employment, and others leaning on affirmative action laws to pull folks ahead, rather than working from within. |
Mayor_sekou Member Username: Mayor_sekou
Post Number: 240 Registered: 09-2006
| Posted on Monday, November 06, 2006 - 4:17 pm: | |
Exactly what moral issues are the cause of the crime problem in the black community? |
Karl Member Username: Karl
Post Number: 4865 Registered: 09-2005
| Posted on Monday, November 06, 2006 - 4:33 pm: | |
Mayor, here's the article: http://www.citizenlink.org/cit izenMag/A000002301.cfm |
Zug Member Username: Zug
Post Number: 133 Registered: 01-2004
| Posted on Monday, November 06, 2006 - 4:54 pm: | |
Karl, Perhaps centuries of oppression coupled with living within a society that leaves very few opportunities for those who do not have a family history of privilege is a factor as well. I understand all of the personal responsibility arguments. But people's choices are limited by the conditions they are born into. I think you are discounting the influence of historical conditions that existed (and still exist) in the country. How come its okay for some southerners to still reference the Civil War for conditions in the South, and many others still have "Rebel Pride", but once someone says that the condition of Black people before the 1960s still has an impact on the Black community people scoff? Also, why are you just focusing on Blacks? Do women possess bad morals that lead them to have a lower salary than men for the same jobs? |
Detroit_stylin Member Username: Detroit_stylin
Post Number: 3183 Registered: 10-2003
| Posted on Monday, November 06, 2006 - 4:59 pm: | |
Zug easy, cause Karl is a (thinly veiled) racist... That simple... |
Mayor_sekou Member Username: Mayor_sekou
Post Number: 242 Registered: 09-2006
| Posted on Monday, November 06, 2006 - 5:15 pm: | |
This article still doesnt answer my question it just goes on a anti leftist tirade, it brings up the same point you mentioned without specifying any further. So ill ask again, Exactly what moral issues are the cause of the crime problem in the black community? In the case of the disenfranchisement of minorities and women it is for the most part Americas fault, and affirmative action was an attempt to institutionally right some of the wrongs of the US govt. And I am no leftist, I like I hope a majority of the country does, look at things realistically unlike people on the left and right. And realistically this possible ban on Affirmative action is one that may pass on a bunch of lies and deception from what I am gathering. And people are too caught up in the hype to take a realistic look at the potential pros and cons of this legislation and determine whether or not it is the best option for all of the people of Michigan. (Message edited by mayor_sekou on November 06, 2006) |
Livernoisyard Member Username: Livernoisyard
Post Number: 1674 Registered: 10-2004
| Posted on Monday, November 06, 2006 - 5:16 pm: | |
"Are there any politicians or major organizations, other than the KKK :-) , that is in public support of proposal 2?" Duh! This proposition will be voted upon by individuals, not organizations. So, who cares if any groups favor it or not? The major reason for not publicly expressing support for the proposition is business-related, it seems to me. When it passes tomorrow, blame the voting majority for expressing their collective position. |
Mayor_sekou Member Username: Mayor_sekou
Post Number: 243 Registered: 09-2006
| Posted on Monday, November 06, 2006 - 5:28 pm: | |
The voting majority cant always be trusted to make well informed decisions at the ballot box. Case in point our commander in chief as we all know was reelected two years ago, much to the bewilderment to the rest of the world or anyone with common sense. All I know LY, is that if this ban does indeed pass tomorrow Michigan is going to become a lot less attractive of place to live and work for minorities and women than it already is, and that is saying something. Besides I doubt this will be the last we hear from Affirmative Action, like abortion it is one of those things that will never ever go away. |
Zug Member Username: Zug
Post Number: 134 Registered: 01-2004
| Posted on Monday, November 06, 2006 - 7:34 pm: | |
