Of course they're fucking racist. The question is stupid, I'm not going to bother posting on it. The KKK comparison however I'm going to comment on.LividBovine wrote:
So you attack the mindless attack and ignore the base argument of whether or not the organization should exist or not.Flaming_Maniac wrote:
The comparison is useful for nothing but mindless attack.LividBovine wrote:
Never said magnitude has nothing to do with it. You are either trying to deflect the argument or you are just being a tard. Hard to decipher which sometimes. The comparison is slightly related at best, but they are related.
Poll
Is the Black Caucus racist?
| Yes | 82% | 82% - 29 | ||||
| No | 5% | 5% - 2 | ||||
| Maybe | 11% | 11% - 4 | ||||
| Total: 35 | ||||||
Thanks, now I know where you stand on the issue. Couldn't tell before, you know, I am one of those thick skulled types.
"The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation" - Barack Obama (a freshman senator from Illinios)
I don't see a problem with having a group in Congress who champion certain rights...even if it's race. But I do have an issue when the group is exclusive.
No, it's not right at all. They're supposed to represent their district and last I checked there isn't a single district in America that is 100% black. Do congresswomen only represent women in America? Come onPug wrote:
I don't see a problem with having a group in Congress who champion certain rights...even if it's race. But I do have an issue when the group is exclusive.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
Why not?JohnG@lt wrote:
No, it's not right at all. They're supposed to represent their district and last I checked there isn't a single district in America that is 100% black. Do congresswomen only represent women in America? Come onPug wrote:
I don't see a problem with having a group in Congress who champion certain rights...even if it's race. But I do have an issue when the group is exclusive.
I don't like that no one can be in the group.
Here's the thing...name a law that the black caucus passed that was racist...
If there were racist laws passed...then yeah, the group would be racist...
but there's laws against passing a law that is racially biased.
So what is the problem if they can't pass what you think they might be able to pass?
If there were racist laws passed...then yeah, the group would be racist...
but there's laws against passing a law that is racially biased.
So what is the problem if they can't pass what you think they might be able to pass?
Last edited by Pug (2009-10-08 19:18:05)
Racist law?Pug wrote:
Here's the thing...name a law that the black caucus passed that was racist...
If they were...then yeah, the group would be racist...
but there's laws against passing a law that is racially biased.
So what is the problem if they can't pass what you think they might be able to pass?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affirmativ … ted_States
Last edited by JohnG@lt (2009-10-08 19:18:22)
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
what about minority scholarships?Pug wrote:
Here's the thing...name a law that the black caucus passed that was racist...
If there were racist laws passed...then yeah, the group would be racist...
but there's laws against passing a law that is racially biased.
So what is the problem if they can't pass what you think they might be able to pass?
The law states that you have to hire the best candidate no matter what race.
But was it brought to Congress by the Black Caucus?
But was it brought to Congress by the Black Caucus?
I can't honestly be bothered to look it up. It's not the point anyway. For people who scream racism and cry about how segregated America still is they sure are setting a fine example.Pug wrote:
The law states that you have to hire the best candidate no matter what race.
But was it brought to Congress by the Black Caucus?
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
Is that a law?S.Lythberg wrote:
what about minority scholarships?Pug wrote:
Here's the thing...name a law that the black caucus passed that was racist...
If there were racist laws passed...then yeah, the group would be racist...
but there's laws against passing a law that is racially biased.
So what is the problem if they can't pass what you think they might be able to pass?
What's not the point...the law states you have to hire the best candidate no matter what race.JohnG@lt wrote:
I can't honestly be bothered to look it up. It's not the point anyway. For people who scream racism and cry about how segregated America still is they sure are setting a fine example.Pug wrote:
The law states that you have to hire the best candidate no matter what race.
But was it brought to Congress by the Black Caucus?
It's not a racist law.
Affirmative action laws? There's a case involving firefighters in New Haven being passed over for promotion because not enough minorities took and/or passed the test. So they threw out the results and no one received a promotion. Surely you've heard of this case, it was just heard by the Supreme Court.Pug wrote:
What's not the point...the law states you have to hire the best candidate no matter what race.JohnG@lt wrote:
I can't honestly be bothered to look it up. It's not the point anyway. For people who scream racism and cry about how segregated America still is they sure are setting a fine example.Pug wrote:
The law states that you have to hire the best candidate no matter what race.
