White-hating racists get Stormfront booted off the internet ! FIRST AMENMENT IS DEAD

blackascoal said:
[/B]

Yet you're talking about black students, not white women.
Click to expand...

We can talk about white women as well if you would like. White women don't need AA to get into universities today. It shouldn't exist for them. My belief now is the same as it's been for years and there should be more of a judgement/benefit given based on economic circumstances. That's transcends race and gender.
 
cawacko said:
We can talk about white women as well if you would like. White women don't need AA to get into universities today. It shouldn't exist for them. My belief now is the same as it's been for years and there should be more of a judgement/benefit given based on economic circumstances. That's transcends race and gender.
Click to expand...

What the hell are you talking about? Obviously you don't know much about the program. The rise of white women in college and among the faculty are tied directly to Affirmative Action.

You speak of black students because you're a republican .. thus prone to bullshit.

If you're against the program and knew anything about it, why wouldn't you be talking about its biggest beneficiaries?
 
blackascoal said:
What the hell are you talking about? Obviously you don't know much about the program. The rise of white women in college and among the faculty are tied directly to Affirmative Action.

You speak of black students because you're a republican .. thus prone to bullshit.

If you're against the program and knew anything about it, why wouldn't you be talking about its biggest beneficiaries?
Click to expand...

You think if AA went away today there would be a huge drop off in women going to college? Don't women generally get higher grades than men in school?

Do you think when democrats talk about AA they are talking about white women?

I spoke about black students based on what I said, Prop 209 in California. Have women had the same drop in CA universities as black and Hispanic students since its passage?
 
And BAC, re-read my post to Cypress. I included athletes and legacies. Both those groups include white males. The same question exists to white make legacies. Do they benefit by getting into a school they wouldn't have otherwise qualified for if not for a family member having already attended?

(Now some legacies also qualify on their own. I'm talking the ones who don't but still get in)
 
blackascoal said:
Have you been paying attention to events? Have you paid attention to how many times right-wingers have been denied permits to assemble for the very reasons that I stated? They've been denied because of the potential for violence.

The measure is the 'potential' for violence.

Should I post examples of that?
Click to expand...
I mentioned many demonstration permits are denied because of fears of violence.
noise said:
non-violent speech is protected speech.
a lot of time not giving permits is used to shut down free speech on the basis
that a demonstration will lead to violence. free speech ( even vile speech) especially political speech is absolutely 100% protected speech
Click to expand...



But if that denial of permit would get to court (under calmer times) the standard of imminent threat having not being met by the state would default to the plaintiffs win.
And I would think heavy damages awarded to the vile Nazi's (speakers)

You can't screw around with free speech. It's the most protected class of speech when it's political speech.
The founders designed it that way to ensure politics is populist
 
Last edited:
cawacko said:
We can talk about white women as well if you would like. White women don't need AA to get into universities today. It shouldn't exist for them. My belief now is the same as it's been for years and there should be more of a judgement/benefit given based on economic circumstances. That's transcends race and gender.
Click to expand...

All race-based or sex-based special treatment needs to end. There is no GIANT CONSPIRACY holding blacks and women down and there never has been. They simply don't have the ability of white men.
 
Cypress said:
Lot of bitterness there, mate. I have never had the slightest disadvantage in any way from having my white skin.
Click to expand...

illogical.......advantage given MUST be accompanied by advantage taken away.....if there are a finite number of seats in a college classroom or job openings in a fire department, then giving one group an advantage because of a biological factor automatically becomes a disadvantage to those without that biological condition.......
 
blackascoal said:
Have you been paying attention to events? Have you paid attention to how many times right-wingers have been denied permits to assemble for the very reasons that I stated? They've been denied because of the potential for violence.

The measure is the 'potential' for violence.

Should I post examples of that?
Click to expand...

you need to distinguish between the legal standard and the standard commonly applied by lib'rul bodies such as Berkeley.......
 
blackascoal said:
.. so an unequal and unjust society would have been better in your opinion?

Are you aware that the biggest beneficiaries of AA are white women .. BY FAR?

Did you know that?

I ask because here you are talking about black students .. who aren't even the ones who benefit from the program the most.

It demonstrates that you aren't as knowledgeable about the program as you think you are.
Click to expand...

so your argument is two wrongs make a right?......
 
PostmodernProphet said:
illogical.......advantage given MUST be accompanied by advantage taken away.....if there are a finite number of seats in a college classroom or job openings in a fire department, then giving one group an advantage because of a biological factor automatically becomes a disadvantage to those without that biological condition.......
Click to expand...

Yes indeed. When blacks get special treatment then whites are harmed. And that is exactly what libs want. Hurting whitey is far far more important to them than helping blacks. Libs are white-hating racists.
 
cawacko said:
I got the impression you were saying white people who weren't economically successful were losers. Maybe I misinterpreted you statement and that's my bad if I did.

The question about AA and Universities is (and this would pertain to athletes and legacies as well) are we doing kids a disservice by putting them in schools for which they would not have otherwise qualified for? The ultimate judgement of that is graduation rates. For example I'm sure you're aware of Prop 209 I believe it was which basically outlawed the use of race in college admissions in California. UCLA had a much smaller percentage of black students enter as Freshman in the following years but the number of black students who graduated remained the same. One can get much deeper into these numbers and the reasons for them but the question remains, is it better to put someone in a school they didn't qualify for and have them drop out or go to a 'lesser' school and graduate?

I'm not sure why you threw conservative into your response. Should I be standing on my chair praising out loud the gov't for removing racist discriminatory practices it itself had put into place? It never should have been there to begin with.
Click to expand...

Addressing the bolded... there was a time in our history when women couldn't even get admitted into college and one of the reasons was that they weren't considered bright enough to understand intellectual issues. Now women in college outnumber men and perform better than men.

I say give people a chance to show what they can do and stop arguing about qualify. Deadbeats and loafers don't apply to college in the first place.
 
christiefan915 said:
Addressing the bolded... there was a time in our history when women couldn't even get admitted into college and one of the reasons was that they weren't considered bright enough to understand intellectual issues. Now women in college outnumber men and perform better than men.

I say give people a chance to show what they can do and stop arguing about qualify. Deadbeats and loafers don't apply to college in the first place.
Click to expand...

We have seen results, the numbers are out there. I've posted the UCLA numbers several times. This isn't an issue of saying people shouldn't go to college. It's about what's best for the kids. Is going to a better school and not graduating better than getting a degree from a 'lessor' University?
 
christiefan915 said:
Addressing the bolded... there was a time in our history when women couldn't even get admitted into college and one of the reasons was that they weren't considered bright enough to understand intellectual issues. Now women in college outnumber men and perform better than men.

.
Click to expand...


Women do NOT outperform men in college. They may get better grades but that's because they take easy, verbal, useless courses like sociology or french lit. Only STEM counts and the bimbos shun that. THINK
 
cawacko said:
We have seen results, the numbers are out there. I've posted the UCLA numbers several times. This isn't an issue of saying people shouldn't go to college. It's about what's best for the kids. Is going to a better school and not graduating better than getting a degree from a 'lessor' University?
Click to expand...

This is a common problem. Some black kid with a fine Math SAT of 600 gets into MIT, where the average is 790+, and flunks out. If he had gone to a nice state school like OSU, he'd have done great.
 
Buckly J. Ewer said:
If he ever becomes anti Nazi and anti white supremacist, I'm sure he will be welcomed with loving arms, granny...
Click to expand...
lol.

Not quite, blowjob.

Those criminal degenerates are soldiers of stupidity, and that's it.

Now go put your antifa mask on and burn something to the ground. ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top