tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11306845.post113069228187659601..comments2024-03-28T03:19:40.014-04:00Comments on The Y Files: It's not racist (or sexist) if they're RepublicansCathy Younghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09688616617444359647noreply@blogger.comBlogger45125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11306845.post-45214624231614869342011-05-17T23:32:12.854-04:002011-05-17T23:32:12.854-04:00nice share thanks a lot :)
download free pc gam...nice share thanks a lot :) <br /><br /><a href="http://www.ourpcgame.net" rel="nofollow"> download free pc games </a><br /><a href="http://www.affiliatesrating.com" rel="nofollow"> affiliate review</a>Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16217946196345356227noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11306845.post-1131597499284519312005-11-09T23:38:00.000-05:002005-11-09T23:38:00.000-05:00Iraq/Saddam not Iraq osama, I should say. Watching...Iraq/Saddam not Iraq osama, I should say. Watching too many Bush speeches will do that do you.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11306845.post-1131592555137110912005-11-09T22:15:00.000-05:002005-11-09T22:15:00.000-05:00The US did not go after Iraq Osama becaue there br...The US did not go after Iraq Osama becaue there brown, Bush went after them because their brown. Did you know he only uses the word "gifted" when talking about colored people? "You are a gifted people" he said to Iraqis when he gave his victory speechto them. This is a personal war, no doubt about it, and anyone with a axe to grind has signed on with Bush making it look like it is not personal, but make no mistake. But when he gets what he wants, no other agenda will matter. Democracy in the middle east, Israel, human rights, it all goes out the window once hes satisfied.<BR/><BR/>Chinese vs. white Russia (which is half non-european anyway) is apples and oranges compared to the present. Russia had bombs and occupied half of europe and Cuba, with central america next on the list. China had no real expeditionary force and was the enemy of our enemy. Back then, presidents actually had strategery, unlike this fool who thinks the army is his personal hit squad.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11306845.post-1131528363917193042005-11-09T04:26:00.000-05:002005-11-09T04:26:00.000-05:00If you think that the U.S. went after Osama and Sa...If you think that the U.S. went after Osama and Saddam because they're "brown" ... sorry, but I'm not interested in any further discussion. Does your race obsessoin explain why at one point the US had a far friendlier relationship with the "yellow" Chinese than with the "white" Russians?Cathy Younghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09688616617444359647noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11306845.post-1131414539416025312005-11-07T20:48:00.000-05:002005-11-07T20:48:00.000-05:00"nd what's your excuse for racist attacks on Colin..."nd what's your excuse for racist attacks on Colin Powell and Condi Rice?"<BR/><BR/>Colin Powell could have been the first black president, now his credibility is shot for good. All because unlike most blacks he trusted a man who thinks blacks are good at one thing: following orders and taking a dive. They treated him like a token from day one. That was his decision, and it doesn' sound like he is too happy about it these days.<BR/><BR/>You think Freedom Fries doesn t sound like it comes from a racist mentality? This party can't wait to demonize people who dont serve their interests. They cant wait to drop bombs on brown people. Osama, Saddam, whatever, whoever, they all look alike, right? Bush cant even get his own story straight when he trys to explain himself. "And then 9/11 changed everything". I guess 9/11 changed Osama into Saddam, and made everyone in the middle east look the same. Martin Luther King jr noticed the same thing about Vietnam. This war is a war on the inner city. You say the Republican party doesnt even try to reach out? Tough. That's you reaching out right now. "Tough".<BR/><BR/>You think an exception should be made for criticizing religions? So what do these conservatives think of jews? Look at what they think of born-agains. According to Tom Delays man, they're just a bunch of wackos that Republicans can use for their own interests. Publicly, they make it sound like the religious right is the only way around and theyll do anything they can for them, but look what they say to each other behind closed doors. We only learn the truth in court. I bet there's a lot more truth out there.<BR/><BR/>"could anyone doubt for a moment that, if the racial groups involved in modern-day affirmative action were reversed, the policy would be widely denounced as a return to Jim Crow?"