Racism and sexism are solved! Why are Michelle Obama and Sonia Sotomayor still talking about it? Don’t those girls realize that its the upper class white man who is now oppressed?
(And I know this is years in the past, but Hanson has never clarified his b.s. assertion that liberals somehow were in a furor over the movie 300)
So the next time I get pulled over for DWB I can smile and say “Sorry, you got the wrong person” roll up my window and drive on?
Thanks!
So, what’s his fourth observation?
Shorter Oliver Willis
Headline and post are inflammatory and have little bearing on underlying story.
He never said anything about oppression, but this very post indicates that it’s not acceptable for him to even question specific experiences that specific people have had.
Shorter Amused Observer: “I don’t understand how to use ’shorter’.”
Shorter shorter “Amused Observer”:
‘Right wing lies rule.’
Racism is almost gone. The main problem is that leftists assume that white people have a default setting that is racist. Too many times when an incident takes place between two people of different races, it’s assumed that white person’s motivation was racial hatred, even without any proof of this. The other issues is that liberals don’t want racism, or at least the perception that it is a major problem in our society, to stop. It is the bread and butter of the left. Without this notion, there would be no democratic party. Just the border issue alone reeks of racial politics. As do affirmative action, contract set-asides, quotas, minority grants, etc. There will never be a day in this country when identity politics aren’t a factor. As long as some people are promised entitlements based on their hue, it’ll be there. How long policies like this ultimately last will depend upon when white democrats realize that the identity-politics game is only set up to eat them last, (with the exception of white, ivory tower politicians) eventually forcing them to jump off the liberal ship. Eventually, it’ll happen. People aren’t stupid enough, even white democrats, to support policies that intentionally discriminate against them in a country that is already an entire 1/3 non-white. It’s when, not if.
VDH looks like Orville Redenbacher
Too many times when an incident takes place between two people of different races, it’s assumed that white person’s motivation was racial hatred, even without any proof of this.
And then you proceed into a rant that culminates with an appeal to white paranoia of “a country that is already an entire 1/3 non-white.”
I can’t imagine what would motivate such an appeal.
Racism is almost gone.
Take the bone out of your nose and get back to me.
Shorter fafaroo: I don’t really understand so I’ll just call him racist.
Let me explain this to you, faf…..
1/3 of the population isn’t white. As this number increases, yes, more and more white people will think it’s crazy for policies to be in place that favor 1/3 or more of the population over them for contracts, employment,ect, and will not support those said policies. That isn’t paranoia. That is common sense. And reality.
What part of that is confusing to you?
Racism is almost gone.
Things are better than they were. Unfortunately, there is still a safe harbor for racist assholes: the political party run by Rush Limbaugh (previously posted at a different thread, but relevant here):
Where we’re at:
So it looks like we still have some work to do. I wonder if Boss Limbaugh will speak out against his party’s well documented pattern of ugliness.
ed would have us believe that , if there is any racism at all, then America is a racist country.
Using that kind of logic, America is a murdering, raping, robbing, burglarizing, embezzling, vandalizing, mugging, aborting, child molesting incestuous country as well (I am out of breath, not crimes).
There is no cure for racism. The true end of racism will come, when races are indistinguishable.
And the Democrats have Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson, for starters. There are racists on both sides, but also lots more people that aren’t. Such accusations do nothing but make things worse.
I for one didn’t flip out because conservatives swooned over this awful, dreadfully bad movie with all these hot guys wearing leather thong pants and no shirts jumped around on screen facing scary 7 foot tall Persians and such. To the contrary, I absolutely adored the weirdo homo-eroticism from all the war-mongering right.
What part of that is confusing to you?
The part where you think discrimination has anything to do with numbers.
yo mama,
Well thanks for letting me know that the reason I’m pulled over on average of 1X a month (Strangely only in small or “Good” neighborhoods) is not real.
Yo Mama it’s real, though it is prevalent in fewer people. it is more … virulent I face it on a daily basis. In some places it is so bad it affects my ability to REPORT A CRIME.
I take your point (though I do not agree with it I understand what you are trying to say.) But it IS real and it will neer leave the harts minds nnd actions of some of the people in this country.
Peace be with you
ZOMG! Grumpyman is black?!
There are racists on both sides, but also lots more people that aren’t.
