Supreme Court To Examine State Ban On Affirmative Action

[Captain Obvious]

http://www.npr.org/2013/03/25/175293854/supreme-court-throws-curveball-in-agreeing-to-hear-second-affirmation-action-cas


Just 10 years ago a narrow court majority upheld affirmative action programs in higher education in an opinion written by Justice Sandra Day O'Connor. But ever since O'Connor retired and was replaced by the more conservative Justice Samuel Alito, the court has been on a steady march to get rid of all race-conscious programs.

In October, the justices heard arguments (http://www.npr.org/2012/10/10/162669964/supreme-court-questions-uts-affirmative-action-plan) in a case from the University of Texas that has the potential to reverse O'Connor's affirmative action ruling.

After oral arguments, the only real question seemed to be whether the court would rule broadly, striking down all affirmative action programs, or narrowly, dealing just with the University of Texas program — a program with unique features. Then too, there was the possibility that the court would deadlock 4 to 4 because Justice Elena Kagan is recused from the case.

But on Monday, with the Texas case still undecided, the court surprised observers by accepting yet another affirmative action case for next term. This one, from Michigan, tests whether voters, by referendum, can bar affirmative action programs in higher education.

[Mister D]

1. I listened briefly to NPR the other day. I liked it so I will take your advice.

2. AA is is anti-white and a glaring contradiction. The hypocrisy is staggering.

[Captain Obvious]

AA is nothing more than liberal favoritism, including certain groups and excluding certain groups. Pure racism although they refuse to acknowledge this.

But in this whole psycho-pseudo liberal fantasy land we have what are generally liberal institutions (universities) coming under fire for what they traditionally have enveloped themselves in. Subtle irony I guess, but people sue and universities are great targets for this, it's a virtual legislative playground.

I wonder what percentage of legal fees, research, etc. is included in their next years tuition increase.

[Captain Obvious]

And yeah - Mister D , I think you'll like NPR. I'm surprised at how objectively they're reporting news lately, but you have to listen to the evening shows like Democracy Now and Alternative Radio. Unbelievably liberal stuff.

[Mister D]

And yeah - @Mister D (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=4) , I think you'll like NPR. I'm surprised at how objectively they're reporting news lately, but you have to listen to the evening shows like Democracy Now and Alternative Radio. Unbelievably liberal stuff.

I've seen Democracy Now on TV at night. No way. I need to relax at night. :grin:

The programming seemed interesting. It's 880 here.

[Mister D]

AA is nothing more than liberal favoritism, including certain groups and excluding certain groups. Pure racism although they refuse to acknowledge this.

But in this whole psycho-pseudo liberal fantasy land we have what are generally liberal institutions (universities) coming under fire for what they traditionally have enveloped themselves in. Subtle irony I guess, but people sue and universities are great targets for this, it's a virtual legislative playground.

I wonder what percentage of legal fees, research, etc. is included in their next years tuition increase.

Agreed on all points. I greet the irony with a mixture of amusement and irritation.

Forget universities for a moment. How much do headaches about discrimination (racial, age, sex) lawsuits cost regular businesses? Indeed, never mind legal fees. You need a larger HR staff. The cost nationwide must be substantial.

[Mister D]

Re universities: a bloated staff will raise tuition costs. Period.

[Captain Obvious]

Agreed on all points. I greet the irony with a mixture of amusement and irritation.

Forget universities for a moment. How much do headaches about discrimination (racial, age, sex) lawsuits cost regular businesses? Indeed, never mind legal fees. You need a larger HR staff. The cost nationwide must be substantial.

Add indirect costs also like taking action (or not taking action) because of potential legal issues regardless of the situation.

Can't tell you how many times I've seen "we want to take HR action against this person but she's a woman or a minority or over 40 - or the trifecta which virtually makes them untouchable.

[Mister D]

Add indirect costs also like taking action (or not taking action) because of potential legal issues regardless of the situation.

Can't tell you how many times I've seen "we want to take HR action against this person but she's a woman or a minority or over 40 - or the trifecta which virtually makes them untouchable.