<BR/><BR/>Dont you have enough reality to face without thinking up science fiction scenarios? IF all things are equal in your fantasy world, maybe so. All things are not equal, get it?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11306845.post-1131401680257971542005-11-07T17:14:00.000-05:002005-11-07T17:14:00.000-05:00I'm no fan of racial preferences, but frankly I cr...<I>I'm no fan of racial preferences, but frankly I cringed a bit at the comparison of affirmative action to Jim Crow -- a regime of total and systematic subjugation of blacks to whites.</I><BR/><BR/>I didn't mean to sound like I was comparing affirmative action to Jim Crow as a whole. I was referring only to the J.C. era policies of racial preferences for whites in hiring, education, et cetera. I don't think it is unfair or cringeworthy to draw those parallels; could anyone doubt for a moment that, if the racial groups involved in modern-day affirmative action were reversed, the policy would be widely denounced as a return to Jim Crow?Revenanthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11374515200055384226noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11306845.post-1131250971809899552005-11-05T23:22:00.000-05:002005-11-05T23:22:00.000-05:00You know, I could argue with you on a lot of count...You know, I could argue with you on a lot of counts. For one thing the dominance of the Republican party in the South today is <I>nothing</I> like the dominance of the Democratic party in the South pre-1960s. Bill Clinton won a lot of Southern States, remember? And yes, I think a lot of the black community pretty blindly follows a demagogic leadership -- if you think that's insulting, tough. They're not the first or the last community to do so.<BR/><BR/>I haven't followed the golf club story too closely but maybe Steele made a bad judgment call, so because of that it's okay to turn him into a racial caricature? Sheesh. And what's your excuse for racist attacks on Colin Powell and Condi Rice?<BR/><BR/>Of course if you think that "Freedom fries" is a racial slur, I don't think there's much point to this conversation...Cathy Younghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09688616617444359647noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11306845.post-1131236062940029122005-11-05T19:14:00.000-05:002005-11-05T19:14:00.000-05:00" revenant is basically correct when he says that ..." revenant is basically correct when he says that until the 1970s, the Democratic Party -- or at least its Southern wing, a.k.a. "the Dixiecrats" -- was the party of Jim Crow. The Republican Party had virtually no influence in Southern politics."<BR/><BR/>Just as the Democratic party has little influence in the South today. These are word games. We are talking about the same folks who switched sides. Now they are on your side. Or you are on their. Whichever works.<BR/><BR/>"As for voting patterns today: I think that a lot of African-Americans have been successfully persuaded that the Republican Party is "the enemy.""<BR/><BR/>This is insulting to blacks. You say they share conservative views, yet vote Democratic because Democrats "persuaded" them. How come the Republicans can not persuade them? After all, they were the home team for blacks for a century, it hasnt been that all that long. Maybe you think blacks are easily led?<BR/><BR/>"Sometimes, people follow demagogues even when it's not good for them."<BR/><BR/>I hear that kind of thing happens. But the Republican party does not lack for demogogues, and Jack Kemp did not have much luck either, not because of him maybe, but because of black loathing of his party. How did the Democrats get that much influence? If Democrats are better demagogues than the rest, then why arent' they running the country?<BR/><BR/>"Actually, I think that putting all their political eggs in the Dems' basket has been very bad for the black community; the Democrats already have the black vote in the bag so they don't to do anything to earn it, and the Republicans don't even bother to try."<BR/><BR/>Not true, they do try, this president is trying, but his own policies and party stand in his way and the only blacks who listen are the ones invited onto his crony list. In other words, they are sellouts and that is why they receive scorn. You say Democrats dont do anything to earn it, that is false, but you will agree I am sure that Republicans are working hard to earn their contempt. With enemies like them, and so forth.<BR/><BR/>"MO, your defense of despicable racist slurs directed at blacks who have the temerity to be Republicans severely undercuts your moral credibility."