Livernoisyard...I'm not an idiot...I know individuals vote...tell me that water is wet next. I'm asking because conservatives have touted their disdain for affirmative action for years. Now its on the ballot and I haven't heard a single one voice their support for this proposal. When the proposal on gay marriage was on the ballot, politicians were constantly voicing their opinions for and against it. This affirmative action ban is only receiving criticism. How come I haven't heard a peep, even from politicians who ran parts of their past campaigns on ending affirmative action. I find something wrong with a proposition if none of our elected leaders or major organizations want to be associated with it. |
Karl Member Username: Karl
Post Number: 4872 Registered: 09-2005
| Posted on Monday, November 06, 2006 - 7:51 pm: | |
Zug, no offense but you don't understand the left very well. AA is the "third rail" and if you speak against it, you're zapped. Your opponent will call you a racist (usually while supporting baby dismemberment which is FAR more racist/damaging to African Americans) and your constituents, while they will agree privately, will shun you in public because it isn't socially acceptable to speak out against something that Jesse Jackson might rail personally against you for opposing. Sorry, but that's just the way it is. |
Lmichigan Member Username: Lmichigan
Post Number: 4662 Registered: 10-2003
| Posted on Monday, November 06, 2006 - 7:59 pm: | |
Yeah, it took Patterson until TODAY to even come out in support of it. His reason "no one had asked." If this was a truly noble proposal, candidates should have been all over the airwaves blasting evil and unjust AA. The fact that we have to coax the most conservative dinosaurs from their caves to even publicly acknowledge and take a side on the proposal says a lot. And, everyone knows that despite his words, DeVos is straight up lying when he says he doesn't support it. It's a back-door deal, and MCRI supporters know and embrace that. It's unabashed/unashamed deception in the highest. |
Jimaz Member Username: Jimaz
Post Number: 952 Registered: 12-2005
| Posted on Monday, November 06, 2006 - 8:02 pm: | |
Behold! The mighty Karl deploys his impervious human shield! (Message edited by Jimaz on November 06, 2006) |
Karl Member Username: Karl
Post Number: 4876 Registered: 09-2005
| Posted on Monday, November 06, 2006 - 8:04 pm: | |
No, it's hiding from a thug mentality that's taken over the left. |
Lmichigan Member Username: Lmichigan
Post Number: 4663 Registered: 10-2003
| Posted on Monday, November 06, 2006 - 8:07 pm: | |
You mean the same way the Christian conservative thugs totally hijacked the right? |
Detroit_stylin Member Username: Detroit_stylin
Post Number: 3193 Registered: 10-2003
| Posted on Monday, November 06, 2006 - 8:25 pm: | |
The exact same way LMich |
Hit24sqft Member Username: Hit24sqft
Post Number: 2 Registered: 11-2006
| Posted on Tuesday, November 07, 2006 - 12:07 pm: | |
How is the KKK any worse than the NAACP ? Please ! |
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus
Post Number: 324 Registered: 06-2006
| Posted on Tuesday, November 07, 2006 - 12:51 pm: | |
I'd be curious to know if any of the race-based affirmative action supporters would also support racial quotas in professional sports.... |
Misssocks Member Username: Misssocks
Post Number: 9 Registered: 06-2006
| Posted on Tuesday, November 07, 2006 - 12:55 pm: | |
I'd be curious to know why women don't hold ALL jobs, since they do the same work for less money, as Zug asserts. |
Zug Member Username: Zug
Post Number: 136 Registered: 01-2004
| Posted on Tuesday, November 07, 2006 - 4:54 pm: | |
Thejesus, Affirmative action in Michigan isn't about quotas. Also, if you look at the performance of our mostly Black basketball team over about the last decade in world competition (getting beaten by such places as Argentina, Puerto Rico, and Greece), then people should expand their ideas about who has potential in certain sports. Jerome Iginla of the NHL and Tiger Woods of the PGA are other examples of how when given opportunities people can succeed in sports that are not typically associated with certain groups. Misssocks, According to studies I have read, men are inherently viewed as being more qualified by many employers. And the way to ensure that quality employees do not leave is to pay them more. Also, outright discrimination is often at hand. Plus, you're acting as if women promote themselves as low wage alternatives...you'd have to ask business leaders why women are typically paid less once they are hired. |
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus
Post Number: 325 Registered: 06-2006
| Posted on Tuesday, November 07, 2006 - 4:59 pm: | |
