What is the rationale for affirmative action for hispanics?

[Not2BSubjugated]

Yes she should be passed over. You cant hog up all the spots. You already have spots selected for you. Be better than the people in your particular designation. The whole point of AA is to even the playing field not stack it for one minority. Thats how we got here in the first place. Whites had 400 years of getting all the spots.

Why should the spots be separated by race at all?

How does your desire to see them separated as such not make you racist?

Or am I making an assumption, there? Do you admit to your racism?

I'm beginning to think you dont actually know what AA is. Its a program to battle the results of institutionalized racism. By that fact it cant be racist. If it was racist it would prefer one race over another due to the idea the less prefered race was inherently inferior. Since it does the opposite it is a balancing mechanism for the previous system that preferred whites and was racist. Do you see the difference?

I understand that what you're saying is that blacks gotta get their getback, and whoever suffers along the way? Fuck 'em. Move on.

Creating a preferred class based on race is creating a preferred class based on race. Your intent isn't what qualifies it as racist or not.

Also, you're contradicting yourself. Is the purpose to balance the old white racist system, or is its purpose to "even the playing field"?

Did the old white racist system favor Asians? If it's about balancing that old system, why would it discriminate against Asians?

 

[Not2BSubjugated]

Its not stupid if it is existing and someone is taking it away. Once its gone however then life has to go on.

Thats only true if whites feel the same way about their 400 years of AA. Whites would not be the dominating culture if the government had not made sure of that for 400 years. Is that true?

Whine, whine, whine...you incompetent, incapable racist. Face it, you wouldn't even have a job in the free market if AA hadn't intervened and put someone capable in the position.
Racist.

Wel I dont have a job but when i did it was not gained by AA. Never had to use it though if I had to I would not have felt bad about it.

So wait, people who support AA, you for instance, might possibly do it for moral reasons even though they don't personally benefit?

Yet, it's impossible that someone might object to it for moral reasons, even if it doesn't detriment them personally?

 

[Asclepias]

Why should the spots be separated by race at all?

How does your desire to see them separated as such not make you racist?

Or am I making an assumption, there? Do you admit to your racism?

I'm beginning to think you dont actually know what AA is. Its a program to battle the results of institutionalized racism. By that fact it cant be racist. If it was racist it would prefer one race over another due to the idea the less prefered race was inherently inferior. Since it does the opposite it is a balancing mechanism for the previous system that preferred whites and was racist. Do you see the difference?

I understand that what you're saying is that blacks gotta get their getback, and whoever suffers along the way? Fuck 'em. Move on.

Creating a preferred class based on race is creating a preferred class based on race. Your intent isn't what qualifies it as racist or not.

Isnt that what you and your ancestors said to other races in the building of this country and worse? Fuck you the white man is getting his? You got a 400 year head start and now you are complaining about 50 years the other way?

Who told you intent was not the qualification? The word racism is dependent on the intent to create an unequal system based on a belief that one race is superior to all others. you must be high to say something like that.

 

[Asclepias]

Whine, whine, whine...you incompetent, incapable racist. Face it, you wouldn't even have a job in the free market if AA hadn't intervened and put someone capable in the position.
Racist.

Wel I dont have a job but when i did it was not gained by AA. Never had to use it though if I had to I would not have felt bad about it.

So wait, people who support AA, you for instance, might possibly do it for moral reasons even though they don't personally benefit?

Yet, it's impossible that someone might object to it for moral reasons, even if it doesn't detriment them personally?

Yes if you support AA even if it does not benefit you then it can be for a moral reason. That reason is to correct an embalance created by 400 years of white AA. Someone trying to raise a moral argument against AA is too funny to even consider. How are you going to say AA is unfair to anyone except those that benefitted from being unfair for 400 years?

 

[Asclepias]

Why should the spots be separated by race at all?

How does your desire to see them separated as such not make you racist?

Or am I making an assumption, there? Do you admit to your racism?

I'm beginning to think you dont actually know what AA is. Its a program to battle the results of institutionalized racism. By that fact it cant be racist. If it was racist it would prefer one race over another due to the idea the less prefered race was inherently inferior. Since it does the opposite it is a balancing mechanism for the previous system that preferred whites and was racist. Do you see the difference?

