Scalia’s controversial remarks about African Americans expose U.S. higher education

Celticguy said:
The quiet racism of low exoectations. Rampant among the left.
Click to expand...

Yes, it's unbelievable.

The leftists like Mott saying blacks can't do it themselves and need help to make it

- Racism? No, of course not

Others saying that's ridiculous, blacks are people like everyone else and lowering the bard is an insult to capable blacks

- Racism? Mott, it's "soft" racism, you can't say blacks can make it on their own, it's an insult.

Yeah, they are a bunch of idiots
 
kaz said:
You're such a dumb ass. Scalia was talking about blacks making on their own merits rather than lowering the bar for them as if somehow they are less capable, and you write it to imply he's OK with targeting blacks for discrimination when he's for not discriminating for or against them. you're a liberal Democrat card board cut out
Click to expand...

If you don't understand soft racism when you see it, you're part of the problem.
 
NOVA said:
Isn't that exactly what the Justice was saying.....after all, the context of his statements was within the topic of affirmative action, favoring one group over another group.
Click to expand...

AA was initiated to correct bias in the system. What is wrong with that? Furthermore, this isn't the only country with some form of AA. Others also recognize that not every race or gender gets a fair deal in schooling or employment. Yet all you can do is babble "but WHITE GUYS..."

"The term "affirmative action" was first used in the United States in "Executive Order No.10925",[SUP][6][/SUP] signed by President John F. Kennedy on 6 March 1961, which included a provision that government contractors "take affirmative action to ensure that applicants are employed, and employees are treated during employment, without regard to their race, creed, color, or national origin."[SUP][7][/SUP] In 1967, gender was added to the anti-discrimination list."
 
NOVA said:
So TWO WRONGS make a right in you mind ?.....I don't think the adage goes quite like that.....AA IS DISCRIMINATION....that, good sir, is an undeniable fact.....

In rhetoric and ethics, two wrongs make a right and two wrongs don't make a right are phrases that denote philosophical norms. "Two wrongs make a right" is a fallacy of relevance, in which an allegation of wrongdoing is countered with a similar allegation. Its antithesis, "two wrongs don't make a right", is a proverb used to rebuke or renounce wrongful conduct as a response to another's transgression.

Conservative....: You shouldn't embezzle from your employer. It's against the law.


Liberal............: My employer cheats on their taxes. That's against the law, too!

We hear this argument on JPP several times a day
Click to expand...

Was there racial discrimination before AA, yes or no? Is there still racial discrimination, yes or no?
 
Mott the Hoople said:
Again, that's an assumption of your part that because a person of color may be subjectively less qualified than their white counterpart that they are not at all qualified. Soft racism Nora....you gotta be careful about that. Think it through!
Click to expand...

I don't believe that I am assuming that a person of color may be less qualified than their white counterpart though. What I am trying to say is that a person should be not admitted into a university because of their skin color. I should not be admitted because i'm white anymore than a black person or hispanic persons should be admitted because of their skin color. I don't believe that's racist at all to be honest with you. If it's wrong to admit someone because they are white then it's wrong to admit someone because they aren't white.
 
Last edited:
christiefan915 said:
AA was initiated to correct bias in the system. What is wrong with that? Furthermore, this isn't the only country with some form of AA. Others also recognize that not every race or gender gets a fair deal in schooling or employment. Yet all you can do is babble "but WHITE GUYS..."

"The term "affirmative action" was first used in the United States in "Executive Order No.10925",[SUP][6][/SUP] signed by President John F. Kennedy on 6 March 1961, which included a provision that government contractors "take affirmative action to ensure that applicants are employed, and employees are treated during employment, without regard to their race, creed, color, or national origin."[SUP][7][/SUP] In 1967, gender was added to the anti-discrimination list."
Click to expand...

No need for a history lesson on AA....I know about it as well as you....all that don't change the fact that it is racist and discriminatory against other groups of people....
You remedy bias in the system by removing that bias, not by adding new biases that suits your politics....
Why can't lefties think logically.....?
 
Mott the Hoople said:
Sorry Nora. That rationalization is just soft racism. You're argument is based on the premise that these students of color either are not qualified or do not believe themselves to be qualified when there is no question that the admissions process is either fair or objective when it is not and has never been.

Scalia's convoluted thinking is just his rationalizing his own racist view point. The soft racism of accept less than what you believe you are capable of so that you can play catch up to us superior white folk and than maybe one day you can be like one of us. It's a load of horse apples. Learning to compete at the highest level is often of far more value than any grade one would receive.