... (Message edited by thejesus on November 07, 2006) |
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus
Post Number: 326 Registered: 06-2006
| Posted on Tuesday, November 07, 2006 - 4:59 pm: | |
Zug, actually, yes, it is about quotas in many cases...just ask U of M law school, which RESERVES a certain number of seats for minority applicants who wouldn't be able to get in on the credentials everyone else must have... That said, you also didn't answer the question...would you support racial quotas in professional sports? |
Detroit_stylin Member Username: Detroit_stylin
Post Number: 3209 Registered: 10-2003
| Posted on Tuesday, November 07, 2006 - 5:12 pm: | |
TJ basicaly says:
quote:
|
Zug Member Username: Zug
Post Number: 137 Registered: 01-2004
| Posted on Tuesday, November 07, 2006 - 5:32 pm: | |
...I had a debate with another user quite a while ago about a similar topic. Being "qualified" is not as cut and dry as some of you are acting. Acceptance into a college is about more than GPA and test scores. Getting a job is more than just showing your GPA at graduation or taking a test. Qualitative factors are almost always taken into consideration...for everyone. So to act as if it is always obvious as to who is more qualified is inherently flawed. If someone with cancer was looking for a job, would you think of it as fair if a potential employer said, "You have less recent experience than we would like, if only you weren't in the hospital last year and working instead." Back when all of the UofM affirmative action stuff was on the news, the newspaper showed how there were a considerable number of Whites who had "lower academic standards" (i.e. GPA & ACT score) than Gratz. It's not like all of the White kids at Michigan needed a 4.0 and a 34 on the ACT...there's a wide range of scores among Whites as well as every other racial group. |
English Member Username: English
Post Number: 514 Registered: 10-2003
| Posted on Tuesday, November 07, 2006 - 5:36 pm: | |
How come no one ever talks about gender in this debate? Race-based preferences seem to be the major sticking point... but there's just as much, if not more, financial support available to me as a woman, not just as a person of color. Things that make you go hmmm... |
Detroit_stylin Member Username: Detroit_stylin
Post Number: 3210 Registered: 10-2003
| Posted on Tuesday, November 07, 2006 - 5:43 pm: | |
English now...is that really a question? I brought that point up several times since this thread and others like it came up and thats all they lock on to like a rabid rottweiller. Not only are there other factors such as gender but sexual orientation as well that will be affected by this... And then they claim that minorities have a victim mentality? They say that we have an entitlement mentality? They seem to forget that Generation X was the first generation of minorities born in this country truly free (and even that is questionable), and 42 years of Affirmative Action is somehow supposed to magically disappear almost four hundred years of disenfranchisement, inequality, oppression, social injustice among a myriad of other things? We all know the truth behind what the true motives for banning this initiative is...w/ the exception of Wardell Connerly... (Message edited by Detroit_stylin on November 07, 2006) |
Janesback Member Username: Janesback
Post Number: 126 Registered: 08-2006
| Posted on Tuesday, November 07, 2006 - 5:59 pm: | |
We all know the truth behind what the true motives for banning this initiative is...w/ the exception of Wardell Connerly... ------------------------------ --------- I would think the truth and motive would be "fairness and equality for all", regardless of color, race , gender or sexual orientation........ |
Detroit_stylin Member Username: Detroit_stylin
Post Number: 3212 Registered: 10-2003
| Posted on Tuesday, November 07, 2006 - 6:05 pm: | |
OK so Jane let me ask you this since you jumped into the fray... Hypothetically speaking Affirmative Action is banned in Michigan...what alternatives do you have in mind to replace this initiative that is truly equal and fair? With the history of this country do you really believe that people will play nicely and share with each other or that we will have achieved a truly color blind society? What do you propose that we do and be as specific as you can, and not throw out some generic answer like what seems to be the safe answer on this forum... |
Janesback Member Username: Janesback