Our HR department goes on high alert when there is bad blood on the part of anyone but a white male under 40 that hasn't done anything that would obviously merit termination.

[Cigar]

AA, for the most part, is not widely needed, but there are still a few Dinosaurs roaming the sewage. I give it a Generation or two max, then Liberty and Justice for All will really have meaning for All and no longer just the privileged. The fact is, change has come to America and there's no stopping it now because now the numbers and support are in favor of equal rights for everyone. Sure there will be some who will long for the good-old-days, but their time has come and gone.

So the true purpose of AA has been achieved. :)

[Mister D]

AA, for the most part, is not widely needed, but there are still a few Dinosaurs roaming the sewage. I give it a Generation or two max, then Liberty and Justice for All will really have meaning for All and no longer just the privileged. The fact is, change has come to America and there's no stopping it now because now the numbers and support are in favor of equal rights for everyone. Sure there will be some who will long for the good-old-days, but their time has come and gone.

So the true purpose of AA has been achieved. :)

AA gives people special rights and we already know you support racial discrimination against whites. No need to remind us.

[Ravi]

The way the law is written is no discriminating based on race. It doesn't say which race, it just says race. So in reality it also protects white people.

[Mister D]

The way the law is written is no discriminating based on race. It doesn't say which race, it just says race. So in reality it also protects white people.

Yet we know such discrimination occurs. In reality, whites are penalized on the basis of race. Why would you support discrimination against your own people?

[Ravi]

Yet we know such discrimination occurs. In reality, whites are penalized on the basis of race. Why would you support discrimination against your own people?If WE KNOW such discrimination occurs and WE KNOW it is illegal than the perps should be punished on a case by case basis.

[Mister D]

If WE KNOW such discrimination occurs and WE KNOW it is illegal than the perps should be punished on a case by case basis.

Yes, they should be but they keep doing it with the complicity of our government and Supreme Court.

[Ravi]

Are you sure? I thought all the lawsuits were to prove discrimination.

What do you suggest....that we go ahead and make discrimination legal?

[Mister D]

Are you sure? I thought all the lawsuits were to prove discrimination.

What do you suggest....that we go ahead and make discrimination legal?

Sure am. So are you.

Nope. Why would you even ask? In any case, it already is legal to discriminate against some races but not others. Universities, for example, do it quite often.

[Ravi]

Quotas are illegal. And no, it isn't legal to discriminate against some races.

[Mister D]

Quotas are illegal. And no, it isn't legal to discriminate against some races.

I'm not talking about quotas but we know that universities, for example, will lower standards for some groups in order to meet 'unofficial' quotas. Affirmative Action persists and you know it does. It unfairly penalizes whites. Do you disagree? If so, why?

Then why are standards, academic and otherwise, lowered for some groups?

[Ravi]

I disagree that it penalizes whites. It clearly states no discrimination based on race.

People might use the law to suit their own purposes but there is nothing wrong with the law as it is written.

[roadmaster]

I disagree that it penalizes whites. It clearly states no discrimination based on race.

People might use the law to suit their own purposes but there is nothing wrong with the law as it is written.

It can say what it wants but companies get rewarded hiring minorities, so it does penalize whites.

[Mister D]

I disagree that it penalizes whites. It clearly states no discrimination based on race.

People might use the law to suit their own purposes but there is nothing wrong with the law as it is written.

So what do you call it when standards, academic or otherwise, are lowered for blacks and Hispanics but not for whites? You say it's not discrimination. What is it then? What do you call it when a white student, for example, with superior qualifications is turned down in favor of a Negro with inferior qualifications? What's that called?

[Mister D]

It can say what it wants but companies get rewarded hiring minorities, so it does penalize whites.

They also get shaken down when they don't. Carrot and stick.