Look! Over there! False equivalence!
(Yet again!)
But nice try pretending that the Southern Strategy isn’t still with us. Admitting you have a problem is the first step to recovery.
And the Democrats have Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson, for starters.
*Yawn.* Sooo last century. What else you got?
The true end of racism will come, when races are indistinguishable.
Stop screwing around, get out there and knock up some black chicks, Frank.
Well thanks for letting me know that the reason I’m pulled over on average of 1X a month
Yeah, Driving While Hispanic might as well be in the penal code in Arizona, I’m told.
300 was a little… homoerotic.
Still, who the doesn’t want to see a dude with a spear solo a fucking rhino?
Duros, interestingly, research has shown that black women are the least successful at interracial relationships
We have a pretty smart fairly even handed guy write an article pointing out that everyone is a little bit freaked out at college. Most people get through it. Mama Obama never felt at ease at college and wrote near the end of her stay there that she felt alienated even though people were nice to her.
Next we have Oliver posting his normal inflammatory bullshit propaganda that often has little to do with the underlying story.
What blacks don’t get is most whites don’t really think about them too much. You’re just not the most important thing on the radar screen. Is there still racism in this country? You bet.
And it goes both ways. Someone was ranting about emails and jokes making fun of blacks circulating. I am sure it happens all the time. I’m also sure that blacks make jokes about white people all the time.
I’m sure that getting pulled over while black is a pain in the ass. Well guess what, I used to get pulled over when I was a punk kid because punk kids fit a profile for trouble. I know you guys think racial profiling is oh so horrible but do you think cops do it because they hate blacks or is it because blacks commit crime much more than thier raw numbers would predict.
All we hear about is discrimination bitch bitch bitch. Develope a culture that reveres education a little more and maybe you’ll do better. Try to raise more kids in a 2 parent household so the Dad can keep his boys from raising so much hell and getting into so much trouble. We bend over backwards for you guys. Affirmative action which is so unconstitutional used to give blacks either extra points or just held out spots for blacks they couldn’t get any other way. That’s not fair to the people displaced by those extra points or reserved spaces.
This whole Ricci affair that Obama’s first Supreme justice pick is all wrapped up in is a perfect example. Blacks couldn’t pass the test so the test is at fault, throw it out. I realize the city was in a tight spot because of federal legislation. But that federal legislation was put in place to help blacks compete, not on thier own merits but with a leg up. In many jobs its not legal to test for intelligence because it is alledgedly discriminatory. So I can’t hire the smartest guys that apply, I need to pick out some dimmer ones. How dumb is that?
I imagine I’m going to get a bunch of racist accusations out of this, but so what. I haven’t said anything that isn’t true and everyone here reading this knows it.
w
Amused Observer,
“I’m sure that getting pulled over while black is a pain in the ass. Well guess what, I used to get pulled over when I was a punk kid because punk kids fit a profile for trouble. I know you guys think racial profiling is oh so horrible but do you think cops do it because they hate blacks or is it because blacks commit crime much more than thier raw numbers would predict.”
Bullshit.
I’m a 40 ish man Married I’ve been with my wife for 19 years.
I was driving a new car working a professional job (Yes a professional. I fit no ones idea of someone that is doing something wrong (Unless you leave out my skin.) I WORKED with law enforcement. And they readily admit what they are doing is wrong.
“All we hear about is discrimination bitch bitch bitch. Develope a culture that reveres education a little more and maybe you’ll do better. Try to raise more kids in a 2 parent household so the Dad can keep his boys from raising so much hell and getting into so much trouble. We bend over backwards for you guys. Affirmative action which is so unconstitutional used to give blacks either extra points or just held out spots for blacks they couldn’t get any other way. That’s not fair to the people displaced by those extra points or reserved spaces.”
If I begin to explain what is wrong with this statement I will become… uncivil, so all I will say is the fact that you see nothing wrong with this thinking this is the reason cons are bigoted. And if they would own up to the racism I would have as much respect for them as I do the KKK.
“I imagine I’m going to get a bunch of racist accusations out of this, but so what. I haven’t said anything that isn’t true and everyone here reading this knows it.”
I read it and I know it’s bullshit. Unless you are saying that I am less than, (Not a surprise taking in to account what you have just said.) or not human, stands as proof that your diatribe is not only off kilter but a racist statement and offensive to boot.