<BR/><BR/>Steele wasnt slurred because he happened to be Republican but because he defended a country club for 123 years of racism. If they didnt let French in, and he was called a Vichy Frenchman, would the Republicans complain. Oh speaking of racial slurs, Freedom Fries anyone?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11306845.post-1131193892292836512005-11-05T07:31:00.000-05:002005-11-05T07:31:00.000-05:00anonymous, just wanted to add:IMO, your defense of...anonymous, just wanted to add:<BR/><BR/>IMO, your defense of despicable racist slurs directed at blacks who have the temerity to be Republicans severely undercuts your moral credibility.Cathy Younghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09688616617444359647noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11306845.post-1131193421206779512005-11-05T07:23:00.000-05:002005-11-05T07:23:00.000-05:00revenant: I'm no fan of racial preferences, but fr...revenant: I'm no fan of racial preferences, but frankly I cringed a bit at the comparison of affirmative action to Jim Crow -- a regime of total and systematic subjugation of blacks to whites.<BR/><BR/>anonymous: revenant is basically correct when he says that until the 1970s, the Democratic Party -- or at least its Southern wing, a.k.a. "the Dixiecrats" -- was the party of Jim Crow. The Republican Party had virtually no influence in Southern politics. As a result, a higher percentage of Republicans than Democrats in Congress voted for the Civil Rights Act in 1964. Around that time, Republican presidential candidate Barry Goldwater opposed the Civil Rights Act -- not because he was a racist (Goldwater had founded the Arizona chapter of the NAACP and had previously supported federal civil rights measures to protect the rights of black voters) but because he was a champion of limited government and believed that the government should not outlaw discrimination in the private sector. Goldwater's stance gained him support from 5 Southern states, which began the migration of the South to the Republican Party.<BR/><BR/>As for voting patterns today: I think that a lot of African-Americans have been successfully persuaded that the Republican Party is "the enemy." And yes, I agree that the GOP has its racist elements (the former "Dixiecrats"). But I don't think the Democratic Party has served blacks all that well either. Surveys show that a lot of blacks actually agree with many GOP policy views (e.g. support for school vouchers). Actually, I think that putting all their political eggs in the Dems' basket has been very bad for the black community; the Democrats already have the black vote in the bag so they don't to do anything to earn it, and the Republicans don't even bother to try.<BR/><BR/>Sometimes, people follow demagogues even when it's not good for them. By the way, I think that in the long run, "affirmative action" (i.e. racial preferences) <I>is</I> bad for blacks.Cathy Younghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09688616617444359647noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11306845.post-1131159396899592572005-11-04T21:56:00.000-05:002005-11-04T21:56:00.000-05:00Welcome to the discussion, revenant. I was worried...Welcome to the discussion, revenant. I was worried I would never get any direct answers.<BR/><BR/>"I said that affirmative action was racist, not that blacks don't benefit from it. "Racist" does not mean "bad for black people", it means "discriminatory on the basis of race". I think blacks probably do benefit, on average, from affirmative action, just as southern whites benefitted from the affirmative action policies of the Jim Crow era."<BR/><BR/>Thank you for the clarification. My impression before is that you might have felt that blacks were being exploited by so-called paternalistic liberals, but I see you are really more worried about protecting whites from black racism. My mistake.<BR/><BR/>"Blacks vote for Democrats for the same reason southern whites did prior to the 1970s. Back then, the party's policy was to grant special protected status to southern whites and redistribute wealth from the rest of the country to benefit them."<BR/><BR/>What a novel idea. And here I thought we were the party of northeastern liberals like Kennedy, Stevenson and FDR. Looks like you can't get past LBJ in your thinking. That is ok, many conservatives who dislike the Civil Rights Act cant either, he is the great betrayer of their race. For the record, distributing pork is not a policy of any party left or right. It is a policy of politicians who want to get re-elected. Ask Phil Gramm about this. This begs the question: why would blacks look to one party for protection over the party that freed them (Republicans)? Answer that, and tell me who the racists are.