Oh, I’m sorry. I forgot this was about Montro’s victimhood.
I’m so outta here. I totally don’t want to tread on your victimhood. You deserve it. No, you really do. Please. Be my guest. I’ll support you sister!
I’m not sure what your point was supposed to be.
So we can accept that 100 employers with around 11 1/2 million employees do not have specific policies in place to discriminate based on race. There are far more than 11 1/2 million workers in this country with thousands of potential employers. There are also departments within those big companes who are finding ways to carry on discriminatory practices while avoiding difficulties with HR or the EEOC.
You are the one who made the claim that 9 times out of 10 employers will choose blacks over whites when reviewing equal credentials and I doubt that you have anything beyond anecdotes to support that claim–and I am sure that other posters can match anecdotes with you all day long.
True, my “9 out of 10” is anecdotal, but your “departments within those big companies” carrying out nefarious activities is groundless.
First you were arguing that you were a victim. Now you’ve switched to worrying about black doctors having low test scores. More reason and less emotion would do your argument a lot of good.
You do realize that your anti affirmative action argument is an argument for lower standards for whites?
If there were no affirmative action for selective college admissions, there would be approximately ten per cent more spaces in each class (at selective colleges, a minority of all colleges in the US) for whites, so they could squeak in at the bottom ten per cent.
I’m no advocate of affirmative action, btw. It’s just that your claim of victimization is absurd.
Low test scores are low test scores. Maybe that’s emotion where you come from, but here on the Dope numbers are numbers.
I’m all for standards for whites being lowered to the standards for others. Or vice verse.
Let the bottom ten percent battle it out. Don’t let the bottom ten percent push out the top ten percent. That’s silly.
It’s reverse discrimination, not victimization. I think it’s obvious who claims victimization, here. This whole thread was started about victimization. Tell me it wasn’t.
You may (and will) choose to believe whatever makes you feel comfortable. I have seen it happen. It is less widespread than previously and, perhaps, less widespread than among smaller companies, but it still happens. Target, for example, had a very strong affirmative action program when I worked for them, and even they have had divisions that have been caught ignoring company policy and federal law.
You called yourself a victim in an earlier post. Unless someone is posting under your name… 
Bakke did have higher scores than all of the applicants of the special program BUT he also had higher scores than whites admitted in the regular program. In 1973 his scores were higher than that of the average regular program admittee and in 1974 hi scores were far higher than that of the average regular program admittees.
So whites with lower overall scores than Bakke being admitted is not a problem?
Yes any persons suffering under the racist regimes and still suffering should be justly compensated even today and a big hand to the Lumbee tribe who directly stood against Jim Crow, the exploitation of tribes despite the so call assimilation process programme which effectively failed should have no bearing on anything except to be treated fairly, more specifically those who stood against Jim Crow. A great war chief said ‘’ assimilation worked pretty good for a while anyway’’
another leader of the American Indian Movement said all you have to do is look at the state of the poor state reservations to see how socialism has failed for the Frist Nations, addressing the matter in a realistic light in as much that a political ideology is not meant to fail after a period and the duration and effort of the tribes to conform proved ineffective.
Yes any persons suffering under the racist regimes and still suffering should be justly compensated even today and a big hand to the Lumbee tribe who directly stood against Jim Crow, the exploitation of tribes despite the so call assimilation process programme which effectively failed should have no bearing on anything except to be treated fairly, more specifically those who stood against Jim Crow. A great war chief said ‘’ assimilation worked pretty good for a while anyway’’
another leader of the American Indian Movement said all you have to do is look at the state of the poor state reservations to see how socialism has failed for the Frist Nations, addressing the matter in a realistic light in as much that a political ideology is not meant to fail after a period and the duration and effort of the tribes to conform proved ineffective, I am addressing the Jim Crow conflict,
Certain tribes have knelt to tribal chiefs and asked for forgiveness of past indiscretions and come together for the common purpose and in my opinion, the Jim Crow issue is merely an exploitation of a tribal way of belief, I know what it is to stand against that sort of thing & I was not addressing the past slavery question many blacks are constantly compensated and still are being rightfully compensated.
Do zombies have to deal with Jim Crow laws?
*Zombie Crow, Zombie Crow,
Does whatever, but zombie slow…
Can he post a Wall O’ Text?
To hide the fact that he’s perplexed…
Where next? There goes the Zombie Crow!*