Good day to you sir.
Sorry not 19 years it’s 10
Oh boy. So much Amused Observer id laid bare. Wow. Let’s have a look:
I’m sure that getting pulled over while black is a pain in the ass. Well guess what, I used to get pulled over when I was a punk kid because punk kids fit a profile for trouble.
Should I explain the difference to him? Nah, he wouldn’t get it anyway.
I know you guys think racial profiling is oh so horrible but do you think cops do it because they hate blacks or is it because blacks commit crime much more than thier raw numbers would predict.
Hate blacks (either overtly or subconsciously). Next question.
All we hear about is discrimination bitch bitch bitch.
Indeed. Why are Those People so uppity anyway? What did nice white people like Amused Observer ever do to Them? Just because They are constantly discriminated against, is that any reason to complain?
Develope a culture that reveres education a little more and maybe you’ll do better.
No comment necessary.
We bend over backwards for you guys.
Obviously. You guys. You hear? You guys? It must be so hard to be a white male in these United States. Thanks for your being extra bendy, AO. You’re a credit to your race.
I realize the city was in a tight spot because of federal legislation.
Yeah, what is it with that Rule of Law in a democracy thingy anyway?
In many jobs its not legal to test for intelligence because it is alledgedly discriminatory.
Does spelling count?
I imagine I’m going to get a bunch of racist accusations out of this, but so what. I haven’t said anything that isn’t true and everyone here reading this knows it.
Ladies and gentlemen: Your modern Republican party. Charming as ever.
Shorter Amused Observer: Racism in the defense of racism is what Amused Observer is all about.
I’m sure that getting pulled over while black is a pain in the ass.
And a Fourth Amendment violation unless there is an actual Vehicle Code violation.
In a reversal of that, I was pulled over for Driving While White, after I was seen in a parking lot where most white people would be afraid to go and where a black citizen wouldn’t even be noticed. Before I was pulled over, I got a cell-phone call from the parking lot advising me that three Sheriff’s vehicles were stalking me, so I was ready when the light went on.
The deputy never bothered to point out a Vehicle Code violation, he just pulled me over, demanded my license and detained me for a warrant check. A rare experience for me, a common experience for my friends.
What blacks don’t get is most whites don’t really think about them too much.
…Says the world’s foremost authority on what strawmen think.
The trollpack claim that racism is only a concern for liberals, and word it in the form of a solid wall of text several times the height of my screen. That’s a good example of them not being concerned about that!
Grumpymann…..
I don’t believe you when you say you get pulled over once a month. Sorry. It’s an outrageous claim. You say that’s racism. I say this to you: slow down. Come to a complete stop. Use your turn signals. You’ll notice a dramatic difference in how often you’re pulled over.
If by chance you aren’t lying or greatly exaggerating, I’d seek legal advice. Cause that’s fucked up for anyone to get pulled over that often, white or black.
Cause that’s fucked up for anyone to get pulled over that often, white or black.
Indeed. It’s called racism, Republican guy.
(And love the “white or black” bit. That’s a dead giveaway. Classic. Whenever you hear someone say, “I don’t care what color a person is…” you should leave the room pronto, ’cause you’ll want to take a shower if you hear the rest.)
Oh, and say, yo mama, what did you think of Amused Observer’s extended comment? Care to defend it?
I say this to you…
And I (virtually) say this to you: You’re a racist asshole.
I see Oliver still gets the D-List trolls. If this weren’t such a target rich environment, I’d be surprised people haven’t taken full advantage of the low-hanging fruit in yo mama’s claim that discrimination against non-white people can’t possibly occur in a state that is one-third non-white. That’s Anthony Kennedy stupid there. Yo mama, ladies and gentlemen. The world’s first apartheid denier. And apparently someone who’s never been to Mississippi.
Yes. I’m racist for pointing out that something is racist. Nice logic. Man, some of you are f***ed in the head. Seriously. I’d say that if you’re white and you support people and policies that actively discriminate against you, you need to have your head examined. Something is fundamentally wrong with anyone that votes to legalize discrimination against themself. It’s a mental disorder of some sort.
But as Sonia Sotomayor would say, I’m just a dumb fucking white guy, what do I know? My race and gender limit my abilities.
