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.
Youre evading the point I was making. Let me help you out.You must have missed my earlier post. I would suggest you read the mans words as spoken from his own mouth.If a cow had nuts it would be a bull.If MLK was asked that in 2015 would he like for employers and schools to still use a race based bias to determine who they accept? I bet he'd say...he hopes that practice would've ended by then.
You probably lose a lot of bets. The point was you claimed MLK was not supportive of the concept of AA. He was despite your warped perception of what he was about.
MLK was for voting rights and their rights to use the same public facilities as everybody else not for AA. That was Jessie Jackson's, after MLK was murdered.
The term "affirmative action" did not come into currency until after King's death and it was Jackson who initiated it along with the NAACP.
MLK's "Operation Breadbasket" was different than AA.
Operation Breadbasket 1962-1972
His way worked.
AA does the oppistie where it is forced.
"Whenever the issue of compensatory treatment for the Negro is raised, some of our friends recoil in horror. The Negro should be granted equality, they agree; but he should ask nothing more. On the surface, this appears reasonable, but it is not realistic."-MLK
Cool boycott Starbucks then cons. Add it to the list of hundreds of companies that support things you'll never understand.
In fact better yet, just stay home all day. Less risk of accidentally supporting some cause us lesser people support.
Alrdy told ya that opening comment or question coming out of the wrong colored mouth falling on an ear whose current mindset and beliefs may not be known to the employee just seems like a prescription for disaster especially now.On what grounds would a offended customer sue? An employee doesnt have to have a discussion. Its up to them.I think they're asking to get sued by either an offended customer or injured employee.Body language. All discussions should start off with a question not a statement.And how are employees to discern that.......Its a good idea if people want to talk. If not they can just simply decline.So back to the topic...,good idea or bad? Tensions being what they currently are even an innocent well meant comment could lead to violence.
Youre evading the point I was making. Let me help you out.You must have missed my earlier post. I would suggest you read the mans words as spoken from his own mouth.If a cow had nuts it would be a bull.If MLK was asked that in 2015 would he like for employers and schools to still use a race based bias to determine who they accept? I bet he'd say...he hopes that practice would've ended by then.
You probably lose a lot of bets. The point was you claimed MLK was not supportive of the concept of AA. He was despite your warped perception of what he was about.
MLK was for voting rights and their rights to use the same public facilities as everybody else not for AA. That was Jessie Jackson's, after MLK was murdered.
The term "affirmative action" did not come into currency until after King's death and it was Jackson who initiated it along with the NAACP.
MLK's "Operation Breadbasket" was different than AA.
Operation Breadbasket 1962-1972
His way worked.
AA does the oppistie where it is forced.
"Whenever the issue of compensatory treatment for the Negro is raised, some of our friends recoil in horror. The Negro should be granted equality, they agree; but he should ask nothing more. On the surface, this appears reasonable, but it is not realistic."-MLK
What about them? They just did more with less. Not everyone thats Black is poor. They just outworked whites and achieved the American dream despite having obstacles placed in their way and no legacy to fall back on.Not Black people. They were the ones enslaved without compensation. Since whites own most of the resources then whites benefited the most. I guess you have a hard time with the concepts of legacy and fortune.All whites in the US benefit or have benefited from slavery and Jim Crow. Some more than others. To think otherwise is a fools errand.I think its whites that cant compete. Thats why they needed all those years of slavery and Jim Crow to get ahead. We are just asking for the same amount of time of with legislated "help".
You really are vile. Most "whites" didn't have slaves. My Norwegian ancestors who moved to North Dakota in the 1880s certainly didn't benefit from slavery.
As for slavey, it exists in present day Africa. Perhaps your energy would be better directed towards liberating Real Slaves Today than blaming people who had nothing to do with slavery for your own personal problems.
Asswipe.
If all whites today benefit from slavery, then so do all people from all races in the U.S., bub.
What about black people who own stuff? There are plenty of rich black people in the U.S.
What about them? They just did more with less. Not everyone thats Black is poor. They just outworked whites and achieved the American dream despite having obstacles placed in their way and no legacy to fall back on.Not Black people. They were the ones enslaved without compensation. Since whites own most of the resources then whites benefited the most. I guess you have a hard time with the concepts of legacy and fortune.All whites in the US benefit or have benefited from slavery and Jim Crow. Some more than others. To think otherwise is a fools errand.You really are vile. Most "whites" didn't have slaves. My Norwegian ancestors who moved to North Dakota in the 1880s certainly didn't benefit from slavery.
