Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
A simple clarification is all that is needed, but you instead are looking for the gotcha now aren't you ?
You were that 20 year old spec ed kid in high school, beagle9.
Why would you think I thought your daughter being in middle school at 18 was a lie ? I thought that she may have been held back, and was still in the 9nth grade maybe. I would have been shocked if that was the case, but you clarified it and that is good. I have a friend who has a special needs son, and he was in high school at 20 something years old. How do I know that your daughter wasn't a special needs kid maybe ? We just needed clarification from you is all, and my post still stands just as I wrote it.[/QUOTE]A simple clarification is all that is needed, but you instead are looking for the gotcha now aren't you ?
Nope. You jumped on what you thought was a lie on my part.
If you're so sure enough people want segregation then start collecting signatures to get it onto a national ballot. But if after you get the hundred or so people willing to put their names on a legal document proposing such a thing you have to strip naked, douse yourself in tar, and march through the po' side of town shouting at the top of your lungs, "Look at the tar baby! Look at the tar baby!"
The scholars of race relations on this thread evidently take their inspiration from the classics.
Not 43 pages.......but worth a read.
Seven Myths about Affirmative Action in Universities Columbia University in the City of New York
Not 43 pages.......but worth a read.
Seven Myths about Affirmative Action in Universities Columbia University in the City of New York
Bollinger is a smart guy, I'm a smart guy. He relies on sophistry, I rely on data. I can refute his myths. He makes the following claim:
ethnic and racial diversity within a university setting is absolutely essential to the accomplishment of a university's missions, and is at the very core of what a university does.I counter with data:
As the proportion of black students enrolled at the institution rose, student satisfaction with their university experience dropped, as did assessments of the quality of their education, and the work efforts of their peers. . . .If racial diversity is essential to the mission of a university, then it follows that universities were failing in their mission before AA was implemented, failing for a thousand years, and that universities like the University of Tokyo are still failing in their mission.
The same pattern held for the faculty sample's evaluation of the educational milieu. Among faculty members enrollment diversity was negatively related to perceptions of the quality of education, the academic abilities of students, and the work efforts of students,
His sophistry boils down to nonsense and it crumbles when confronted in debate.
Not 43 pages.......but worth a read.
Seven Myths about Affirmative Action in Universities Columbia University in the City of New York
Bollinger is a smart guy, I'm a smart guy. He relies on sophistry, I rely on data. I can refute his myths. He makes the following claim:
ethnic and racial diversity within a university setting is absolutely essential to the accomplishment of a university's missions, and is at the very core of what a university does.I counter with data:
As the proportion of black students enrolled at the institution rose, student satisfaction with their university experience dropped, as did assessments of the quality of their education, and the work efforts of their peers. . . .If racial diversity is essential to the mission of a university, then it follows that universities were failing in their mission before AA was implemented, failing for a thousand years, and that universities like the University of Tokyo are still failing in their mission.
The same pattern held for the faculty sample's evaluation of the educational milieu. Among faculty members enrollment diversity was negatively related to perceptions of the quality of education, the academic abilities of students, and the work efforts of students,
His sophistry boils down to nonsense and it crumbles when confronted in debate.
Your "data" link leads to an abstract. Without looking at the study and the conclusions.....it is meaningless.
I said it earlier. You aren't stupid. Which leaves me wondering what happened to you.
Your "data" link leads to an abstract. Without looking at the study and the conclusions.....it is meaningless.
I said it earlier. You aren't stupid. Which leaves me wondering what happened to you.
It's a question of priorities. I'd rather be correct in what I say rather than well thought of by liberals by lying about things. Someone has to stand and say that the Emperor has no clothes.
Private Truths, Public Lies
The Social Consequences of Preference Falsification
Preference falsification, according to the economist Timur Kuran, is the act of misrepresenting one’s wants under perceived social pressures. It happens frequently in everyday life, such as when we tell the host of a dinner party that we are enjoying the food when we actually find it bland. In Private Truths, Public Lies, Kuran argues convincingly that the phenomenon not only is ubiquitous but has huge social and political consequences. Drawing on diverse intellectual traditions, including those rooted in economics, psychology, sociology, and political science, Kuran provides a unified theory of how preference falsification shapes collective decisions, orients structural change, sustains social stability, distorts human knowledge, and conceals political possibilities.
A common effect of preference falsification is the preservation of widely disliked structures. Another is the conferment of an aura of stability on structures vulnerable to sudden collapse. When the support of a policy, tradition, or regime is largely contrived, a minor event may activate a bandwagon that generates massive yet unanticipated change.
In distorting public opinion, preference falsification also corrupts public discourse and, hence, human knowledge. So structures held in place by preference falsification may, if the condition lasts long enough, achieve increasingly genuine acceptance. The book demonstrates how human knowledge and social structures co-evolve in complex and imperfectly predictable ways, without any guarantee of social efficiency.
Private Truths, Public Lies uses its theoretical argument to illuminate an array of puzzling social phenomena. They include the unexpected fall of communism, the paucity, until recently, of open opposition to affirmative action in the United States, and the durability of the beliefs that have sustained India’s caste system.