Post Number: 127 Registered: 08-2006
| Posted on Tuesday, November 07, 2006 - 6:24 pm: | |
I have never believed in quotas. I still dont. I don't believe that women, gays, blacks, chinese, muslims, jews, baptists, catholics, hispanics should be given special preferential treatment. I believe the "most qualified" be hired or admitted. Who is it fair to when you have kids in class rooms that cant keep up with the whole because a certain amount of reserved seats were held to accomidate minority students. Is it fair to him, is it fair that the class lag for this individual? If my brother, who is handicapped, applied for a job , and was unable to do the job, would I think there was prejudism or racism involved? Would I think there was unfairness in the application and hiring practice? No, hes not able to do the job........ How would he perform tasks if he were unable to keep up? Is that fair to him, or is it fair to the able bodied individual who lost out on a chance to get hired? I saw in another posting, and I myself asked, of which no one answered. Is there AA in professional sports, which claims to be an equal opportunity employer? Seen any 4 " 1 Chinese basketball players on the court, or any Eskimo transgendered pitchers on the mound lately? When is the last time you saw a woman in the World Series or in any N.B.A play offs |
Detroit_stylin Member Username: Detroit_stylin
Post Number: 3213 Registered: 10-2003
| Posted on Tuesday, November 07, 2006 - 6:29 pm: | |
OK so I ask again... IF AA is banned, then what do you propose the replace it to ENSURE that there is fair play all across the board? I didn't ask you to answer a question with a question as so many anti-AA people do... |
Janesback Member Username: Janesback
Post Number: 128 Registered: 08-2006
| Posted on Tuesday, November 07, 2006 - 6:31 pm: | |
Note to my posting In the college I attended recently for a degree in Economics, I had a counselor/ advisor give me some advice. He said when I took Calculus and pre-cal, that if I were to walk into a class room, look around and see the majority "Asian", to get up, goto Admissions, drop the class and try again. It was his experience that most American students, white, black, brown and any other color youd like, that we couldnt keep up with the Asians. I thought about it, didnt get mad. Matter of fact, I appreciated his advice and followed it accordingly. I am not that great in math. So, I headed his advice and have no problems with that. |
Janesback Member Username: Janesback
Post Number: 129 Registered: 08-2006
| Posted on Tuesday, November 07, 2006 - 6:34 pm: | |
Oops, sorry.....I didnt answer your question. I will tell you what, let me think about it, I have to go vote today, I am waiting to meet 3 others up at the polls. I will leave your answer tonite. Again, let me think on it, I am good about doing what I say, and I will leave you an answer Detroit.....Thanks, Jane |
Janesback Member Username: Janesback
Post Number: 130 Registered: 08-2006
| Posted on Tuesday, November 07, 2006 - 6:35 pm: | |
Oops, sorry.....I didnt answer your question. I will tell you what, let me think about it, I have to go vote today, I am waiting to meet 3 others up at the polls. It is 5 : 30 C.S.T and the poll is 5 mins away........I will leave your answer tonite. Again, let me think on it, I am good about doing what I say, and I will leave you an answer Detroit.....Thanks, Jane |
Zug Member Username: Zug
Post Number: 138 Registered: 01-2004
| Posted on Tuesday, November 07, 2006 - 8:27 pm: | |
...I wish someone like Janesback would just read the previous posts before they start typing. Honestly, its annoying when there is a thread that addresses so many things, then someone posts a statement as if they are ignorant to the entire conversation. Plus, would you people get off of the "equality" rhetoric. I hope you'll be pushing the politicians to rectify the inequality that exists by the fact that some people are born into privalege (wealth, political power, social connections) ...or is it okay to have inequality if its "only" based on money? Is it equality when Detroit children have to go to worse schools because of the actions of their parents, something that child has no control over? Ending affirmative action only increases the benefits to those with privelege...which in our country is historically rooted and still possessed by White men. |
Detroit_stylin Member Username: Detroit_stylin
Post Number: 3215 Registered: 10-2003
