Will: And what wd is to making cogent and conceivable points. He did add that as well.
You misheard. He was talking about dmarks.
dmarks: Hey Will, don't kick a man when he's down... down in Mom's basement, that is.
My parent's home does not have a basement, only a crawlspace. I've previously informed you of this fact... not that facts matter to you.
"Rational" Nation lied: What surprises me is that wd isn't a regular over at the bigoted, racist, and hate everything not left site known as Progressives Eruptions.
I would never visit such a site, as I strongly disapprove of bigotry and racism. That said, Progressive Eruptions is neither of these things.
WD said: "I would never visit such a site, as I strongly disapprove of bigotry and racism. That said, Progressive Eruptions is neither of these things."
That contradicts your record. I have mentioned before my opposition to all racism. You agree with me, except when it comes to anti-white racism. You have emphatically defended specific policies designed punish white people for their skin color.
While I realize that anti-white racism is a rather small part of the picture of the problem of racism historically and currently, as someone who consistently opposes racism and bigotry, I oppose even this. While you support it. Your position against racism is not complete. It is inconsistent.
Will said: "If profanity is a comedian's crutch, then Bob Saget is a quadriplegic"
Haha. A couple of years ago, Saget was the headliner at the local Michael Moore-run comedy festival. All everyone said was, He's the same boring Bob Saget, only now he says the F-word a lot"
dmarks: You have, in discussion of the type of "affirmative action"...
You have failed the challenge. Affirmative action has nothing at all to do with "punishing" White people for the color of their skin.
I agree with Martin Luther King Jr, who wrote...
It is impossible to create a formula for the future which does not take into account that our society has been doing something special against the Negro for hundreds of years. How then can he be absorbed into the mainstream of American life if we do not do something special for him now, in order to balance the equation and equip him to compete on a just and equal basis?
The struggle for rights is, at bottom, a struggle for opportunities. In asking for something special, the Negro is not seeking charity. He does not want to be given a job he cannot handle. Neither, however, does he want to be told that there is no place where he can be trained to handle it. So, with equal opportunity must come the practical, realistic aid which will equip him to seize it. Giving a pair of shoes to a man who has not learned to walk is a cruel jest. (M.L. King, Why We Can't Wait)
WD said: "You have failed the challenge. Affirmative action has nothing at all to do with "punishing" White people for the color of their skin."
Affirmative action policies that involve quotas, goals, and preferences explicitly punish whites for their race.
I agree with Martin Luther King when he wrote:
"I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character"
As for your quote, it is fine as long as you accomplish this with no racial discrimination at all.
The affirmative action policies which you apparently admit you favor (quotas, goals, and preferences) have little to do with what King was talking about in your quote. Since these policies boost African-Americans of means and crush whites who are in poverty.
dmarks: Affirmative action policies that involve quotas, goals, and preferences explicitly punish whites for their race.
They don't.
dmarks: The affirmative action policies which you apparently admit you favor (quotas, goals, and preferences) have little to do with what King was talking about in your quote.
Of course they do.
dmarks: ...these policies boost African-Americans of means and crush whites who are in poverty.
No, they don't.
dmarks: I agree with Martin Luther King when he wrote: "I have a dream... they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character".
No, you don't. We aren't there yet, and you want to do away with Affirmative Action, a policy that will help us get there (or closer, at least).
The quota, goal, and preference part of AA puts us much farther away from King's goals as it explicitly judges people by the color of their skin and rewards and punishes people based on this. These policies are explicitly "by the color of their skin" with no consideration of content of character.
And yes these racist policies you defend do indeed boost African-Americans of means and crush whites in poverty. Under any standard university affirmative action policies, Obama's daughters (princesses of wealth and power and privilege) are given an extra boost, and the daughters of poor Ukrainian immigrants are given even less of one.
These policies do indeed punish people for their race. Yolu know this, from our discussion of the infamous University of Michigan admissions policy which assigns points based on skin color.
As I am opposed to all racism, I want such policies abolished immediately.
And yes when you said I did not agree with King's "content" idea, you were lying. I have always very strongly supported this. You have absolutely no evidence of me doing otherwise. None at all.
19 comments:
"And what wd is to making cogent and conceivable points." He did add that as well.
Hey Will, don't kick a man when he's down...
.... down in Mom's basement, that is.
Its a hell of a stretch calling Jeff Ross a comedian.
What surprises me is that wd isn't a regular over at the bigoted, racist, and hate everything not left site known as Progressives Eruptions.
Will: And what wd is to making cogent and conceivable points. He did add that as well.
You misheard. He was talking about dmarks.
dmarks: Hey Will, don't kick a man when he's down... down in Mom's basement, that is.
My parent's home does not have a basement, only a crawlspace. I've previously informed you of this fact... not that facts matter to you.
"Rational" Nation lied: What surprises me is that wd isn't a regular over at the bigoted, racist, and hate everything not left site known as Progressives Eruptions.