Also, you're contradicting yourself. Is the purpose to balance the old white racist system, or is its purpose to "even the playing field"?

Did the old white racist system favor Asians? If it's about balancing that old system, why would it discriminate against Asians?

Why do you say i am contradicting myself?

It does not discriminate against Asians. They have their X number of slots just like everyone else that is considered a minority.

 

[Not2BSubjugated]

I'm beginning to think you dont actually know what AA is. Its a program to battle the results of institutionalized racism. By that fact it cant be racist. If it was racist it would prefer one race over another due to the idea the less prefered race was inherently inferior. Since it does the opposite it is a balancing mechanism for the previous system that preferred whites and was racist. Do you see the difference?

I understand that what you're saying is that blacks gotta get their getback, and whoever suffers along the way? Fuck 'em. Move on.

Creating a preferred class based on race is creating a preferred class based on race. Your intent isn't what qualifies it as racist or not.

Isnt that what you and your ancestors said to other races in the building of this country and worse? Fuck you the white man is getting his? You got a 400 year head start and now you are complaining about 50 years the other way?

Who told you intent was not the qualification? The word racism is dependent on the intent to create an unequal system based on a belief that one race is superior to all others. you must be high to say something like that.

I'm Hawaiian, little buddy. The fuck are you talking about, -my- ancestors? None of my ancestors founded this country. Thanks for assuming, though.

And even if I -were- Anglo-Saxon, your statement would be untrue. "Me" and my ancestors still wouldn't have said any such thing. Them, maybe, but certainly not me. Being their descendant wouldn't make me personally complicit in their crimes, despite your suggestion.

And yes, to the extent that the country's founders committed atrocities based on race in its conception and upbringing, things were fucked. I totally don't condone slave labor. The racial qualifications for citizenship I also disagree with, but I hesitate to condemn the early Americans for defining themselves on the same religious and ethnic lines as damn near EVERY OTHER EXISTING COUNTRY AND CULTURE OF THE ERA. This is all beside the point.

My belief is that it doesn't logically follow that we should then reverse the racism and give the whites a taste of being shit on, given the fact that none of the currently breathing whites were responsible for or even alive during slavery.

As for who told me intent was not the qualification, it was that pesky dictionary. Always telling me silly things about the English language.

rac·ism [rey-siz-uhm] Show IPA

noun

1. a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to rule others.

2. a policy, system of government, etc., based upon or fostering such a doctrine; discrimination.

3. hatred or intolerance of another race or other races.

Definition 3. Care to try again?

 

[gallantwarrior]

Native-born American here. But, what the hell...

 

[Not2BSubjugated]

Wel I dont have a job but when i did it was not gained by AA. Never had to use it though if I had to I would not have felt bad about it.

So wait, people who support AA, you for instance, might possibly do it for moral reasons even though they don't personally benefit?

Yet, it's impossible that someone might object to it for moral reasons, even if it doesn't detriment them personally?

Yes if you support AA even if it does not benefit you then it can be for a moral reason. That reason is to correct an embalance created by 400 years of white AA. Someone trying to raise a moral argument against AA is too funny to even consider. How are you going to say AA is unfair to anyone except those that benefitted from being unfair for 400 years?

It's unfair to Asians who have higher qualifications than their competitors of other minority ethnicities and still get their college aps turned down because they're the wrong color. Any time you discriminate against someone who's more qualified based on race, that's a form of intolerance based on race and it's unfair to that individual. Racist -and- unfair to someone who didn't benefit from white racism.

Also, -my- morality demands that everyone be held accountable for their actions and their actions alone. None of the white people alive today are, by that measurement, accountable for black slavery, and very few of them are at all complicit in the institutionalized racism of days gone by. Yet all of these people are disadvantaged by affirmative action. They are experience de facto punishment for crimes they had nothing to do with. This is my moral objection.

You can find my morality laughable (as I do yours), that doesn't make it factually incorrect, and it certainly doesn't imply that I don't believe in my own morality or that I'm making it up to hide the fact that I don't like AA because I'm personally disadvantaged by it.

 

[Not2BSubjugated]

Native-born American here. But, what the hell...

Lol. We're such dicks, you and me, not liking AA just cuz whites like us are finally getting our come-up-ins.

Why am I such a supremacist!?