<BR/><BR/>It is strange how conservatives feel that liberty and freedom are the most important things America has to offer, and the source of this countrys strength, yet they fear the one people this country has enslaved and suppressed, right up to the very last election. Blacks have had to fight the most powerful government in the world for their rights, but those who agree with you have trouble sympathizing with them, or sharing opportunity with them. Why cant blacks just get over it or move on, you wonder? Then you go back to fretting over every tiny loss of freedom that a 1% change in the tax code represents, or a few extra black students at your local college represent. Oh the injustice of it all.<BR/><BR/>"When one party says "you should be treated better than other people" and the other says "you should be treated the same as other people", it is no surprise that the former is much more attractive."<BR/><BR/>What part of Equal Opportunity do you not understand? Southern whites left the Republican party because they didn't want to grant blacks equal rights. History has spoken.<BR/><BR/>"Maybe I'm giving left-wingers too much credit, but I like to think that moderate and left-wing blacks don't like being called "Sambos" either, and that moderate and left-wing whites don't like *seeing* blacks called "Sambos" either."<BR/><BR/>Nobody likes it. That is the point of using it as an insult, and it stings as hard as the betrayal that prompted it. Perhaps it is that better example of one of those insensitive yet true jibes you were searching for earlier? As for seeing others use that language, maybe moderate and left-wing whites understand why Gilliard is being so blunt, and would rather use uncivil language to speak the truth, than hide uncivil thoughts behind polite discourse. Not that I am accusing you of polite discourse, understand.<BR/><BR/>"There doesn't seem to be much reason to continue discussing the matter with you."<BR/><BR/>It can be difficult to discuss these things with people who dont share one's knee-jerk presumptions, I am told, so I can understand your wish to end this discussion.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11306845.post-1131140383935107172005-11-04T16:39:00.000-05:002005-11-04T16:39:00.000-05:00For example, you still have not explained why you ...<I>For example, you still have not explained why you think blacks vote overwhelmingly Democratic, despite their policies being bad for them, as you insist. </I><BR/><BR/>Um, I haven't "explained" why I think that because I never said I think it. I said that affirmative action was racist, not that blacks don't benefit from it. "Racist" does not mean "bad for black people", it means "discriminatory on the basis of race". I think blacks probably do benefit, on average, from affirmative action, just as southern whites benefitted from the affirmative action policies of the Jim Crow era.<BR/><BR/><I> I asked twice, now maybe third time is the charm?</I><BR/><BR/>You asked once. Your first question was to Cathy, who I do not presume to answer for. Blacks vote for Democrats for the same reason southern whites did prior to the 1970s. Back then, the party's policy was to grant special protected status to southern whites and redistribute wealth from the rest of the country to benefit them. The policy of the Democratic Party remains the same today; only the races involved have changed.<BR/>When one party says "you should be treated better than other people" and the other says "you should be treated the same as other people", it is no surprise that the former is much more attractive.<BR/><BR/><I>but Gilliard makes a historical comparison that the right does not like</I><BR/><BR/>Maybe I'm giving left-wingers too much credit, but I like to think that moderate and left-wing blacks don't like being called "Sambos" either, and that moderate and left-wing whites don't like *seeing* blacks called "Sambos" either. But I could be mistaken -- it may be that only conservatives and libertarisn disapprove of referring to black men using racist terminology.<BR/><BR/>Anyway, I don't think you are being intellectually honest here. There doesn't seem to be much reason to continue discussing the matter with you.Revenanthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11374515200055384226noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11306845.post-1131072919959410262005-11-03T21:55:00.000-05:002005-11-03T21:55:00.000-05:00I am going to guess that the solution to the myste...I am going to guess that the solution to the mystery referred to in that article about racial disparity is that blacks use peer pressure against fellow high achieving blacks to keep them from acting white, which is to say, being successful at school. And you are going to compare this to Gilliard mocking Steele. Not buying it. Apples and oranges. Gilliard is trying to shame Steele with what both men agree are offensive stereotypes, in order to point out how Steele is living up to the stereotype, or at least in danger of living up to it. It is not civil, but it is direct, and it is not racist, anymore than calling an American businessman who deals with a foreign rival at his countrys expense a Benedict Arnold.