But was it brought to Congress by the Black Caucus?
It's not a racist law.
Last edited by JohnG@lt (2009-10-08 19:26:04)
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
Yeah, and before we continue much further down this road...the Black Caucus IS racist because it won't allow everyone to join. It's actions are not racist, unless they manage to pass a law.
You do realize your local town has Chambers of Commerce based on race right? For instance...I'm white and a member of the hispanic chamber in town. Why? Because I do business with Mexico on occasion...
You do realize your local town has Chambers of Commerce based on race right? For instance...I'm white and a member of the hispanic chamber in town. Why? Because I do business with Mexico on occasion...
Groupings of any kind based on race are stupid.Pug wrote:
Yeah, and before we continue much further down this road...the Black Caucus IS racist because it won't allow everyone to join. It's actions are not racist, unless they manage to pass a law.
You do realize your local town has Chambers of Commerce based on race right? For instance...I'm white and a member of the hispanic chamber in town. Why? Because I do business with Mexico on occasion...
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
groups can discriminate among applicants based on their race, one would think it is illegalPug wrote:
Is that a law?S.Lythberg wrote:
what about minority scholarships?Pug wrote:
Here's the thing...name a law that the black caucus passed that was racist...
If there were racist laws passed...then yeah, the group would be racist...
but there's laws against passing a law that is racially biased.
So what is the problem if they can't pass what you think they might be able to pass?
Oh, you mean the one the white firefighters won?JohnG@lt wrote:
Affirmative action laws? There's a case involving firefighters in New Haven being passed over for promotion because not enough minorities took and/or passed the test. So they threw out the results and no one received a promotion. Surely you've heard of this case, it was just heard by the Supreme Court.
It's private money. That's the loophole. They could pick a different race if they wanted to.S.Lythberg wrote:
groups can discriminate among applicants based on their race, one would think it is illegalPug wrote:
Is that a law?S.Lythberg wrote:
what about minority scholarships?
as long as it isn't whitePug wrote:
It's private money. That's the loophole. They could pick a different race if they wanted to.S.Lythberg wrote:
groups can discriminate among applicants based on their race, one would think it is illegalPug wrote:
Is that a law?
Agree, but stupid doesn't mean unfair...JohnG@lt wrote:
Groupings of any kind based on race are stupid.Pug wrote:
Yeah, and before we continue much further down this road...the Black Caucus IS racist because it won't allow everyone to join. It's actions are not racist, unless they manage to pass a law.
You do realize your local town has Chambers of Commerce based on race right? For instance...I'm white and a member of the hispanic chamber in town. Why? Because I do business with Mexico on occasion...
And I would think the purpose of the Black Caucus is to promote equity. If it's being used to drive a wedge (which happens with certain private interest groups...take minority scholarships for instance) between the races...well it missed out on its true calling.
hey, i didn't say it was smart, or even necessaryS.Lythberg wrote:
as long as it isn't white
Here's a landmark ruling against affirmative action btw.Pug wrote:
Oh, you mean the one the white firefighters won?JohnG@lt wrote:
Affirmative action laws? There's a case involving firefighters in New Haven being passed over for promotion because not enough minorities took and/or passed the test. So they threw out the results and no one received a promotion. Surely you've heard of this case, it was just heard by the Supreme Court.
I forgot to mention that...
It'll be interesting to see what changes will happen as a result.
I "agree" with the purpose of affirmative action, but AA got muddied along the way. I do think AA is being used to promote racist behavior....but I don't think the intent of the law was to have a non-white quota as a hiring policy.
I do know that large companies have more administrative tape it they are short of "quota". So I wonder how this case will impact human resource issues...
Last edited by Pug (2009-10-08 19:48:30)
It isn't smart, all this preferential treatment by one side to the other just breeds more contempt, race should be removed from every job application and surveyPug wrote:
hey, i didn't say it was smart, or even necessaryS.Lythberg wrote:
as long as it isn't white
Actually I think the Black Caucus is on tinychat now.
your girlfriend loves the black caucus
ANYWAYS, I said maybe, it's not like whiteys all team up anyways
ANYWAYS, I said maybe, it's not like whiteys all team up anyways