 

[Asclepias]

I understand that what you're saying is that blacks gotta get their getback, and whoever suffers along the way? Fuck 'em. Move on.

Creating a preferred class based on race is creating a preferred class based on race. Your intent isn't what qualifies it as racist or not.

Isnt that what you and your ancestors said to other races in the building of this country and worse? Fuck you the white man is getting his? You got a 400 year head start and now you are complaining about 50 years the other way?

Who told you intent was not the qualification? The word racism is dependent on the intent to create an unequal system based on a belief that one race is superior to all others. you must be high to say something like that.

I'm Hawaiian, little buddy. The fuck are you talking about, -my- ancestors? None of my ancestors founded this country. Thanks for assuming, though.

And even if I -were- Anglo-Saxon, your statement would be untrue. "Me" and my ancestors still wouldn't have said any such thing. Them, maybe, but certainly not me. Being their descendant wouldn't make me personally complicit in their crimes, despite your suggestion.

And yes, to the extent that the country's founders committed atrocities based on race in its conception and upbringing, things were fucked. I totally don't condone slave labor. The racial qualifications for citizenship I also disagree with, but I hesitate to condemn the early Americans for defining themselves on the same religious and ethnic lines as damn near EVERY OTHER EXISTING COUNTRY AND CULTURE OF THE ERA. This is all beside the point.

My belief is that it doesn't logically follow that we should then reverse the racism and give the whites a taste of being shit on, given the fact that none of the currently breathing whites were responsible for or even alive during slavery.

As for who told me intent was not the qualification, it was that pesky dictionary. Always telling me silly things about the English language.

rac·ism [rey-siz-uhm] Show IPA

noun

1. a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to rule others.

2. a policy, system of government, etc., based upon or fostering such a doctrine; discrimination.

3. hatred or intolerance of another race or other races.

Definition 3. Care to try again?

I dont believe your Hawaiian but whatever. You sound just like every other white redneck I ever heard of.

Yes "you" are benefitting from the head start your ancestors gave you by them being able to take advantage of higher academics, landownership, businesses, etc. You are saying fuck you when you fight against other people having that same privileged, front of the line access to everything your ancestors had.

Not really concerned with what you believe. The facts show that AA works. More minorities are taking advantage and changing their family trees.

You should not have skipped over #1 and #2 to make your argument with #3 then pasted it here in your post. You look stupid doing that. You just proved my point that AA is not racist.

 

[gallantwarrior]

Native-born American here. But, what the hell...

Lol. We're such dicks, you and me, not liking AA just cuz whites like us are finally getting our come-up-ins.

Why am I such a supremacist!?

Cuz you were born the wrong kulor...I'm jess gessin'

 

[Not2BSubjugated]

Isnt that what you and your ancestors said to other races in the building of this country and worse? Fuck you the white man is getting his? You got a 400 year head start and now you are complaining about 50 years the other way?

Who told you intent was not the qualification? The word racism is dependent on the intent to create an unequal system based on a belief that one race is superior to all others. you must be high to say something like that.

I'm Hawaiian, little buddy. The fuck are you talking about, -my- ancestors? None of my ancestors founded this country. Thanks for assuming, though.

And even if I -were- Anglo-Saxon, your statement would be untrue. "Me" and my ancestors still wouldn't have said any such thing. Them, maybe, but certainly not me. Being their descendant wouldn't make me personally complicit in their crimes, despite your suggestion.

And yes, to the extent that the country's founders committed atrocities based on race in its conception and upbringing, things were fucked. I totally don't condone slave labor. The racial qualifications for citizenship I also disagree with, but I hesitate to condemn the early Americans for defining themselves on the same religious and ethnic lines as damn near EVERY OTHER EXISTING COUNTRY AND CULTURE OF THE ERA. This is all beside the point.

My belief is that it doesn't logically follow that we should then reverse the racism and give the whites a taste of being shit on, given the fact that none of the currently breathing whites were responsible for or even alive during slavery.

As for who told me intent was not the qualification, it was that pesky dictionary. Always telling me silly things about the English language.

rac·ism [rey-siz-uhm] Show IPA

noun

1. a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to rule others.

2. a policy, system of government, etc., based upon or fostering such a doctrine; discrimination.

