Re: Even better.....
 

and

Are you serious?

Anyways, here's what the shirt says:

http://www.protestwarrior.com/nimage...r_the_left.jpg

Okay, maybe my ignorance is showing here, but I don't understand the shirt in question. Here's why:

1. I thought the "good 'ole boy" network was associated with Republicans and/or conservatives. Here's a link discussing that. What does that have to do with liberals and high taxes? I'm sure that both Dems and Republicans, once in office or after becoming involved in politics, return favors, favor friends and "scratch each others' backs," so to speak.

2. Where's the government monopoly on education?

3. Umm, I thought the point of affirmative action was to prevent women and minorities from being adversely impacted by the good 'ole boy network (see item #1).

4. I googled my heart out but couldn't find those statistics. Can someone help me with that?

5. Umm, what?

Maybe I'm reading the shirt too literally, but I just don't get it...:confused:

Re: Re: Even better.....
 

Exactly. Liberals want us to be taxed to death to pay for welfare and crap like that. I think what it's saying is that because taxes are so high, it prevents a minority from crawling out of the hole. *I'm not saying it's right, and my explanation for this one might be wrong, but thats the way I understand it*

I dunno about the "government monopoly" but when you think about the "good" schools, etc etc, there arent very many minorities in them. People, before you start bashing everythign I'm saying, understand where I am coming from. I can tell you from experience that I went to a VERY GOOD high school, Georgia School of Excellence, etc etc. There were, on the other hand, schools that were MOSTLY minority (if you were white, you were THE minority). Of course, alot of this has to do with the way the school district lines are drawn. Minoirites (at least here in the metroatlanta area) tend to live in close proximity to one another, therefore, most of the kids go to the same school. Maybe thats the monopoly AXiD670 - the way the district lines are drawn, "Keep all the minorities out of our white school" or whatever.

Affirmative action blows. If I were a white male with 10 times the qualifications as a minority, AA prevents me from getting the job, which is total crap. Again, the way the statement is written on the shirt is true - democrats thrive on Affirmative Action...if they truly thought that minorities were "equal" then everyone would be treated equally, instead of giving special help to those of color, or those who were women.

I'll admit, I dont know. But it'd be pretty dang funny if it is true. I wonder if it's actually on the PW website somewhere.

Liberal policies, in general, such as AA, etc etc etc, prevent minorities from moving forward. Because liberal policies thrive on hand outs and "gimme gimme gimme" crap. It's like....let me think of a good example....sort of like a child who is grown to be dependent on their parents, rather than learning how to be independent and take care of themselves. It's liek the parents have treated that child in such a way, and molded that child to believe that he or she cant survive without the parents, so that child is too afraid to venture out into the world on their own.


I didnt say you had to like my answers, my answers might not be right, but thats the way I perceive them to be. That's why I find it SO FUNNY. Because it is playing on the irony of what liberalism actually is. It's a satire shirt, yeah, thats it.

Re: Re: Re: Even better.....
 

Not true. Affirmative action does not prevent employers from hiring the most qualified applicant.

AA should not be used to discriminate against anyone, white, black, male, female, purple or plaid, disability or not, and yes, AA covers veterans.

It's not about whether you think women and minorities are equal, it's about whether you think that guy over there treats women and minorities as his equal. Discrimination is not limited to a particular political party.

I still don't see how having measures in place to examine the hiring/firing/promoting practices of employers to ensure they are not having an adverse impact on minorities and females = Democrats think minorities and women are not equal to, well, white men.

If someone doesn't believe discrimination still goes on in today's workforce, they're pretty naive. It may not always be intentional (i.e., company president hires his neighbor's idiot son who practically failed out of college a la the good 'ole boy network), but it does happen.

Re: Re: Re: Even better.....
 

Your explanation is wrong - you're basing this generalization on the basic difference in intrinsic value of money. Essentially, the first dollar someone makes is more important than the last dollar - or, more properly, the further away from the poverty line someone is, the less each individual dollar above that line is 'worth' in general terms.