These folks of color are tax payers in Texas and by golly if they are 15% of the population and they pay 15% of the taxes than by golly they are within in their rights to see the best and brightest in their communities represent 15% of the enrollment of that State funded school. Particularly given this States history of denying these folks access to a quality education.

The flaw in the argument here is that the admission's process is completely objective and unbiased in terms of qualifications when to any objective observer they have never, ever been. So just because there may arguably be a better qualified candidate doesn't mean, out of hand, that the candidate of color isn't qualified.

That's just poor reasoning based on flawed logic using a false premise.
Click to expand...

Bullshit on your 'soft racism'...We happen to use testing, then interviews to judge applicants for college entry and most jobs.....its fast, simple and fairly accurate....

Lowering standards or favoritism or set asides, or quotas, based on the color of your skin is what is racist, and that is undeniable.

The test don't know what color your are. You either pass or fail....We're all born and raised in the same country, using the same language, etc....so its also bullshit the
the tests themselves are racist....their is no such thing.....
All you pinheads do is invent excuses for everything...and the two you use to the extreme is bias and racism.....
1+1 =2 and 10x10=100 for blacks and whites alike........US history is the same for everyone as is spelling and English, etc....
Ebonics is even more ridiculous today than it was in 1996 when it was introduced as another excuse for blacks lagging behind....
Blacks can learn about US history and geography just as well as whites can learn about African history and geography....history and geography are not racist....

How can liberal thinking can be so convoluted and illogical amazes me.....
 
Mott the Hoople said:
Again, that's an assumption of your part that because a person of color may be subjectively less qualified than their white counterpart that they are not at all qualified. Soft racism Nora....you gotta be careful about that. Think it through!
Click to expand...

Maybe you should think it through.....choosing the more qualified over the less qualified isn't even close to racism, soft or hard.....

Choosing because or race or skin color is racism..., choosing by religion or political bent, etc. is another form of bias that is akin to racism.....

Choosing by qualification is what is normal.....If the black person was MORE qualified and you picked him, would that be 'soft racism' against the white....WTF?
 
christiefan915 said:
AA was initiated to correct bias in the system. What is wrong with that? Furthermore, this isn't the only country with some form of AA. Others also recognize that not every race or gender gets a fair deal in schooling or employment. Yet all you can do is babble "but WHITE GUYS..."

"The term "affirmative action" was first used in the United States in "Executive Order No.10925",[SUP][6][/SUP] signed by President John F. Kennedy on 6 March 1961, which included a provision that government contractors "take affirmative action to ensure that applicants are employed, and employees are treated during employment, without regard to their race, creed, color, or national origin."[SUP][7][/SUP] In 1967, gender was added to the anti-discrimination list."
Click to expand...

So it was created to correct bias in the system? Did it work? How will you know if it works? How do you measure if it works or not?
 
NOVA said:
No need for a history lesson on AA....I know about it as well as you....all that don't change the fact that it is racist and discriminatory against other groups of people....
You remedy bias in the system by removing that bias, not by adding new biases that suits your politics....
Why can't lefties think logically.....?
Click to expand...

What is your answer toward racial bias in education, hiring, housing and all the rest? I hope you're not going to try and pretend that none of that happens or even worse, that the best and brightest blacks are still less intelligent than whites.
 
christiefan915 said:
By the before and after numbers after it was put into place, for one.
Click to expand...

Numbers? What numbers?

So you are looking for quotas?

And what characteristic do black people lack that will prevent them from overcoming this bias you say exists?

For example are white people standing outside their homes screaming at them to not study hard and to join gangs and to have children out of wedlock?

I am sure you will have some contrived answer about not spending enough tax payer dollars in public schools
 
christiefan915 said:
What is your answer toward racial bias in education, hiring, housing and all the rest? I hope you're not going to try and pretend that none of that happens or even worse, that the best and brightest blacks are still less intelligent than whites.
Click to expand...

I say nothing like you posted and I don't claim to have all the answers....I do know that adding more discrimination in another direction isn't the answer....just as I know taking
guns from law abiding citizens won't stop gun violence....

When bias and bigotry are detected in the public education system or hiring, or housing, THAT is where it must dealt with...meaning, those that guilty of the bias and discrimination and
not those that have no part in it.

That is not the same as saying that every school or apartment building or neighborhood must have X number of blacks or Asians or Latinos or its biased...


Howard University is one of the best "black" colleges in the country, ....93% Black and rated Moderately difficult to gain entrance.....so if its moderately difficult to get into, isn't
that saying they pick and choose only those with the better grades and test scores.....1.5% white.....--- .4 % Hispanic, that hardly diverse....
68% female, do they discriminate against young black men?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top