3. hatred or intolerance of another race or other races.

Definition 3. Care to try again?

I dont believe your Hawaiian but whatever. You sound just like every other white redneck I ever heard of.

Yes "you" are benefitting from the head start your ancestors gave you by them being able to take advantage of higher academics, landownership, businesses, etc. You are saying fuck you when you fight against other people having that same privileged, front of the line access to everything your ancestors had.

Not really concerned with what you believe. The facts show that AA works. More minorities are taking advantage and changing their family trees.

You should not have skipped over #1 and #2 to make your argument with #3 then pasted it here in your post. You look stupid doing that. You just proved my point that AA is not racist.

I didn't skip over 1 and 2. I'm simply pointing out that there is a valid English definition of racism that encompasses what AA is. That there are others that don't encompass it doesn't negate it from being what it is. Your logic is piss-poor.

On top of that, your assumption that any moral objections that contradict your morals are made up to hide insecurity, as well as your dismissal of my stated ethnic background and willful assumption that I am actually Anglo-Saxon shows your intellectual dishonesty. You'll pretend that the realities that contradict your view are invalid or made up, INCLUDING DICTIONARY DEFINITIONS! Even worse, you'll pretend that the realities that contradict your careless assumptions regarding people whose beliefs contradict yours are -also- invalid or made up! You can't even acknowledge the possibility that honest people might disagree with you! HOLY FUCK!

This racist shit is a religion for you and your self-imposed blinders are fuckin THICK!

 

[Asclepias]

So wait, people who support AA, you for instance, might possibly do it for moral reasons even though they don't personally benefit?

Yet, it's impossible that someone might object to it for moral reasons, even if it doesn't detriment them personally?

Yes if you support AA even if it does not benefit you then it can be for a moral reason. That reason is to correct an embalance created by 400 years of white AA. Someone trying to raise a moral argument against AA is too funny to even consider. How are you going to say AA is unfair to anyone except those that benefitted from being unfair for 400 years?

It's unfair to Asians who have higher qualifications than their competitors of other minority ethnicities and still get their college aps turned down because they're the wrong color. Any time you discriminate against someone who's more qualified based on race, that's a form of intolerance based on race and it's unfair to that individual. Racist -and- unfair to someone who didn't benefit from white racism.

Also, -my- morality demands that everyone be held accountable for their actions and their actions alone. None of the white people alive today are, by that measurement, accountable for black slavery, and very few of them are at all complicit in the institutionalized racism of days gone by. Yet all of these people are disadvantaged by affirmative action. They are experience de facto punishment for crimes they had nothing to do with. This is my moral objection.

You can find my morality laughable (as I do yours), that doesn't make it factually incorrect, and it certainly doesn't imply that I don't believe in my own morality or that I'm making it up to hide the fact that I don't like AA because I'm personally disadvantaged by it.

Life is unfair. They are not getting turned down due to their color. They are getting turned down because they are filling up their quotas faster. You have x number of slots. You fill up then you are out of luck and have to wait for the next go round. Thats the way the system works. Frankly I would never wait on that. Its much faster to simply go somewhere else.

If you were genuine about your morals then you would demand all whites give back their inheritance of land, position, and power due to white AA and start from scratch like everyone else. I dont see that happening do you? Something is logically wrong with your position. You cant be moral about inequity based on one group getting AA for 400 years and others only 50 years and expect anyone to believe you have a leg to stand on. Give me a break.

 

[Not2BSubjugated]

Yes if you support AA even if it does not benefit you then it can be for a moral reason. That reason is to correct an embalance created by 400 years of white AA. Someone trying to raise a moral argument against AA is too funny to even consider. How are you going to say AA is unfair to anyone except those that benefitted from being unfair for 400 years?

It's unfair to Asians who have higher qualifications than their competitors of other minority ethnicities and still get their college aps turned down because they're the wrong color. Any time you discriminate against someone who's more qualified based on race, that's a form of intolerance based on race and it's unfair to that individual. Racist -and- unfair to someone who didn't benefit from white racism.

Also, -my- morality demands that everyone be held accountable for their actions and their actions alone. None of the white people alive today are, by that measurement, accountable for black slavery, and very few of them are at all complicit in the institutionalized racism of days gone by. Yet all of these people are disadvantaged by affirmative action. They are experience de facto punishment for crimes they had nothing to do with. This is my moral objection.