<BR/><BR/>To revenant:<BR/><BR/>I am afraid I am not one of those people who understands your usual circle's elbow nudging, so youll have to speak clearly what you mean. For example, you still have not explained why you think blacks vote overwhelmingly Democratic, despite their policies being bad for them, as you insist. You acknowledgethey support it,but won't say why. I asked twice, now maybe third time is the charm? Or maybe the elbow nudging is clear here?<BR/><BR/>If we are to be honest about race, then we should speak clearly right? It sounds like the problem people have here is that they disagree with this approach. They re upset that Gilliard speaks clearly, and just as upset that Bennett does. I guess that is uncivil. But as long as we are civil, like Charles Murray and Andrew Sullivan, we can be as racist as we like. When Murray writes his racist book, he is "thoughtful and provocative", but Gilliard makes a historical comparison that the right does not like, and he is what exactly? Have you agreed he is racist? Or are you still searching for a term? It is hard to tell, with all the civil, guarded elbow nudging passing for language. So much for clarity.<BR/><BR/>Revenant need not worry I tar all conservatives with the same feathers. Not all conservatives are Irish like Murray, Bennett and Sullivan, and we know that the Irish have little love for the black man. Just kidding, that is a little humor, for those here who didn't attend a good school and didn't get it.<BR/><BR/>I am interested in hear revenant explain why affirmative action is punishment. It is based on the premise that blacks are generally as qualified as white, once they have access otherwise denied. Say loud and clear if you disagree. Do you have an interest in equal opportunity or not? Or is it every revenant for himself in your ideal world?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11306845.post-1131060827257876562005-11-03T18:33:00.000-05:002005-11-03T18:33:00.000-05:00Sorry; I thought that was a humorous way to demons...Sorry; I thought that was a humorous way to demonstrate that a person could be truthful and insensitive at the same time.<BR/><BR/>I should have used a different example.Revenanthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11374515200055384226noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11306845.post-1130997260670548572005-11-03T00:54:00.000-05:002005-11-03T00:54:00.000-05:00Can I please put in an appeal for no name-calling?...Can I please put in an appeal for no name-calling? I'd like to keep the threads here from turning to flame wars.Cathy Younghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09688616617444359647noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11306845.post-1130993351524219612005-11-02T23:49:00.000-05:002005-11-02T23:49:00.000-05:00How can something be both insensitive and true?The...<I>How can something be both insensitive and true?</I><BR/><BR/>The first thought through my mind, upon reading that, was "this has got to be the single stupidest person I've talked to in a month".<BR/><BR/>The preceding sentence was both true and insensitive.<BR/><BR/><I>What do you think affirmative action is supposed to address?</I><BR/><BR/>Politicians' desire for black and Hispanic votes?<BR/><BR/><I>Cultural and economic disadvantages (such as underfunded and poorly run schools) caused by racism.</I><BR/><BR/>So you punish people who had nothing to do with that racism, but who happen to have the same skin color as the guilty parties. Intriguing. How strange that I would consider this "racist".<BR/><BR/>This has gotten pretty far off-topic, though, so I'll end here.Revenanthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11374515200055384226noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11306845.post-1130993284870614822005-11-02T23:48:00.000-05:002005-11-02T23:48:00.000-05:00I am not a William Bennett fan, but I see no proof...I am not a William Bennett fan, but I see no proof that he believes the race gap difference in crime rates is genetic.