I prefer truth to lies. What can I say, I'm unsophisticated like that. Probably explains why I'm not a liberal.
Your "data" link leads to an abstract. Without looking at the study and the conclusions.....it is meaningless.
I said it earlier. You aren't stupid. Which leaves me wondering what happened to you.
It's a question of priorities. I'd rather be correct in what I say rather than well thought of by liberals by lying about things. Someone has to stand and say that the Emperor has no clothes.
Private Truths, Public Lies
The Social Consequences of Preference Falsification
Preference falsification, according to the economist Timur Kuran, is the act of misrepresenting one’s wants under perceived social pressures. It happens frequently in everyday life, such as when we tell the host of a dinner party that we are enjoying the food when we actually find it bland. In Private Truths, Public Lies, Kuran argues convincingly that the phenomenon not only is ubiquitous but has huge social and political consequences. Drawing on diverse intellectual traditions, including those rooted in economics, psychology, sociology, and political science, Kuran provides a unified theory of how preference falsification shapes collective decisions, orients structural change, sustains social stability, distorts human knowledge, and conceals political possibilities.
A common effect of preference falsification is the preservation of widely disliked structures. Another is the conferment of an aura of stability on structures vulnerable to sudden collapse. When the support of a policy, tradition, or regime is largely contrived, a minor event may activate a bandwagon that generates massive yet unanticipated change.
In distorting public opinion, preference falsification also corrupts public discourse and, hence, human knowledge. So structures held in place by preference falsification may, if the condition lasts long enough, achieve increasingly genuine acceptance. The book demonstrates how human knowledge and social structures co-evolve in complex and imperfectly predictable ways, without any guarantee of social efficiency.
Private Truths, Public Lies uses its theoretical argument to illuminate an array of puzzling social phenomena. They include the unexpected fall of communism, the paucity, until recently, of open opposition to affirmative action in the United States, and the durability of the beliefs that have sustained India’s caste system.
I prefer truth to lies. What can I say, I'm unsophisticated like that. Probably explains why I'm not a liberal.
You have a brain. I'm not convinced that you seek truth. But It sure sounds nice.
What we're talking about here is something like what happened in India in 1947. The largest mass migration in history - a sorting of Hindus and Muslims into India and Pakistan. Brutal.
Your "data" link leads to an abstract. Without looking at the study and the conclusions.....it is meaningless.
I said it earlier. You aren't stupid. Which leaves me wondering what happened to you.
It's a question of priorities. I'd rather be correct in what I say rather than well thought of by liberals by lying about things. Someone has to stand and say that the Emperor has no clothes.
Private Truths, Public Lies
The Social Consequences of Preference Falsification
Preference falsification, according to the economist Timur Kuran, is the act of misrepresenting one’s wants under perceived social pressures. It happens frequently in everyday life, such as when we tell the host of a dinner party that we are enjoying the food when we actually find it bland. In Private Truths, Public Lies, Kuran argues convincingly that the phenomenon not only is ubiquitous but has huge social and political consequences. Drawing on diverse intellectual traditions, including those rooted in economics, psychology, sociology, and political science, Kuran provides a unified theory of how preference falsification shapes collective decisions, orients structural change, sustains social stability, distorts human knowledge, and conceals political possibilities.
A common effect of preference falsification is the preservation of widely disliked structures. Another is the conferment of an aura of stability on structures vulnerable to sudden collapse. When the support of a policy, tradition, or regime is largely contrived, a minor event may activate a bandwagon that generates massive yet unanticipated change.
In distorting public opinion, preference falsification also corrupts public discourse and, hence, human knowledge. So structures held in place by preference falsification may, if the condition lasts long enough, achieve increasingly genuine acceptance. The book demonstrates how human knowledge and social structures co-evolve in complex and imperfectly predictable ways, without any guarantee of social efficiency.
Private Truths, Public Lies uses its theoretical argument to illuminate an array of puzzling social phenomena. They include the unexpected fall of communism, the paucity, until recently, of open opposition to affirmative action in the United States, and the durability of the beliefs that have sustained India’s caste system.
I prefer truth to lies. What can I say, I'm unsophisticated like that. Probably explains why I'm not a liberal.
You have a brain. I'm not convinced that you seek truth. But It sure sounds nice.
As I keep saying, just show me to be wrong. Show what I write to be false. That's all it takes.
Look, we both understand that I'm not winning a popularity contest by saying unpopular things, so clearly I'm not writing in order to garner lots of "likes." I don't understand why it's so hard to understand that people can feel insulted by having to regurgitate falsehoods and pretend they believe in them or that they actually reflect the world. Those old KGB interrogators knew their business - they forced prisoners to recant, to publicly proclaim allegiance to Marxism. We even saw it with the execution of James Foley last week - the renunciation of the US and of his own brother. He was beaten into mental submission, like many people are today with political correctness. Then there is the other model, exemplified by Fabrizio Quattrocchi:
Look at what living a lie does to science. That's just not the way I roll.