You can find my morality laughable (as I do yours), that doesn't make it factually incorrect, and it certainly doesn't imply that I don't believe in my own morality or that I'm making it up to hide the fact that I don't like AA because I'm personally disadvantaged by it.

Life is unfair. They are not getting turned down due to their color. They are getting turned down because they are filling up their quotas faster. You have x number of slots. You fill up then you are out of luck and have to wait for the next go round. Thats the way the system works. Frankly I would never wait on that. Its much faster to simply go somewhere else.

If you were genuine about your morals then you would demand all whites give back their inheritance of land, position, and power due to white AA and start from scratch like everyone else. I dont see that happening do you? Something is logically wrong with your position. You cant be moral about inequity based on one group getting AA for 400 years and others only 50 years and expect anyone to believe you have a leg to stand on. Give me a break.

They aren't getting turned down based on their color? The quota of slots they have is based on color. If they're getting turned down based on a full quota based on color, they're getting turned down based on color. I'm not gonna argue any more with a religious zealot. HAve a good one

 

[Asclepias]

I'm Hawaiian, little buddy. The fuck are you talking about, -my- ancestors? None of my ancestors founded this country. Thanks for assuming, though.

And even if I -were- Anglo-Saxon, your statement would be untrue. "Me" and my ancestors still wouldn't have said any such thing. Them, maybe, but certainly not me. Being their descendant wouldn't make me personally complicit in their crimes, despite your suggestion.

And yes, to the extent that the country's founders committed atrocities based on race in its conception and upbringing, things were fucked. I totally don't condone slave labor. The racial qualifications for citizenship I also disagree with, but I hesitate to condemn the early Americans for defining themselves on the same religious and ethnic lines as damn near EVERY OTHER EXISTING COUNTRY AND CULTURE OF THE ERA. This is all beside the point.

My belief is that it doesn't logically follow that we should then reverse the racism and give the whites a taste of being shit on, given the fact that none of the currently breathing whites were responsible for or even alive during slavery.

As for who told me intent was not the qualification, it was that pesky dictionary. Always telling me silly things about the English language.

rac·ism [rey-siz-uhm] Show IPA

noun

1. a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to rule others.

2. a policy, system of government, etc., based upon or fostering such a doctrine; discrimination.

3. hatred or intolerance of another race or other races.

Definition 3. Care to try again?

I dont believe your Hawaiian but whatever. You sound just like every other white redneck I ever heard of.

Yes "you" are benefitting from the head start your ancestors gave you by them being able to take advantage of higher academics, landownership, businesses, etc. You are saying fuck you when you fight against other people having that same privileged, front of the line access to everything your ancestors had.

Not really concerned with what you believe. The facts show that AA works. More minorities are taking advantage and changing their family trees.

You should not have skipped over #1 and #2 to make your argument with #3 then pasted it here in your post. You look stupid doing that. You just proved my point that AA is not racist.

I didn't skip over 1 and 2. I'm simply pointing out that there is a valid English definition of racism that encompasses what AA is. That there are others that don't encompass it doesn't negate it from being what it is. Your logic is piss-poor.

On top of that, your assumption that any moral objections that contradict your morals are made up to hide insecurity, as well as your dismissal of my stated ethnic background and willful assumption that I am actually Anglo-Saxon shows your intellectual dishonesty. You'll pretend that the realities that contradict your view are invalid or made up, INCLUDING DICTIONARY DEFINITIONS! Even worse, you'll pretend that the realities that contradict your careless assumptions regarding people whose beliefs contradict yours are -also- invalid or made up! You can't even acknowledge the possibility that honest people might disagree with you! HOLY FUCK!

This racist shit is a religion for you and your self-imposed blinders are fuckin THICK!

Where do you see AA defined as "hatred or intolerance of another race or other races."? Do you have a link? You are claiming AA is racist and the intent has to be shown. You cant do that can you except to make up something you got off of stormfront?

Its insecurity or selfishness. If it wasnt you would not be complaining AA is racist without proof. However your handlers have given you the script and are laughing as you run with it. You can scream about how unfair it is all day long. Just remember your white ancestors set the stage when they granted themselves a 400 year head start.