<BR/><BR/>Affirmative action primarily benefits middle-class blacks, not the poor. By the way, here's an interesting article that addresses the issue of whether racial disparities in academic achievement are caused by poverty and underfunded schools:<BR/><BR/><A HREF="http://www.shaker.org/news/releases/1998/1998.10.23.htm" REL="nofollow">A Good-School, Bad-Grade Mystery</A>Cathy Younghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09688616617444359647noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11306845.post-1130985545066478482005-11-02T21:39:00.000-05:002005-11-02T21:39:00.000-05:00"William Bennett said nothing of the kind. He said..."William Bennett said nothing of the kind. He said that black children are more likely to grow up to be criminals, which is racially insensitive but entirely true -- not because of genetics, but because of cultural and economic factors in the inner cities."<BR/><BR/>How can something be both insensitive and true? Maybe he should have spoken in code, like many who share his views. But that's the Bell Curve mindset for you, which states that these unfortunate conditions will be with us always, because of the genetic disposition of these poor black folk, and we should structure our policies accordingly. Affirmative Action is wasted on them says Murray, because they're unable take advantage of a foot in the door. Liberals disagree. White Man's Burden, indeed. What do you think affirmative action is supposed to address? Cultural and economic disadvantages (such as underfunded and poorly run schools) caused by racism. Or do you disagree about the cause? You never did answer my question why blacks vote overwhelmingly Democratic. Would it be due to these same factors?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11306845.post-1130964151483030212005-11-02T15:42:00.000-05:002005-11-02T15:42:00.000-05:00Given the history of racism in this country, still...<I>Given the history of racism in this country, still being practised today in many quarters, why would that even occur to you that affirmative action is based on notions of inferiority?</I><BR/><BR/>The main form of racism currently being practiced in this country IS affirmative action, which (for example) tells the children of Vietnamese boat people that, because they had the misfortune of being born Asian, they deserve to be treated worse than the children of middle- and upper-income black couples.<BR/><BR/>But in any case, I did not say that all supporters of affirmative action were motivated by the belief that some races are inferior. I said it was easy to see that that some of them could be. There are plenty of liberal racists; how much their racism affects their attitudes towards things like affirmative action is anyone's guess. Western liberals have a long history of taking a "white man's burden" approach towards dealing with other ethnicities and cultures.<BR/><BR/><I>No, I am afraid the Bell Curve mind-set will not be found on the left</I><BR/><BR/>I'm not sure what "the Bell Curve mind-set" refers to. But the notion that there are no people on the left who believe in the natural superiority of one race over another is easy to refute -- just look to the Nation of Islam.<BR/><BR/><I>William Bennett who say that blacks have a genetic disposition towards crime</I><BR/><BR/>William Bennett said nothing of the kind. He said that black children are more likely to grow up to be criminals, which is racially insensitive but entirely true -- not because of genetics, but because of cultural and economic factors in the inner cities.Revenanthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11374515200055384226noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11306845.post-1130959441987794992005-11-02T14:24:00.000-05:002005-11-02T14:24:00.000-05:00anonymous, where exactly did I deny that conservat...anonymous, where exactly did I deny that conservatives can be racist? I personally thought there was more than a whiff of racism about <I>The Bell Curve</I>, though I don't think merely promoting it as a controversial but thought-provoking work makes Andrew Sullivan a racist. <BR/><BR/>By the way, I don't think Bennett said that blacks were genetically predisposed to crime, though his comment certainly does betray the assumption that higher crime rates among blacks will continue in future generations.Cathy Younghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09688616617444359647noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11306845.post-1130905227013441732005-11-01T23:20:00.000-05:002005-11-01T23:20:00.000-05:00"For the record, I have no reason to believe that ..."For the record, I have no reason to believe that Jeff Danziger is a racist. It's just as probably that he unthinkingly drew on the racial stereotyping that is, unfortunately, a part of our cultural heritage."<BR/><BR/>There is no reason to speculate, because he already said he got the idea from an African American friend. Maybe that friend has the same kind of sense of humor as Gilliard?