Bobby Thompson: simple point here. Try and comprehend……it’s wrong to give 1/3 of the population preferential treatment based on race and gender. It’s wrong for one. It’s wrong for all.
I’m racist for pointing out that something is racist.
No Einstein, you’re racist for calling Grumpymann a liar, then patting him on the head and admonishing him to drive better, then suggesting that getting pulled over so frequently couldn’t possibly be because of racial profiling, even if by some weird circumstance he weren’t lying. Jeezus. You sound like a minor character in an updated version of “To Kill a Mockingbird.” Show some self-awareness for fuck’s sake.
Ed illustrates the wide parameters the left uses to define racism. I notice many here embrace discrimination when it benefits them.
Ed said: “you’re racist for calling Grumpymann a liar, ”
Doubting someone’s claim is racism now ed? Whatever you say man. I didn’t believe Mike Tyson didn’t rape that girl either. Racism for sure! Just keep on lowering the bar for that accusation why don’t ya. People like you have made it damn near meaningless now already. In fact, this might be a new low standard. Now, all of us dumb fucking white guys are naziskinheadklansmen if we dare doubt an outrageous claim made on the interenet by a black man on a political weblog. Sheesh. How dare *anyone* do something like *that!*
And Ed, did you ever consider the fact that I know plenty of black people, and none of them have been pulled over 13 times. And perhaps me having doubts about that claim is based on this. Did that ever cross your mind? Of course it didn’t. That would upset your worldview.
Now go flog yourself, evil guilty white man. And apologize to everyone for your sins against them. Or something like that.
And since you asked, there are parts of Amused Observers comment that I agree with. Some of it is fact. Go ahead and ask me which parts if you so choose.
Duros, interestingly, research has shown that black women are the least successful at interracial relationships
Who said anything about a relationship?
P.S. I’m kidding, Frank.
Well guess what, I used to get pulled over when I was a punk kid because punk kids fit a profile for trouble.
See, the difference is that most punk kids grow out of being punk kids. Black folks, not so much.
Duros,
Zing! Thwack! Bullseye.
I’d say that if you’re white and you support people and policies that actively discriminate against you, you need to have your head examined.
Can you begin to see why there are so few black Republicans?
LOL,
I can see why there are so many black Democrats who embrace discrimination.
Your modern Republican party. The party of Sarah Palin rallies. Of Lee Atwater. Of head patters (and tax evaders) like yo mama and wholly unaware racist dimwits like Amused Observer. What a lovely group of people. Sure hope they don’t go all Whig on us.
Who, who, who will stand up for the white man? When’s a white guy gonna get a break? FINALLY?
Who, who, who will stand up for the white man?
Dude I already told you: Michael God Damned Steele, that’s who!
“LOL,
I can see why there are so many black Democrats who embrace discrimination.”
Thwack! Homerun! Zing!
It’s simple: Republicans do not offer anyone entitlements based on their race or gender. Democrats do because they need their votes to expand government. Sadly enough, many in our society do not truly care about racism or discrimination, so long as it’s not against them. Soon enough, whites will abandon the democratic party due to their racist policies. People will not continue to support a platform that actively discriminates against them. And with the election of Obama and appointment of Sotomayor, it’s become more and more evident that that’s the plan. At this point, any white man that still calls themself a democrat needs mental help. That like a jew joining al-qaeda. Self-loathing to a degree rarely seen.
And ed, I’d still love for you to explain to everyone why it’s now racist to doubt an outrageous claim made on the internet. Your last comment had nothing to do with what I asked.
Or do you not have an answer?
Neither Ed or Oliver feel constrained by the Constitution or apparently have a problem with discrimination that benefits them.
Just a wee bit hypocritical, Ollie’s snark might even be called racist if judged by the common parameters of the site. But should we expect anything different?
Hmm, proving racism doesn’t exist by refusing to believe anyone who offers proof that it does. Well played.
Yo Mama – how many black people do you know? Well enough that they’d tell you every time the get pulled over?
Think you’re missing the point OW.
We all have civil rights here. And there should not be policies in place that discriminate against me just as there shouldn’t be ones in place that discriminate against you. Saying “ah fuck it, who cares if some white guys get screwed,” is not acceptable. The race-based policies treat people as statistics instead of individuals that have rights. What part of this do you, or anyone else disagree with? It’s not really a complicated philosophy.