 

[gallantwarrior]

Yes if you support AA even if it does not benefit you then it can be for a moral reason. That reason is to correct an embalance created by 400 years of white AA. Someone trying to raise a moral argument against AA is too funny to even consider. How are you going to say AA is unfair to anyone except those that benefitted from being unfair for 400 years?

It's unfair to Asians who have higher qualifications than their competitors of other minority ethnicities and still get their college aps turned down because they're the wrong color. Any time you discriminate against someone who's more qualified based on race, that's a form of intolerance based on race and it's unfair to that individual. Racist -and- unfair to someone who didn't benefit from white racism.

Also, -my- morality demands that everyone be held accountable for their actions and their actions alone. None of the white people alive today are, by that measurement, accountable for black slavery, and very few of them are at all complicit in the institutionalized racism of days gone by. Yet all of these people are disadvantaged by affirmative action. They are experience de facto punishment for crimes they had nothing to do with. This is my moral objection.

You can find my morality laughable (as I do yours), that doesn't make it factually incorrect, and it certainly doesn't imply that I don't believe in my own morality or that I'm making it up to hide the fact that I don't like AA because I'm personally disadvantaged by it.

Life is unfair. They are not getting turned down due to their color. They are getting turned down because they are filling up their quotas faster. You have x number of slots. You fill up then you are out of luck and have to wait for the next go round. Thats the way the system works. Frankly I would never wait on that. Its much faster to simply go somewhere else.

If you were genuine about your morals then you would demand all whites give back their inheritance of land, position, and power due to white AA and start from scratch like everyone else. I dont see that happening do you? Something is logically wrong with your position. You cant be moral about inequity based on one group getting AA for 400 years and others only 50 years and expect anyone to believe you have a leg to stand on. Give me a break.

I agree...life is unfair. So explain, how exactly do you racist morals justify preference of one group over another based on skin color alone?
Racist.

 

[Not2BSubjugated]

I dont believe your Hawaiian but whatever. You sound just like every other white redneck I ever heard of.

Yes "you" are benefitting from the head start your ancestors gave you by them being able to take advantage of higher academics, landownership, businesses, etc. You are saying fuck you when you fight against other people having that same privileged, front of the line access to everything your ancestors had.

Not really concerned with what you believe. The facts show that AA works. More minorities are taking advantage and changing their family trees.

You should not have skipped over #1 and #2 to make your argument with #3 then pasted it here in your post. You look stupid doing that. You just proved my point that AA is not racist.

I didn't skip over 1 and 2. I'm simply pointing out that there is a valid English definition of racism that encompasses what AA is. That there are others that don't encompass it doesn't negate it from being what it is. Your logic is piss-poor.

On top of that, your assumption that any moral objections that contradict your morals are made up to hide insecurity, as well as your dismissal of my stated ethnic background and willful assumption that I am actually Anglo-Saxon shows your intellectual dishonesty. You'll pretend that the realities that contradict your view are invalid or made up, INCLUDING DICTIONARY DEFINITIONS! Even worse, you'll pretend that the realities that contradict your careless assumptions regarding people whose beliefs contradict yours are -also- invalid or made up! You can't even acknowledge the possibility that honest people might disagree with you! HOLY FUCK!

This racist shit is a religion for you and your self-imposed blinders are fuckin THICK!

Where do you see AA defined as "hatred or intolerance of another race or other races."? Do you have a link? You are claiming AA is racist and the intent has to be shown. You cant do that can you except to make up something you got off of stormfront?

Its insecurity or selfishness. If it wasnt you would not be complaining AA is racist without proof. However your handlers have given you the script and are laughing as you run with it. You can scream about how unfair it is all day long. Just remember your white ancestors set the stage when they granted themselves a 400 year head start.

Every time I point out a fact that contradicts you, you're either gonna tell me it's invalid or that I'm lying. You're still referring to them as my ancestors lol! Is there really a point in continuing this conversation?

 

[gallantwarrior]

I didn't skip over 1 and 2. I'm simply pointing out that there is a valid English definition of racism that encompasses what AA is. That there are others that don't encompass it doesn't negate it from being what it is. Your logic is piss-poor.

