I was criticized for the first of them in that thread. Your suggested wording looks superior to mine. I wish I had used it.
Regarding the second example, my point was that college affirmative action is counter-productive; it’s hurting the very people it seeks to help. I do not see how to express this POV without mentioning African-American college students. That’s the group who I believe are being harmed.
Minty, everyone talks about blocs of voters this way. The SCOTUS even used it in a recent decision approving the limited use of race for redistricting.
Nevertheless, it is a very good example of the perpetual appeals to group-think for which wring justifiably took you to task, and about which you seem oblivious. That it was only 32 minutes before you challenges her to prove the observation is just icing on the cake.
december, two examples off the top of my head w/o even having to hit the search engine - you’ve (just started yet another one) often done the “why don’t blacks support vouchers”.
You’ve also wondered why blacks aren’t more supportive of racial profiling, since it ‘rids their neighborhoods’ of drug users/sellers etc.
and that’s not even touching your views on affirmative action and the media. (the AA one, I see gobear has brought up).
Yep, I think that makes it ‘consistent’, since many of your threads center around these themes.
And, you pointing out your cousin, and the 3 or 4 conservative black pundits, as being ‘exemplerary’ and ‘exceptions’ only serves to underscore the point. Do you think it’s merely a coincidence that these are the ones to whom you’re either related or who agree damn near 100% w/your world view?
Do you really not see this?
and yes, it’s highly, richly and wonderfully ironic that here in the pit, you challenge me to ‘show you examples of how you do that’, while damn near the same time you’re over in Great Debates doing it again.
David Blackwell and I are both mathematicians. I’ve studied from his textbook. Amalya Kearse and I both play duplicate bridge. So, what? I’m afraid I’m not getting your point.
BTW regarding my use of a generalized group, here are some recent thread titles:
**What should the Palestinian do?
Why can’t conservatives stop slamming Clinton?
Lawyers Are Not Engineers!!!
Score one for the Atheists - US Courts Rule Pledge of Allegiance Unconstitutional!
Freedom-lovin’ Americans, get your behinds in here NOW!
What’s with Communists and Gold?
Why are message board mods/admins (outside the SDMB) such fucking Nazis?
bastard referees are fucking up the beautiful game…
Byrd was an unapologetic member of the Ku Klux Klan earlier in his career. He’s a throwback to the old segregationist southern Democrats. He’s socially conservative, economically liberal, mainly because his state, WV, depends so much on govt. largesse. His state also has a miniscule black population, so the Repubs can’t use race as a wedge to drive between po’ white folks and what they see as their best interests.
Walt Williams and Tom Sowell are respectable, and both did some important work earlier in their careers. I recommend Sowell’s * Ethnic America* and Williams’ The State Against Blacks. These scholars offer a piece of the puzzle that’s often missing when people discuss black issues (But only a piece. Don’t be so silly as to embrace their entire world view.)
But now both men are growing cranky and bitter as they age. Perhaps because the right wing movement to which they hitched their wagons has grown morally and intellectually bankrupt.
As to Clarence Thomas, I wouldn’t mention the mediocre toady’s name in the same sentence as “respect.”
The only one of those threads I’ve opened is the “Lawyers!!!” one, since all the rest sounded too stupid to be worth the time. But it should be noted that the OP of the lawyers thread got righteously flamed by a number of people for being an ignoramus who lumped together a diverse group of people without even attempting to recognize the individuals’ obvious differences.
Bwahahaha. Wow. That’s the best laugh I’ve had all day. I especially love the part where you focus in on the “lesbian” half of “lesbian spearchucker”…classic!
And as for the “Jews ain’t a race” thing, well–while it’s never made a damn bit of difference to me–I’m sure all my secular jew friends will love it. Who’d have thunk it? It turns out that all this time they’ve been going around calling themselves jewish, and all they had to do was talk to december for enlightenment…
I wasn’t saying that Sen. byrd wasn’t a racist. As I am not american, I hadn’t a clue as to who Sen. Byrd is before mentioned in this thread and in the “leave this country” thread by Eve.
My point was thaqt words can be used out of context, and a cite to explain what you meant when you use it would be helpful for those of us who aren’t Americans.
<<Also, I’m not so sure that inner city public schools are so bad, in and of themselves… Too many students in these schools aren’t convinced of the benefits of basic literacy, basic computational skills, and speaking standard grammatical English. Way too many of these kids see fighting and casual sex as valid ways to entertain themselves and pass the time. >>
This is what an opponent posted on another thread about vouchers.. The person who wrote this appears to be liberal, so nobody is blasting him for what he wrote.
If I had written the same thing, I would have been accused of blaming the victim, not understanding the problem, mean-spiritedness, lack of compassion for the poor, racism,…
Actually, I did not see that as an “oppositional” post to your position. I saw a certain caution regarding jumping to conclusions regarding the efficacy of vouchers, but no claims that it would destroy public education, trash the Constitution, or any of the other typically “liberal” anti-voucher positions.
I have also not yet seen a clear liberal bias in belowjob’s grand total of 12 posts. I have seen some informed discussion of some issues where a clearly conservative speaker might phrase it differently, but I have also seen some appreciation for some conservative speakers efforts.