| Posted on Tuesday, November 07, 2006 - 10:32 pm: | |
*sigh* this really isnt looking so good right now... |
Lmichigan Member Username: Lmichigan
Post Number: 4670 Registered: 10-2003
| Posted on Tuesday, November 07, 2006 - 10:36 pm: | |
It's your typical voters on issues of race that tell pollsters one thing, and then vote completely another. That is, unless there is some surprise, and they haven't counted the urban areas, yet. |
Detroit_stylin Member Username: Detroit_stylin
Post Number: 3216 Registered: 10-2003
| Posted on Tuesday, November 07, 2006 - 10:40 pm: | |
In Wayne County with 19% of precincts reporting it is 52% to 48%... Jim Crow here we come. I hope the 'victims' are happy IF it actually passes... |
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus
Post Number: 327 Registered: 06-2006
| Posted on Tuesday, November 07, 2006 - 10:43 pm: | |
Detroit News: Proposal 2 currently leading 61% to 38% looking good so far! : ) |
Yupislyr Member Username: Yupislyr
Post Number: 171 Registered: 07-2004
| Posted on Tuesday, November 07, 2006 - 10:50 pm: | |
CNN.com is projecting a prop 2 win |
Warriorfan Member Username: Warriorfan
Post Number: 563 Registered: 08-2005
| Posted on Tuesday, November 07, 2006 - 10:53 pm: | |
quote:Jim Crow here we come. I hope the 'victims' are happy IF it actually passes...
Exaggerate much? Did California turn into "Jim Crow" when they passed their AA ban? Calm down Chicken Little, the sky isn't falling and we aren't going back to "whites only" drinking fountains, UofM and the other universities will simply switch to SES-based affirmative action to comply with the law, which is the way it should be. |
Detroit_stylin Member Username: Detroit_stylin
Post Number: 3218 Registered: 10-2003
| Posted on Tuesday, November 07, 2006 - 10:59 pm: | |
OK so tell me where anyone produced an alternative to Affirmative Action. And pumpo ya brakes, becuase I didnt reference you in any negative way. TY FIrst off, if this passes what other sort of sneaky initiatives will someone try to sneak through into law. Must be mighty damn nice to not have to worry about neither their personal futures, nor those of their children's... (Message edited by Detroit_stylin on November 07, 2006) |
321brian Member Username: 321brian
Post Number: 192 Registered: 02-2006
| Posted on Tuesday, November 07, 2006 - 11:14 pm: | |
I voted yes and I hope it will lead to some sort of economic based A.A. I think most everyone can agree that would be the way to go in the future. |
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus
Post Number: 328 Registered: 06-2006
| Posted on Tuesday, November 07, 2006 - 11:35 pm: | |
detroit_stylin: nothing was snuck past anyone... even if all the signatures the anti-Prop 2 groups wanted to be thrown out were thrown out, there were still more than enough signatures to place the initiative on the ballot and the ballot language itself was totally straightforward... the peoples' voice has been heard |
Ltorivia485 Member Username: Ltorivia485
Post Number: 2846 Registered: 08-2004
| Posted on Wednesday, November 08, 2006 - 2:02 am: | |
This is a VERY SAD day in MICHIGAN history. The freaken state for crying out loud is 80% white!!!!!! |
Lmichigan Member Username: Lmichigan
Post Number: 4671 Registered: 10-2003
| Posted on Wednesday, November 08, 2006 - 3:15 am: | |
Which is why it passed. When the majority is given the advantage to take advantage of the minority, they usually take it. It's just one of those terrible facts of life. (Message edited by lmichigan on November 08, 2006) |
Oldredfordette Member Username: Oldredfordette
Post Number: 765 Registered: 02-2004
| Posted on Wednesday, November 08, 2006 - 3:17 am: | |
Don't worry, LMichigan and Ltorivia. I'm sure white men will be much more generous with their privilige this time around. |
Tetsua Member Username: Tetsua
Post Number: 860 Registered: 01-2004
| Posted on Wednesday, November 08, 2006 - 8:14 am: | |
Very disappointed in the results this morning. I simply don't see this America where minorities, and women are running off with all the opportunities. For that matter last time I was at U of M to visit a friend of mine, the only blacks I saw were my friend, and myself. Affirmative Action was put in place to protect people from themselves, because people are too rotten to notice how their prejudice thoughts guide their actions. |
1953 Member Username: 1953
Post Number: 1098 Registered: 12-2004
| Posted on Wednesday, November 08, 2006 - 9:14 am: | |