Neither Ed or Oliver feel constrained by the Constitution or apparently have a problem with discrimination that benefits them.
We’ve been over this. Fourteenth Amendment changed the Constitution, AO.
Right you are Quaker,
Let us examine the 14th Amendment.
1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
So what exactly was your point again?
Really Quaker?
Which part of this section of the 14th amendment states that race, ethnicity, or gender should be a factor….
“All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”
The key part being protection under the laws. It is now legal to violate my civil rights in regards to employment, contracts, etc, through the use of quotas and set-asides, which would seem to violate this. And folks like you and ed are ok with this. Also, I didn’t see the part of this amendment that stated “unless you’re a white guy, which in that case means it is just, legal, and encouraged to discriminate against you based on your race and/or gender.”
And it would be so much easier if you, ed and even OW would just admit that you’re ok with discrimination, as long as it’s against a certain demographic, namely white males.
Just admit it. It’s obvious.
AO, we’re on the same page here. I had posted my comment before seeing yours. I guess that means all dumbass evil white guys think alike.
It doesn’t hurt to repeat the basics. But is still probably won’t sink in. Here’s a provacative thought; If you promote discrimination, does that make you a racist?
It makes you a racist if it’s race-based, and it makes you a bigot on at least some level 100% of the time.
Here’s a provacative thought; If you promote discrimination, does that make you a racist?
What kind of discrimination?
I worry for my sons knowing they’re growing up in a country where people like AO and YM vote.
My husband, not so much – he’s 45 and mostly used to it by now.
You ought to be worried about the trillions of dollars of debt we have and the democratic party that created it telling him it’s ok to discriminate against him because he’s white. If he’s not white, and you don’t like the idea of racial perks for minorities being eliminated scares you, then you should be worried. Support for such policies is on the decline.
You ought to be worried about the trillions of dollars of debt we have and the democratic party that created it …
Whoa, whoa, who created it?
You WATBs need a hobby.
@yo mama:
Keep reading. There’s more to the 14th after the part you quoted.
You too, AO. Don’t stop at the end of Section 1. There are four more.
The key part being protection under the laws. It is now legal to violate my civil rights in regards to employment, contracts, etc, through the use of quotas and set-asides, which would seem to violate this.
Sounds like you have entitlement issues. Maybe you get passed by for a “minority” because your work sucks? Ever think of that?
Quaker,
Knock yourself out, show me the part that negates the right for an individual to be deprived of equal protection of the law.
2. Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice-President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.
3. No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.
4. The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.
5. The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.
LOL Zython,
“Maybe you get passed by for a “minority” because your work sucks? Ever think of that?”
Am I to understand that you are 4 square behind the idea of a man’s worthiness or merit being the qualification for promotion,admission, or acceptance for public contract?
Well done, you are a supporter of the Constitution and can now be referred to as a True American with American values. Doesn’t that feel much better than being a subversive trying to tear the nation down and destroying the foundation of her greatness?
Liar “yo mama”, a right wing traitor who brags about not paying his taxes during our time of wars, complains about the the trillions of dollars of debt we have…
… that were created by Republican President Reagan who more than DOUBLING the US debt, between Republican Reagan and Republican Bush 1 they more than QUADRUPLED the US debt.
Republican President Bush 2 came in and DOUBLED the US debt again.
All three Republican Presidents increased the size of government and increased the Federal outlays as well (the Republican Presidents spent more government money).
All three Republican Presidents, Reagan, Bush 1, and Bush 2 also increased the Gross Federal Debt as a percentage of Gross Domestic Product.
On the other hand, every Democratic President since World War II has paid down the Gross Federal Debt as a percentage of GDP.
Doesn’t that feel much better than being a subversive trying to tear the nation down and destroying the foundation of her greatness?
You tell me.
It works for me Zython. Say Quaker we’re still waiting for your dissertation on the 14th amendment.
It works for me Zython.
Why did you hate America so much, AO?
LOL Zython,
” the idea of a man’s worthiness or merit being the qualification for promotion,admission, or acceptance for public contract?”
That is your idea of hating America? You want to give it another shot?