As for slavey, it exists in present day Africa. Perhaps your energy would be better directed towards liberating Real Slaves Today than blaming people who had nothing to do with slavery for your own personal problems.
Asswipe.
If all whites today benefit from slavery, then so do all people from all races in the U.S., bub.
What about black people who own stuff? There are plenty of rich black people in the U.S.
.
Well, I guess we have to write a check.
Hey, white liberals, how much will assuage your guilt so we can all get on with our lives?
.
Your decisions come from your philosophy. Your philosophy comes from your reality or environment. If your environment is one without hope of opportunity chances are high that you wont make the right decisions. Since the reality has not changed that white racism is a problem what makes you think the results are going to change?Youre evading the point I was making. Let me help you out.You must have missed my earlier post. I would suggest you read the mans words as spoken from his own mouth.If a cow had nuts it would be a bull.
You probably lose a lot of bets. The point was you claimed MLK was not supportive of the concept of AA. He was despite your warped perception of what he was about.
MLK was for voting rights and their rights to use the same public facilities as everybody else not for AA. That was Jessie Jackson's, after MLK was murdered.
The term "affirmative action" did not come into currency until after King's death and it was Jackson who initiated it along with the NAACP.
MLK's "Operation Breadbasket" was different than AA.
Operation Breadbasket 1962-1972
His way worked.
AA does the oppistie where it is forced.
"Whenever the issue of compensatory treatment for the Negro is raised, some of our friends recoil in horror. The Negro should be granted equality, they agree; but he should ask nothing more. On the surface, this appears reasonable, but it is not realistic."-MLK
In the 50s and 60s thats true.
Today? WHAT...in particular. ..is holding any 12 year old black kid from achieving ANY dream in America? HIS future decisions could land him in the White House or leading the US Army or being CEO of Apple or living in a nice suburb with a wifeand kids and a dog and a nice job and peaceful life. OR...he could be dead or in jail.
HIS decisions determine all of that and all of us white devils cant stop him.
Right?
Blacks in Africa did not enslave whites then use them to make them an economic power. Stay focused on the US instead of deflecting.Unless you can tell me why blacks and women somehow need these special considerations? Because I tend to think they're 100% just as capable as anyone else...and they dont need to be treated like they need some head start.
If you're equal...be fucking equal. Put on your big boy pants and let your qualifications ALONE speak for you....or explain to me why you cant compete equally with white males?
This is white boy thinking. This is like the Lion to telling the Porcupine to put down his quills to make it fair. LOL.
Whites are a majority...majorities have an advantage period.
Ha see I knew it. The race card is all you have.
Majorities dont have the advantage or disadvantage in 2015...because race doesnt matter!!
So you're saying blacks simply cant compete on equal footing with whites? Why?
Wait...in a discussion about race, I cant bring up race? What kinda rules are these?
Because the playing field isnt level in the first place...remember? Majorities?
You're making my point. ALL you do is play the race card. Now...simply saying since whites are a majority that makes it racist.
So are blacks in Africa oppressing whites in Africa since blacks have a majority? Do African nations need affirmative action to ensure more whites get positions of influence there? Blacks are the majority. So....shouldnt the legislate some ways for whites to gain more power and influence in Africa?
That was an educated reply. No wonder you cant contribute to an intelligent conversation.What about them? They just did more with less. Not everyone thats Black is poor. They just outworked whites and achieved the American dream despite having obstacles placed in their way and no legacy to fall back on.Not Black people. They were the ones enslaved without compensation. Since whites own most of the resources then whites benefited the most. I guess you have a hard time with the concepts of legacy and fortune.All whites in the US benefit or have benefited from slavery and Jim Crow. Some more than others. To think otherwise is a fools errand.
If all whites today benefit from slavery, then so do all people from all races in the U.S., bub.
What about black people who own stuff? There are plenty of rich black people in the U.S.
You are a racist moron who completely dishonors the vision and dream of Martin Luther King.
No, just give a number, enough bitching..
Well, I guess we have to write a check.
Hey, white liberals, how much will assuage your guilt so we can all get on with our lives?
.
Race relations talk is interfering with your life now? Do you need medical assistance?
I just proved your logic was broken. No African nations enslaved whites and made themselves an economic power. Stay focused on apples.Blacks in Africa did not enslave whites then use them to make them an economic power. Stay focused on the US instead of deflecting.This is white boy thinking. This is like the Lion to telling the Porcupine to put down his quills to make it fair. LOL.
Whites are a majority...majorities have an advantage period.
Ha see I knew it. The race card is all you have.