Every one here needs to take a chill pill. I strongly doubt the impact of this proposal passing will be that grave and dire for you all. If anything, I think the proposal promises to open opportunity to more groups, not fewer. |
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus
Post Number: 329 Registered: 06-2006
| Posted on Wednesday, November 08, 2006 - 9:20 am: | |
Tessuta: Women aren't the ones getting into school on lower test scorse...they won't be affected by this |
Misssocks Member Username: Misssocks
Post Number: 10 Registered: 06-2006
| Posted on Wednesday, November 08, 2006 - 12:53 pm: | |
Zug, you said: "According to studies I have read, men are inherently viewed as being more qualified by many employers. And the way to ensure that quality employees do not leave is to pay them more. Also, outright discrimination is often at hand. Plus, you're acting as if women promote themselves as low wage alternatives...you'd have to ask business leaders why women are typically paid less once they are hired." First of all, the men are not viewed as "more qualified"---unless they simply are. The pay disparity studies fail to mention that men in general are viewed as being more willing to work longer hours, are not maternity-leave risks, and more dedicated to the job via abdication of caring for the home and family. That IS worth more to an employer and affects "quality." The second point you make is NOT what I am suggesting. I am saying that if an employer could hire a male or female, both of whom would do identical quality jobs, why in the world would the employer voluntarily pay MORE for the man? All employers would hire strictly women if that were true. Don't tell me business cares more about surrounding itself with all men than it does making money. |
Zug Member Username: Zug
Post Number: 139 Registered: 01-2004
| Posted on Wednesday, November 08, 2006 - 2:22 pm: | |
"...men in general are viewed as being more willing to work longer hours, are not maternity-leave risks, and more dedicated to the job via abdication of caring for the home and family." - Actually, these are the exact reasons why they say women are discriminated against. Perhaps I should have extrapolated on my statement that, "Also, outright discrimination is often at hand." Your statement supports what I said...if you really think these qualities make men more qualified. Some of this sounds like sexist assumptions to me...how can you tell a man would be more willing to work or be away from their families. Also, is it fair that women should be penalized because they could potentially get pregnant? And you want to know why people say there is institutionalized discrimination...these should not be reasons to pay women less or not hire them. Penalizing a woman based on preconceived assumptions or because of reproduction sounds like discrimination to me. - Plus, the point is...if companies assume that women are less qualified for doing the same jobs (job positions) then they will pay women less. Women are assumed to be worse employees...you wouldn't want to pay the less qualified employees the same as the qualified ones. Companies do not value the women workers as much as their male counterparts...why would a company want an entire office of "bad" workers? Perhaps you misunderstood what I meant by "same job"...for example, female accountants vs. male accountants. Bottom line, it appears that women in specific professions disproportionately get the less desired/lower paying jobs. That is why it doesn't make sense to say they should have all jobs. Unless a job is not desired by men, such as being a maid, then men will usually be considered more qualified. ...but I guess none of this matters in Michigan anymore...because now everything is perfectly fair and equal <sarcasm>. On the bright side, at least women and minorities who get into college or get specific jobs will not be automatically looked at as "tokens". |
Misssocks Member Username: Misssocks
Post Number: 11 Registered: 06-2006
| Posted on Wednesday, November 08, 2006 - 4:19 pm: | |