Right wing “Amused Observer”, a huge fan and supporter of the ignorant and incompetent Republican Sarah Palin to become not just Vice President of the United States, but President, exclaims that “a man’s worthiness or merit being the qualification for promotion,admission, or acceptance for public contract” is what really matters.
Riiiight.
see also: incompetent Republicans Bush 2, Dan Quayle, Michael “Katrina disaster” Brown, Clarence “unqualified” Thomas, et al.
Has anyone read “Idiot America” chronicling the right wing’s subservience to ignorance?
That is your idea of hating America? You want to give it another shot?
No, but you DID admit that you were once “trying to tear the nation down and destroying the foundation of her greatness”.
Again, it’s not the minorities fault that you’re a failure at life. Get over yourself.
Yo and AO,
‘Compelling state interest.’
Also, read a little more.
Zython,
are you taking too much medication?
Parthenon,
Compelling state interest is a modern construct by progressive judges who are faking thier way into doing something they want to do that is unconstitutional. See the 10th amendment and please find for me in the Constitution the right for the United States to nullify enumerated rights such as those guaranteed by the 14th.
AO, are you asking me if I can find an interpretation that would satisfy you and Scalia? Well, no, no I can’t. But others see things a little differently. I know thoughtful nuance seems wimpy to guys like you, but I’m afraid I’m in no position to help you suddenly see law as complicated.
a modern construct by progressive judges
Relatively modern, I suppose, if the 1930s can be called modern. And the case that created the strict scrutiny test was decided 5-1. But hey, I bet those five were all commie pinkos!
Parthenon,
Strangely enough I’m reading a quite good book about the 30’s at this very moment. The Forgotten Man. In it the author details some of the inner workings of FDR’s partially successful attempt to alter the relationship between the people and the government. Freedom and Liberty were not very high up on his list of priorities.
The single most audacious act was probably his attempt to pack the court. But that was a step too far.
Again, point me to the part where it says it is ok to nullify an individuals right to equal protection under the law. You can’t, because it is not there.
yo mama
“I don’t believe you when you say you get pulled over once a month. Sorry. It’s an outrageous claim. You say that’s racism. I say this to you: slow down. Come to a complete stop. Use your turn signals. You’ll notice a dramatic difference in how often you’re pulled over.
You don’t believe me? Color me surprised. But that is your right.
My driving habits are well with in the law I have not had a moving violation in over 15 years. Not one point. Concidreing I was on the road at times over 8 hours at a time, I would say that puts me in the well above the average person.
And once again what is it with cons and numbers.
Once in a life time is far too much.
“If by chance you aren’t lying or greatly exaggerating, I’d seek legal advice. Cause that’s fucked up for anyone to get pulled over that often, white or black.”
Your right it is far too much I find it interesting that it is not till it COULD be happening to a white person do you see it as a problem.
Peace be with you
Sorry not at a time 8 hours in a day. 4 to work 4 home.
Fiction writer Amity Shlaes wrote the fiction book “The Forgotten Man”.
She starts with the conclusion that she wants and then she excludes relevant data that contradicts her predetermined conclusion.
Amity Shlaes the writer of “The Forgotten Man: A New History of the Great Depression” is an “unscrupulous hack”.
There’s a double irony that right winger “Amused Observer” is citing a fiction writer to substantiate his false claims even while in another thread “Amused Observer” is dismissing “peer reviewed” science journals as credible sources of information.
The Neo-Right-Wing: Anti-scientific charlatans.
News,
I don’t know how to break this to you but your claim about that book being fiction is, like everything else you spew, wrong. It is quite obvious you have not read the book.
Right winger “Amused Observer”, when you cite a fiction book that has been repeatedly discredited as a (ir)rational for your alternate reality you lose a lot of credibility to anyone who was paying attention.
Corrections to right winger Amity Shlaes’s fiction book:
Paul Krugman: “Amity Shlaes strikes again.”
Eric Rauchway: “Stop lying about Roosevelt’s record.”
Eric Rauchway: “FDR’s Latest Critics.”
Jonathan Chait: “Wasting Away in Hooverville.”
Oliver Willis: “Amity Shlaes “The Forgotten Man” Is A Farce.”