Certain across-the-board taxes would thusly affect the poor far more, due to this definition. You cannot argue that 'liberals want us to be taxed to death to pay for welfare and crap' without showing me proof.

Also, if your assertion is that governmental programs are somehow tacit inferences that minorities 'need help' from the government, you are thus stating that minorities are the primary beneficiaries of these programs. Until you can show the accounting that states that these programs do not, in fact, offset the 'increased cost' to the poor, then your argument holds no water.

The onus for this particular proof is on you.

"When you think about it" you're looking more and more out of touch - I would in fact infer that 'most the good schools' are outside of the 'government monopoly' by virtue of being private.

Regardless, these kind of baseless assumptions do NOT in fact make the point on the shirt true.

The point of Affirmative Action is that people be treated, on the whole and overall, exactly equally, contrary to your point. I will concede that the implementation is not exactly grand, and I've argued against AA for this very reason on this very board. With that caveat, you're still shooting blanks here.

Do you have anything besides a tired, cliched anecdote to support this point? Can you prove to me that 'Liberal policies' prevent minorities from moving forward? Even better - can you provide me a 'Conservative' policy that will enable minorities to move forward?

Can you really separate the effects of these policies on minorities from those effects on whites of similar socioeconomic status? If you can, I'm sure everyone on the planet would love to see it . . .

Hey you don't have to like my answers, but you can't act like these points are true until you address them. That's why I find your posts SO FUNNY. Because it is playing on the irony of politics: that everyone is an expert at THEIR OPINION, and loves to pass an opinion as fact. It's a walking cliche, yeah that's what your posts have become.

-RC
--Registered Republican 1999-present

Re: Re: Re: Even better.....
 

Come on - you're giving the rest of us Republicans a bad name here.

Re: Re: Re: Even better.....
 

Wait, so you're wearing a t-shirt where you proudly call yourself a White Racist and you admit that you don't even know if what the t-shirt says is true? Moreover, what you claim to understand is so far from educated knowledge on the subject that you don't even fully and accurately understand what you're saying?

If you're going to wear something so incredibly inflammatory where you call yourself a racist, shouldn't you totally understand what you are saying?

How often do you wear this tshirt? Where do you wear it? Most people going to take the time, nor are they usually able if they're just walking past, to read all of your t-shirt. They just see that the person wearing it proudly claims to be a white racist.

I can see how that would dissuade girls from joining your chapter, for example. Not many people, regardless of their political persuasion, want to be associated with a proclaimed racist.

ETA: you go to a school called Southern Polytechnic State University. Had it not been for AA, you likely would've never gone to school there. It would've been much more difficult for women to break the barriers to entry at your school. And also following your AA reasoning, I guess a more qualified white male was denied admission so that you, an underqualified female, could take his spot because of AA.

Also, how do you feel on vets getting preference when it comes to jobs and the like?

Re: Re: Re: Re: Even better.....
 

I would like to applaud all the people participating in this thread who dont understand what sarcasm and satire is. Yeah. The shirt says white racist for the left. It's a jab at the left. WHAT person of the left persuasian in their sane state of mind would actually wear a shirt that called themselves a racist? Obviously, the "joke" is too hard for you to understand, and if you don't "get it" I cant explain it any better that what I've already attempted. It's a JOKE people. It's making fun of the obviously major differences between the left and right ways of thinking. Imagine if a black person (of the left, of course) read the shirt: "...for the left." That black person would probably think: "Wait a minute, I'm a black liberal, and this shirt is saying that white people of liberal persuasian are racist. GRRR!!!!" Get a clue and get a grip, it's a joke.

For your information, I dont actually wear it in public. Hell, I'd get shot if I did. I usually wear it in the privacy of my own home, or in a setting wear I know the people around me think the same thing. I dont wear it to school for that reason miss-know-it-all. I dont need to explain my reasoning to you or anybody else, I think the liberal way of thinking is wrong. I think the shirt is hysterical. But at the same time, I use common sense to realize "hmm, it's probably not a good idea for me to wear this at school." kddani, do you feel proud now? Bashing another organization just because you dont like my beliefs? You dont have to be ugly, but if thats the only way you can get your point across, then good for you.