On top of that, your assumption that any moral objections that contradict your morals are made up to hide insecurity, as well as your dismissal of my stated ethnic background and willful assumption that I am actually Anglo-Saxon shows your intellectual dishonesty. You'll pretend that the realities that contradict your view are invalid or made up, INCLUDING DICTIONARY DEFINITIONS! Even worse, you'll pretend that the realities that contradict your careless assumptions regarding people whose beliefs contradict yours are -also- invalid or made up! You can't even acknowledge the possibility that honest people might disagree with you! HOLY FUCK!

This racist shit is a religion for you and your self-imposed blinders are fuckin THICK!

Where do you see AA defined as "hatred or intolerance of another race or other races."? Do you have a link? You are claiming AA is racist and the intent has to be shown. You cant do that can you except to make up something you got off of stormfront?

Its insecurity or selfishness. If it wasnt you would not be complaining AA is racist without proof. However your handlers have given you the script and are laughing as you run with it. You can scream about how unfair it is all day long. Just remember your white ancestors set the stage when they granted themselves a 400 year head start.

Every time I point out a fact that contradicts you, you're either gonna tell me it's invalid or that I'm lying. You're still referring to them as my ancestors lol! Is there really a point in continuing this conversation?

Funny how that works...your ancestors arrived long after slavery was abolished and yet you are somehow responsible for their inability to get a job because of their race?

 

[Not2BSubjugated]

Where do you see AA defined as "hatred or intolerance of another race or other races."? Do you have a link? You are claiming AA is racist and the intent has to be shown. You cant do that can you except to make up something you got off of stormfront?

Its insecurity or selfishness. If it wasnt you would not be complaining AA is racist without proof. However your handlers have given you the script and are laughing as you run with it. You can scream about how unfair it is all day long. Just remember your white ancestors set the stage when they granted themselves a 400 year head start.

Every time I point out a fact that contradicts you, you're either gonna tell me it's invalid or that I'm lying. You're still referring to them as my ancestors lol! Is there really a point in continuing this conversation?

Funny how that works...your ancestors arrived long after slavery was abolished and yet you are somehow responsible for their inability to get a job because of their race?

Nah, actually, he defeated my argument that someone could disagree with affirmative action on a moral level even if it didn't disadvantage them. . . By stating that I'm lying about being Hawaiian, and I'm actually an Anglo-Saxon descendant of the country's founders.

If he's going to categorize every fact he can't reconcile as a lie, this argument is a dead-end. The guy's more closed minded than the average racist on the forum.

 

[RKMBrown]

I dont hear them complaining about AA. Complaining about AA is for losers that can only get entry level jobs. Your words tell on you without you realizing it....

AA made the people it was supposed to help look like dumb asses who could not wipe their asses without government forcing everyone to give them a free ride in life.

I'm sure that bothered them as they brought checks home to feed their families. People that whine about AA should update their skills. No matter how much AA is going on if someone is not qualified to do the job they wont be hired. Only losers with no skills whine about AA. They are competing for entry level jobs and it makes them cry to have to compete.

ROFL

My first job out of college was in 1983 working for a Merrill Lynch services center in south florida that had about 800 employees. I had previously worked at Publix to pay my way through college, starting there as a bag boy when I was 15 and finishing out as a manager. Never had any AA problems at Publix.

I was employed at ML for just a year and a half before I left. I was employee of the month at ML for 12months straight before I left to go work for a small startup company. I did it by using spare time I found to write software that made their business more efficient, even though that wasn't my job. My job was to maintain the software and their systems, not to redo them. The job of redoing the software was up in NY. Each time I presented one of my new "projects" the managers threw me a frigging party. My projects shaved dozens of man years of manual labor off their work load.

Just before I left ML a promotion came up for which only I was actually qualified among the employees. The director and my manager called me in to explain that I was the best employee they "ever had" and that they tried their best to get me the promotion. Unfortunately there was a rule that forced them to select another candidate based on race alone.

When I put my notice in they flew me up to NY wined and dinned me and offered me a promotion and to triple my salary to work there. I did not want to live in NY so turned it down.

A year later the guys in NY made changes to the systems that made ML "less efficient" again. lol they called me in as a high paid contractor to fix it The guy that got promoted instead of me? He got fired for having sex with a secretary at work.

Well that was just the first of many times I got to experience what AA is all about.