Zug, I'm not even clear on some of your points. The ones I do understand, such as being "penalized" for maternity---look, do you get how the whole "business" thing works? If you could hire someone who wouldn't be taking off three months at full pay versus someone who would, who would you hire? You don't seem to get my point about the economics of it. In any case, there are already laws against discriminating against someone based on age, sex, or skin color, so I don't really get what the fucking huff is about. The concept of this "equality" is false, anyway; it's like some kind of Moonie painting with lions and rabbits and shit all sitting around together peacefully. Let's face it, under the law, we are all equal. Meaning we all have the right to own property, have a job, drive a car, travel, have legal representation, etc. We are NOT all equal when it comes to education opportunity or job opportunity. And artificially trying to make it so by forcing universities or businesses to accept or hire someone based on sex or skin color and then find out AFTERWARD if they've got what it takes is an utter waste of time. Some people really are smarter, faster, and better at things than you or me. PS I do like your "such as being a maid" remark. Thanks, guys, for leaving the maid jobs open! At least that's one arena where I can really "clean up"! |
Zug Member Username: Zug
Post Number: 140 Registered: 01-2004
| Posted on Wednesday, November 08, 2006 - 5:56 pm: | |
You anti affirmative actions patriots are right. I concede. Now that things are equal, everyone will be peaceful...all racial, gender, religious, and sexual orientation tension in the state will instantly disappear. Everyone has the same opportunities...finally! Michigan is now perfect! The last discriminated group, White men, are finally freed from the bonds of discrimination and a life of poverty and limited opportunities. We can finally all live as good as the most dominant and privileged group in Michigan during the evil affirmative action era: the handicapped Black lesbian Muslim. Thank goodness we can all have all of the benefits as the handicapped Black lesbian Muslim!!! |
Lmichigan Member Username: Lmichigan
Post Number: 4676 Registered: 10-2003
| Posted on Wednesday, November 08, 2006 - 8:01 pm: | |
With the passing of the magnanimous MCRI, Michigan will now be a shining beacon for Civil Rights and 'equality,' the likes of which this country has never known before in its history. We are amongst good company with Washington and California being the only other two states in this depraved nation to pass these wonderful laws making every magically equal over night. People will come from all around to witness how well we all harmonize in this great state from our grossly segregated urban areas, to our downright racist, backwards rural counties (i.e. Livingston). Oh you poor Mississippi fools down in the backwards Deep South that still practice the undeniably racist witchcraft of Affirmative Action... How can one be surprised when we still have people injecting race into the placement of WalMarts in Metro Detroit? How can we be surprised when the main thing keeping back mass transit is to keep those with the least from moving freely throughout the entire metro area? Good luck, Majority Michigan, because you're sure as hell going to need it. There is a reason why this state is going to hell in many social areas, and it ain't because Granholm's in office, let me tell you. You poor, poor victimized white men that vote for this "equality." Hopefully with this vote, you will be paid back in full and experience TRUE discrimination so that you will learn. Remember, Karma's a bitch. |
Misssocks Member Username: Misssocks
Post Number: 12 Registered: 06-2006
| Posted on Thursday, November 09, 2006 - 1:07 pm: | |
Jesus, you two idiots think you need a hand with everything!--even to get from point A to point B--and if you can't manage on your own, it's someone else's fault! No wonder society's so fucked up. So many victims! Got a tip for ya: Take the bus into Southfield at rush hour one day and take a gander at all the blacks in their Jags and SUVs. I wonder how they managed with all this terrible racism! |
Zug Member Username: Zug
Post Number: 141 Registered: 01-2004
| Posted on Thursday, November 09, 2006 - 2:24 pm: | |