As far as the AA thing goes - quite frankly, I dont care if affirmative action is the way women were able to initially start going to school there. I dont care. You're reasoning is right - that some qualified white male could have been turned down based on the fact that I'm a woman. But guess what? I met, and exceeded the minimum requirements academically. I disagree with AA because I think that acceptance, or job offers, and everything else related should be based on your skills, and qualifications. Why do you think the high school exit exams are 100% anonymous? You have a unique ID that doesnt state anything about your name age sex and race, they grade the tests and then look up who the ID belongs to and send the results. Thats how it should work. Completely anonymous applications, make the decisions and find out the person it belongs to. And even with that method, I STILL would have made it in to SPSU, because I met at least the minimum requirements to be accepted without having to have a waiver granted.

Even as a veteran, I actually dont agree with preference. But the fact is, alot of the jobs that veterans get preference for are because they have had prior experience in that area. It would only be natural to assume that he or she was more qualified for the job. Yeah, the preference is nice. Does that mean I agree with it? No. Qualificiations, skill and ability (which includes prior experience) is all that should be considered. It shouldn't matter if you're male or female or if you're purple or blue. That method would make a person want to strive to achieve more, to have a better education, to have better skills, to be more qualified so that he or she can get the job based on what they know, not who they are.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Even better.....
 

So after all of that, you can't answer my questions as to why you wear something that you don't even know if it is correct? Regardless of whether you view it as satire or not, you're wearing something that you don't even know if it's correct. That's like going in and getting a tattoo of Chinese characters and letting the tattoo artist put whichever one on you he wants.

I did not attack your organization, I was giving an example of what kinds of things could be affected by that shirt. I don't know anything about your chapter, and it doesn't matter. I was giving an example of how it's not such a good idea.

And hello pot calling kettle black.... you've been incredibly ugly and hateful in this entire thread. I didn't attack you or anything personal to you. I'm talking about your posts and your reasoning. You can't seem to keep things separate. And you can't seem to have an intelligent discussion without flying off the handle, flipping out, name calling, and personal attacks.

Thank you for a reply that actually discusses. I don't know that I agree with the "fact" that a lot of the jobs veterans get preference for are because they had prior experience in the area. Jobs in the post office, for example.

Curious as to how you can say the preferences is "nice" but that you don't agree with it? Does that mean even though your principles don't agree with it you would take advantage of it?

Wait a minute, I never said I took advantage of it. If I fill out an application and it asks me if I am a veteran, what am i supposed to do? Leave it blank? And then NOT get called back because i failed to fill out the application completely? No, I'm going to answer it truthfully. Honestly, I havent applied for a job where it has done me much good yet. And hopefully I wont have to because I'm happy where I am as an intern and hope to be hired on full time once I graduate.

I'm all about veteran benefits, I dont think that getting another job should be one of them. However, i do understand that jobs such as, those at the post office and other federal jobs do have a preference for veterans. Why? Because they know that the veteran knows how the federal government works, and they understand security policies and they are easier to train. Even now, if I got another job with any branch of the federal government, if I worked 16 more years, I would be able to receive retirement benefits. Thats probably why federal job branches do it. As far as other companies I dont know.

As to your first point, I'm pretty sure that it is not required that you answer whether or not you are a veteran -- that is voluntary information. So, no, you're not going to get into trouble for not disclosing that info.

As to your second point, that's not why vets are given preference. The laws that give vets preference do so because the gov't wanted to prevent veterans who were seeking Federal employment from being penalized because of the time they spent in military service.

I'd like to reiterate the point that just because AA requires an employer to give preference to covered individuals, it does not mean that employer has to hire a less qualified or unqualified applicant simply because they are a protected class.