I would never visit such a site, as I strongly disapprove of bigotry and racism. That said, Progressive Eruptions is neither of these things.
Oh, come on, Russ. "If profanity is a comedian's crutch, then Bob Saget is a quadriplegic." That's gold, I tell ya', gold!
Keep your day job Will
No openings in Vegas for this guy, huh?
WD said: "I would never visit such a site, as I strongly disapprove of bigotry and racism. That said, Progressive Eruptions is neither of these things."
That contradicts your record. I have mentioned before my opposition to all racism. You agree with me, except when it comes to anti-white racism. You have emphatically defended specific policies designed punish white people for their skin color.
While I realize that anti-white racism is a rather small part of the picture of the problem of racism historically and currently, as someone who consistently opposes racism and bigotry, I oppose even this. While you support it. Your position against racism is not complete. It is inconsistent.
Will said: "If profanity is a comedian's crutch, then Bob Saget is a quadriplegic"
Haha. A couple of years ago, Saget was the headliner at the local Michael Moore-run comedy festival. All everyone said was, He's the same boring Bob Saget, only now he says the F-word a lot"
George Carlin he's not, that's for sure.
dmarks: You have emphatically defended specific policies designed punish white people for their skin color.
I have never done this. I challenge you to come up with even one example. You won't be able to.
You have, in discussion of the type of "affirmative action" that includes hiring goals, quotas, or preferences.
If you now have abandoned racism by abandoning all this, then I welcome you to the realm of the consistent.
dmarks: You have, in discussion of the type of "affirmative action"...
You have failed the challenge. Affirmative action has nothing at all to do with "punishing" White people for the color of their skin.
I agree with Martin Luther King Jr, who wrote...
It is impossible to create a formula for the future which does not take into account that our society has been doing something special against the Negro for hundreds of years. How then can he be absorbed into the mainstream of American life if we do not do something special for him now, in order to balance the equation and equip him to compete on a just and equal basis?
The struggle for rights is, at bottom, a struggle for opportunities. In asking for something special, the Negro is not seeking charity. He does not want to be given a job he cannot handle. Neither, however, does he want to be told that there is no place where he can be trained to handle it. So, with equal opportunity must come the practical, realistic aid which will equip him to seize it. Giving a pair of shoes to a man who has not learned to walk is a cruel jest. (M.L. King, Why We Can't Wait)
WD said: "You have failed the challenge. Affirmative action has nothing at all to do with "punishing" White people for the color of their skin."
Affirmative action policies that involve quotas, goals, and preferences explicitly punish whites for their race.
I agree with Martin Luther King when he wrote:
"I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character"
As for your quote, it is fine as long as you accomplish this with no racial discrimination at all.
The affirmative action policies which you apparently admit you favor (quotas, goals, and preferences) have little to do with what King was talking about in your quote. Since these policies boost African-Americans of means and crush whites who are in poverty.
dmarks: Affirmative action policies that involve quotas, goals, and preferences explicitly punish whites for their race.
They don't.
dmarks: The affirmative action policies which you apparently admit you favor (quotas, goals, and preferences) have little to do with what King was talking about in your quote.
Of course they do.
dmarks: ...these policies boost African-Americans of means and crush whites who are in poverty.
No, they don't.
dmarks: I agree with Martin Luther King when he wrote: "I have a dream... they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character".
No, you don't. We aren't there yet, and you want to do away with Affirmative Action, a policy that will help us get there (or closer, at least).
The quota, goal, and preference part of AA puts us much farther away from King's goals as it explicitly judges people by the color of their skin and rewards and punishes people based on this. These policies are explicitly "by the color of their skin" with no consideration of content of character.
And yes these racist policies you defend do indeed boost African-Americans of means and crush whites in poverty. Under any standard university affirmative action policies, Obama's daughters (princesses of wealth and power and privilege) are given an extra boost, and the daughters of poor Ukrainian immigrants are given even less of one.
These policies do indeed punish people for their race. Yolu know this, from our discussion of the infamous University of Michigan admissions policy which assigns points based on skin color.
As I am opposed to all racism, I want such policies abolished immediately.
And yes when you said I did not agree with King's "content" idea, you were lying. I have always very strongly supported this. You have absolutely no evidence of me doing otherwise. None at all.
"Affirmative Action accomplishes this. Your MLK quote is him stating a GOAL."
If it does, then it is by the definition of racism, racist.
"Abolishing AA makes it impossible to reach that goal."
Abolishing goals/quotas/preferences levens the playing field and makes society less racist.
"Since you support policies that lead us away from the goal of everyone being judged by the "content of their character"
My policies lead us toward "content of character" because I would completely ban "color of their skin"
"I must conclude that you do not support it. I did not lie."
You are a frequent liar on this in your claim that you are not racist.
Here, and elsewhere, you oppose treating people the same regardless of skin color.
Post a Comment