<BR/><BR/>Your anecdote about the class president shows that racism can exist anywhere, and if racism can be found in those who see themselves as paternalistic towards the so-called weaker races, then it can be found among conservatives who openly declare themselves in books like the Bell Curve, and like William Bennett who say that blacks have a genetic disposition towards crime. It can also reasonably be presumed among the class of business owners who support those kinds of policies with inordinate amounts of campaign cash, and they are the ones who set hiring policy. It can also be presumed among those voters in the south who switched parties to republican thanks to the civil rights act. Why do you think the majority of blacks vote democratic since then? Because they are easily fooled?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11306845.post-1130904243596938082005-11-01T23:04:00.000-05:002005-11-01T23:04:00.000-05:00anonymous, actually some 12 years there was a big ...anonymous, actually some 12 years there was a big brouhaha when the then president of my alma mater, Rutgers University, Francis Lawrence, said in a talk at some faculty gathering that affirmative action was necessary in order to ensure that groups which are "genetically" unable to compete on a level playing field would have a chance to enter universities.<BR/><BR/>After his remarks were leaked to the student paper and the brouhaha broke out, Lawrence tried to explain that what he really meant to say was "unable to compete because of racism, social disadvantage, etc." Kind of hard to see how one could misspeak in such a way.<BR/><BR/>Many conservatives, and probably many African-Americans as well, suspect that this "gaffe" (which, as Michael Kinsley once said, is saying something that you really believe but shouldn't say in public) reflected how a lot of pro-affirmative action liberals really feel about minorities.<BR/><BR/>Whether this suspicion is correct, I have no idea. For the record, I have no reason to believe that Jeff Danziger is a racist. It's just as probably that he unthinkingly drew on the racial stereotyping that is, unfortunately, a part of our cultural heritage.Cathy Younghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09688616617444359647noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11306845.post-1130900188460255832005-11-01T21:56:00.000-05:002005-11-01T21:56:00.000-05:00"Indeed, it is easy to see how support for somethi..."Indeed, it is easy to see how support for something like race-based and gender-based preferences and quotas could be based in a conscious or subconscious belief that blacks and women are just too damned inferior to do well without the help of well-meaning white men"<BR/><BR/>Given the history of racism in this country, still being practised today in many quarters, why would that even occur to you that affirmative action is based on notions of inferiority? It's based on quite active practices of discrimination. No, I am afraid the Bell Curve mind-set will not be found on the left, and not even so-called moderates like Andrew Sullivan are immune from singing its praises.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11306845.post-1130898022349562832005-11-01T21:20:00.000-05:002005-11-01T21:20:00.000-05:00But is a slam at conservative Muslims or Christian...<I>But is a slam at conservative Muslims or Christians for their attitudes toward women's rigts equivalent to a slam at blacks or women?</I><BR/><BR/>I sure hope not, or I'm in big trouble! I have had Jews accuse me of anti-Semetism when I condemned the practice of circumcising infant males, though.Revenanthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11374515200055384226noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11306845.post-1130891885539993192005-11-01T19:38:00.000-05:002005-11-01T19:38:00.000-05:00Good point, revenant. I do think that some of Cou...Good point, revenant. I do think that some of Coulter's comments about Arabs skirt dangerously close to ethnic slurs.<BR/><BR/>By the way, your argument raises an interesting question about religion that I've often wondered about.<BR/><BR/>Should religious slurs be viewed in the same light as racial, ethnic, or gender-based ones, since religion has to do with a person's views and <I>can</I> be changed? Of course, in the case of Jews the religion issue is complicated by the fact that anti-Semitism, espeically modern anti-Semitism, is commonly directed at Jews as an ethnic group as well as religious group. But is a slam at conservative Muslims or Christians for their attitudes toward women's rigts equivalent to a slam at blacks or women?Cathy Younghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09688616617444359647noreply@blogger.com