Assumptions, assumptions, assumptions. When did I ever say I was Black? But you are right, people do play the victim too much...White men played the victim to get this legislation passed. And a flaw to your argument is that Southfield grew to be like it is under affirmative action . It's your ignorance of history that is astounding...if you honestly think there is no discrimination then you must have a diverse group of friends, wouldn't mind if your children married a person of any racial/ethnic background, and would love to live in a safe community composed of people from any racial/ethnic group. If you could honestly say that all of that applies to you, then congratulations...you've done your part to create a more unified society. But if you wouldn't want to live in a neighborhood composed of certain people, or if you would get upset if your son or daughter married someone of a different race/ethnicity, or if you do not want to socialize with people of a different race/ethnicity, then you need to be more honest with yourself. I would say that none of these situations bother me. But if I want to be honest about the world, I know many people who think I'm nuts...so I refuse to say discrimination is dead in America! I know what you're saying...that on the books we are all equal...but what's the point of government if it blindly watches as discrimination happens? (Message edited by Zug on November 09, 2006) |
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus
Post Number: 336 Registered: 06-2006
| Posted on Thursday, November 09, 2006 - 3:01 pm: | |
Zug...SES-based AA is simply better, and that is what we'll have now...poeple who actually need the help will get it...why do you have such a problem with that? |
Zug Member Username: Zug
Post Number: 142 Registered: 01-2004
| Posted on Thursday, November 09, 2006 - 3:23 pm: | |
I don't, but gender and racial issues go beyond social class. I actually do think SES affirmative action would be nice, I've advocated it in the past (on other threads), but I still find it difficult to apply to anything but university applications. |
Misssocks Member Username: Misssocks
Post Number: 13 Registered: 06-2006
| Posted on Thursday, November 09, 2006 - 4:07 pm: | |
You're the one making assumptions, Zug. AA existed, therefore Blacks in Southfield succeeded. Ever considered the concept that probably MOST of them did it through hard work? You also ASSUME that everyone is racist and thus you, the superior and colorblind attitude adjusters of the world, Zug & Associates, must force them to hire people you KNOW they wouldn't! And I never said there wasn't any discrimination. That's why there are already laws against it, and we don't need to be forced to hire people based on race. |
Zug Member Username: Zug
Post Number: 143 Registered: 01-2004
| Posted on Thursday, November 09, 2006 - 5:09 pm: | |
I never said Blacks in Southfield didn’t succeed because of hard work. Southfield became a Black-majority city from the 1980s to the present. During this entire period, affirmative action was in place. To use something from this era as evidence that affirmative action is not needed is not a very sound research design. You should use an example from a place or time that does not have affirmative action, then it is a more logical argument. You’re the one who believes that unqualified people benefit from affirmative action. I think affirmative action helps to give opportunities to help those that are deserving and qualified within diverse communities. Also, I’m not colorblind, I just don’t have a problem with diversity. I can appreciate what different cultures and viewpoints and histories can provide, which lets me acknowledge the hardship that different groups have had in this country. If someone is fearful or disdainful of diversity, then what is their basis for believing that they would consider others fairly? That’s a logical question to ask. (Message edited by Zug on November 09, 2006) |
Misssocks Member Username: Misssocks
Post Number: 14 Registered: 06-2006
| Posted on Thursday, November 09, 2006 - 5:27 pm: | |
Christ, you just can't assume that all of a particular race has suffered, or that all of any other particular group has a fear or disdain of diversity. You want to throw a blanket over the whole state that forces us all to behave as though this were true. You think that the "deserving and qualified" NEED AA and I don't. I don't think that this does anything to "repair" what some no-longer-alive-persons may have suffered. |
Zug Member Username: Zug
Post Number: 144 Registered: 01-2004
| Posted on Thursday, November 09, 2006 - 5:47 pm: | |
Okay, you can believe that. I can't make you change your mind, but you can't change mine. Discrimination is usually directed towards a group, so this is where you should try to rectify the effects of discrimination. Plus, there's plenty of people around who were alive before 1965 (when affirmative action was first enforced)just a year after the Civil Rights Act became law. (Message edited by Zug on November 09, 2006) |