The Italian hostage executed in Iraq tried to tear off his hood seconds before he was shot dead and screamed: "Now I'll show you how an Italian dies."
unkotare said:Brutally failed example. There are many millions of Muslims in India. Stop grasping at straws to justify your fundamental cowardice and irrationality.
unkotare said:Brutally failed example. There are many millions of Muslims in India. Stop grasping at straws to justify your fundamental cowardice and irrationality.
LMAO..name calling...how clever and original.
Ummmmmm. You are slipping off the rails a bit, pal. Come on back, now.
Ummmmmm. You are slipping off the rails a bit, pal. Come on back, now.
You don't believe that Political Correctness forces compliance? Here's the guy who started the ball rolling on the Brendan Eich (Firefox) lynch mob. All he wanted was a public recantation of Eich's beliefs. He was big enough to allow Eich to keep his private beliefs:
I met with Brendan and asked him to just apologize for the discrimination under the law that we faced. He can still keep his personal beliefs, but I wanted him to recognize that we faced real issues with immigration and say that he never intended to cause people problems.So I'm not getting where you're coming from, lot's of people don't like to be forced to lie in order to keep in the good graces of liberal totalitarians. I'm one of them. I prefer truth and reality to lies and make-believe.
It’s heartbreaking to us that he was unwilling to say even that. . . .
Seriously, we assumed that he would reconsider his thoughts on the impact of the law (not his personal beliefs), issue an apology, and then he’d go on to be a great CEO.
Ummmmmm. You are slipping off the rails a bit, pal. Come on back, now.
You don't believe that Political Correctness forces compliance? Here's the guy who started the ball rolling on the Brendan Eich (Firefox) lynch mob. All he wanted was a public recantation of Eich's beliefs. He was big enough to allow Eich to keep his private beliefs:
I met with Brendan and asked him to just apologize for the discrimination under the law that we faced. He can still keep his personal beliefs, but I wanted him to recognize that we faced real issues with immigration and say that he never intended to cause people problems.So I'm not getting where you're coming from, lot's of people don't like to be forced to lie in order to keep in the good graces of liberal totalitarians. I'm one of them. I prefer truth and reality to lies and make-believe.
It’s heartbreaking to us that he was unwilling to say even that. . . .
Seriously, we assumed that he would reconsider his thoughts on the impact of the law (not his personal beliefs), issue an apology, and then he’d go on to be a great CEO.
I can see where you might impress some people with your style. It's certainly not lazy. But I'm not one of them. Inserting random snippets from here and there as a way of assigning some trait to the audience isn't working for me.
How about simply having a discussion. I'm more interested in what you have to say than I am in your interpretations of what others have to say.
Ummmmmm. You are slipping off the rails a bit, pal. Come on back, now.
You don't believe that Political Correctness forces compliance? Here's the guy who started the ball rolling on the Brendan Eich (Firefox) lynch mob. All he wanted was a public recantation of Eich's beliefs. He was big enough to allow Eich to keep his private beliefs:
I met with Brendan and asked him to just apologize for the discrimination under the law that we faced. He can still keep his personal beliefs, but I wanted him to recognize that we faced real issues with immigration and say that he never intended to cause people problems.So I'm not getting where you're coming from, lot's of people don't like to be forced to lie in order to keep in the good graces of liberal totalitarians. I'm one of them. I prefer truth and reality to lies and make-believe.
It’s heartbreaking to us that he was unwilling to say even that. . . .
Seriously, we assumed that he would reconsider his thoughts on the impact of the law (not his personal beliefs), issue an apology, and then he’d go on to be a great CEO.
I can see where you might impress some people with your style. It's certainly not lazy. But I'm not one of them. Inserting random snippets from here and there as a way of assigning some trait to the audience isn't working for me.
How about simply having a discussion. I'm more interested in what you have to say than I am in your interpretations of what others have to say.
What part of what I've written is unclear to you? I prefer truth to lies. I take unpopularity as the price I pay for a clear conscience. I'm open to having my mind changed when you can refute my positions or evidence.
Multiculturalism has never worked. We gave it a try when the nation was 7:1 white to black and this was affordable. It's unworkable when the ratio gets down to 1:1. This now requires a lot of lies and oppression to keep the system, society, function. Something has to give. Democracy, Free Markets, Multiculturalism. Pick two.
If you want to pick multiculturalism and democracy, then free markets have to be abandoned because the power of racial voting blocs will insure massive transfers of wealth between groups and a managed economy in order to insure equal outcomes.
If you chose multiculturalism and free markets, then democracy has to be cast aside because the power of racial voting blocs has to be neutralized. People can rise and fall on their own merit and they're prohibited from using the power of their vote to bring about equal outcomes.
If you chose democracy and free markets, then multiculturalism has to go because racial voting blocs destroy both democracy and free markets.
I choose democracy and free markets.
========================================.
Political Correctness and Identity Politics have created de facto social/cultural/economic segregation.
So we're pretty much already there.
Enjoy.
.
They don't want de facto segregation..they want...according to their own demands/complaints...REAL segregation where the races are physically separated...so they can be self determining with no interference from whites
we have a problem already with that scenario..,
where will we put the MULATTOS ?