AO –
The court’s already gone somewhat in your direction (to my dismay) and defined legal affirmative action almost as narrowly as it is possible to do so. If I recall it was O’Connor writing for the majority in the UofM case, so one can’t say the anti-AA position hasn’t attracted some support from moderate/left-of-center types. So in some respects I’m fighting a losing argument here.
But I’ll give it a shot anyway, in defense of the gutted, watered-down affirmative action that’s still at all legal. I’ll offer one of the arguments – Suppose you’ve got two runners scheduled to run a race, Billy and Joey, and it’s a government policy that before you run the race you have to break Joey’s leg. But after Joey’s leg has been busted, then the two policymakers have a fistfight and decide that no, the two runners need to be equally protected. One of the policymakers says that Joey needs medical care, but the other says NO WAY, Joey can’t be getting freebies that Billy doesn’t get.
Has Joey been equally protected? Has the race policy violated the spirit of its own law by adhering to the absolute letter? To the first question, I would answer no, and to the second question, I would answer yes.
Parthenon,
Can you come up with something a bit more plausible?
Clearly, Billy’s leg also should be broken.
AO, feel free to substitute whatever particulars you like if the race analogy is too outlandish. The basic premise of the argument remains the same – that by adhering to the strict letter of the amendment, you violate its spirit.
I think the letter and the spirit of the 14th amendment are pretty much in sync. But accepting the point you’re trying to make, what are you going to do? When subjective rather than objective criteria change the outcome under the law what are you left with?
I think perhaps what you are shooting for is the quote, possibly from a french man, regarding the equalities of it being illegal for the wealthy and the poor alike to sleep under bridges.
I think the letter and the spirit of the 14th amendment are pretty much in sync.
I realize that; I realized that before I posed the argument. If you didn’t see them as one and the same, you wouldn’t have printed it above as the last word on the legality of affirmative action. I don’t agree.
In an ideal situation they’d be one and the same. I think socioeconomic disparities between ethnicities are still too high to declare them in sync. And let us not make the mistake of declaring this ’social engineering.’ Fafaroo has rightly pointed out that the playing field was previously anything but equal. THAT was social engineering. Affirmative action policies are an attempt to correct social engineering and get closer to that meritocracy, that free market of talent that you espouse.
But accepting the point you’re trying to make, what are you going to do? When subjective rather than objective criteria change the outcome under the law what are you left with?
In fact laws are decided via subjective criteria all the time, and they always have been. That’s why a SCOTUS exists to make interpretations. If laws were decided strictly via objective bean counting, we wouldn’t need interpreters.
I think perhaps what you are shooting for is the quote, possibly from a french man, regarding the equalities of it being illegal for the wealthy and the poor alike to sleep under bridges.
I don’t want everyone to die with the same amount of money. In fact we want the same thing, you and I. I’d like to see a free market of talent where the best, most able and creative can rise as high as their abilities will carry them. Where we differ is that you believe there aren’t unnatural barriers for people of various ethnicities/minorities, whereas I believe there are.
“In fact we want the same thing, you and I. I’d like to see a free market of talent where the best, most able and creative can rise as high as their abilities will carry them. Where we differ is that you believe there aren’t unnatural barriers for people of various ethnicities/minorities, whereas I believe there are.”
I appreciate your comment and the feeling behind it. Human nature is pretty much a constant. I believe it was the genius of the founding fathers to craft a Constitution that let 13 different colonies band together. A system of comprimises and checks and balances allowed this nation to overcome the worst proclivities of human nature and let the people shape the government that leads through the assent of the governed.
Affirmative Action erodes at the basic document that has made us what we are today. To formally approve of discrimination when such is outlawed makes a mockery of the concept of the rule of law. As it currently stands it penalizes merit and achievment and deprives us all of having the most qualified being in positions where we all benefit.
I am sympathetic with your goals but not your methods.
AO: Check out Section 5. Gives Congress a blank check, Constitution-wise, to make sure all citizens are treated equally.
Quaker,
You misunderstand the meaning of
5. The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article
It is not a blank check to negate the provisions of the amendment it is attached to, it is encouragement to pass laws that facilitate the process. Furthermore Constitutional law trumps Congressional legislation. If you examine the document a little more closely you will see this is almost boilerplate added to legitimize and encourage action. It is not a magic power card that negates the Constitution.
So a swing and a miss for Quaker. You can sell the concept here on the Oliver show though.