Majorities dont have the advantage or disadvantage in 2015...because race doesnt matter!!
So you're saying blacks simply cant compete on equal footing with whites? Why?
Wait...in a discussion about race, I cant bring up race? What kinda rules are these?
Because the playing field isnt level in the first place...remember? Majorities?
You're making my point. ALL you do is play the race card. Now...simply saying since whites are a majority that makes it racist.
So are blacks in Africa oppressing whites in Africa since blacks have a majority? Do African nations need affirmative action to ensure more whites get positions of influence there? Blacks are the majority. So....shouldnt the legislate some ways for whites to gain more power and influence in Africa?
OH...so philosophical logic has borders? If..as your like minded buddy says...a simple racial majority means racial oppression. ..then logic would mean white folks in Africa need legislation to help them gain more power and influence in Africa?
What about American Jews? Shoud they get the same AA benefits and biased consideration? They were merely slaughtered throughout history...and kicked off of a few continents for the past 3, 000 years. And you bitch about a 400 year head start haha?
You cant resist much longer. Its coming regardless of you being willfully ignorant. Its not that I dont understand your culture. I do. It more like you cant stop us.you know so little of our culture that I am afraid you will just never get it. The More it's forced, the harder it will be resisted
You cant resist much longer. Its coming regardless of you being willfully ignorant. Its not that I dont understand your culture. I do. It more like you cant stop us.you know so little of our culture that I am afraid you will just never get it. The More it's forced, the harder it will be resisted
You cant make my point for me. What you are talking about has nothing to do with my point. The comment was made MLK was not for AA. The person that made the comment was wrong and so are you.Youre evading the point I was making. Let me help you out.You must have missed my earlier post. I would suggest you read the mans words as spoken from his own mouth.If a cow had nuts it would be a bull.
You probably lose a lot of bets. The point was you claimed MLK was not supportive of the concept of AA. He was despite your warped perception of what he was about.
MLK was for voting rights and their rights to use the same public facilities as everybody else not for AA. That was Jessie Jackson's, after MLK was murdered.
The term "affirmative action" did not come into currency until after King's death and it was Jackson who initiated it along with the NAACP.
MLK's "Operation Breadbasket" was different than AA.
Operation Breadbasket 1962-1972
His way worked.
AA does the oppistie where it is forced.
"Whenever the issue of compensatory treatment for the Negro is raised, some of our friends recoil in horror. The Negro should be granted equality, they agree; but he should ask nothing more. On the surface, this appears reasonable, but it is not realistic."-MLK
I made the point exactly.
MLK's way worked, he did not even know about AA because it happened after his death and I think that he would have been against it.
AA is exactly what he was against, government force.
Your decisions come from your philosophy. Your philosophy comes from your reality or environment. If your environment is one without hope of opportunity chances are high that you wont make the right decisions. Since the reality has not changed that white racism is a problem what makes you think the results are going to change?Youre evading the point I was making. Let me help you out.You must have missed my earlier post. I would suggest you read the mans words as spoken from his own mouth.MLK was for voting rights and their rights to use the same public facilities as everybody else not for AA. That was Jessie Jackson's, after MLK was murdered.
The term "affirmative action" did not come into currency until after King's death and it was Jackson who initiated it along with the NAACP.
MLK's "Operation Breadbasket" was different than AA.
Operation Breadbasket 1962-1972
His way worked.
AA does the oppistie where it is forced.
"Whenever the issue of compensatory treatment for the Negro is raised, some of our friends recoil in horror. The Negro should be granted equality, they agree; but he should ask nothing more. On the surface, this appears reasonable, but it is not realistic."-MLK
In the 50s and 60s thats true.
Today? WHAT...in particular. ..is holding any 12 year old black kid from achieving ANY dream in America? HIS future decisions could land him in the White House or leading the US Army or being CEO of Apple or living in a nice suburb with a wifeand kids and a dog and a nice job and peaceful life. OR...he could be dead or in jail.
HIS decisions determine all of that and all of us white devils cant stop him.
Right?
It only seems like that. There is no issue.Alrdy told ya that opening comment or question coming out of the wrong colored mouth falling on an ear whose current mindset and beliefs may not be known to the employee just seems like a prescription for disaster especially now.On what grounds would a offended customer sue? An employee doesnt have to have a discussion. Its up to them.I think they're asking to get sued by either an offended customer or injured employee.Body language. All discussions should start off with a question not a statement.And how are employees to discern that.......Its a good idea if people want to talk. If not they can just simply decline.