[Ravi]

It can say what it wants but companies get rewarded hiring minorities, so it does penalize whites.
By whom and how do companies get rewarded? Take heart, btw, it won't be long before white people are the minority and you'll no longer feel oppressed. :)

[Ravi]

So what do you call it when standards, academic or otherwise, are lowered for blacks and Hispanics but not for whites? You say it's not discrimination. What is it then? What do you call it when a white student, for example, with superior qualifications is turned down in favor of a Negro with inferior qualifications? What's that called?
I call it discrimination and say that it is illegal.

[Mister D]

By whom and how do companies get rewarded? Take heart, btw, it won't be long before white people are the minority and you'll no longer feel oppressed. :)

So how do you reconcile your first post with your last? You admit whites are in fact discrminated against but you chide roadmaster about it. Why do you support discrimination against whites? That's what it sounds like.

[Mister D]

Oh, and you'll all be long dead by the time that happens. America will also be in a steep decline.

[Cigar]

AA gives people special rights and we already know you support racial discrimination against whites. No need to remind us.


Get back to me after 400 years and I'll try my best to shed a tear ... or two.

[Mister D]

Get back to me after 400 years and I'll try my best to shed a tear ... or two.

Wow! You;re 400 years old!? Again, we know you support discrimination agaist whites. No need to keep reminding us. Do remember that when we stop paying the bills.

[Ravi]

So how do you reconcile your first post with your last? You admit whites are in fact discrminated against but you chide roadmaster about it. Why do you support discrimination against whites? That's what it sounds like.
I think all groups are discriminated against by someone, somewhere. That was the reason for the law in the first place, and once again the law says CANNOT DISCRIMINATE BECAUSE OF RACE.

What is the alternative? The only one I can see that would be equally fair is to say MAY DISCRIMINATE BECAUSE OF RACE.

But, IMO, that would be ridiculous.

How about enforcing the law instead of pretending that it doesn't also protect white people in theory if not always in practice?

[Ravi]

Oh, and you'll all be long dead by the time that happens. America will also be in a steep decline.I doubt either of those are true. Are you a racist? Your last sentence makes you sound like one.

[Mister D]

I doubt either of those are true. Are you a racist? Your last sentence makes you sound like one.

You also doubt whites are discriminated against while simultaneously admitting that they are so what you believe is of no interest. You don't seem particularly rational.

What was racist about what I stated? Do tell.

[Mister D]

Wait a minute! Are you a racist? You're the one dismissing discrimination against whites. :smiley:

[roadmaster]

Wow! You;re 400 years old!? Again, we know you support discrimination agaist whites. No need to keep reminding us. Do remember that when we stop paying the bills.

Right we shouldn't support discrimination against any quote race. I think it's time to end this. The best person should get the job and I have witnessed some state people that would only hire their race and didn't care if the other person had more experience. Race discrimination goes both ways but her being black she didn't feel anyone could do anything to her and didn't hide it. She was wrong.

[Cigar]

Wow! You;re 400 years old!? Again, we know you support discrimination agaist whites. No need to keep reminding us. Do remember that when we stop paying the bills.


I'm not old at all, as a matter of fact I'm more than agile enough to embed my foot in anyone ass who equally deserving with zero discrimination. And any day you want to pay my bills, just stop talking about it and start doing it. Otherwise we can just assume you're talking out your ass ... again.

[Cigar]

Two words, Country Club ... visit one in The year 2013.

[Ravi]

You also doubt whites are discriminated against while simultaneously admitting that they are so what you believe is of no interest. You don't seem particularly rational.

What was racist about what I stated? Do tell.I don't doubt it at all, please show me where I said that. I said it is illegal to discriminate based on race, and that would include discriminating against white people.

[Mister D]

I'm not old at all, as a matter of fact I'm more than agile enough to embed my foot in anyone ass who equally deserving with zero discrimination. And any day you want to pay my bills, just stop talking about it and start doing it. Otherwise we can just assume you're talking out your ass ... again.

:rofl:

2115

Stop embarrassing yourself.

Anyway, we've been paying your bills for decades, watching you fail in our schools, and warehousing your bastard children. I hope I live to see our people pull the plug on this wretched system.

[Ravi]

You also doubt whites are discriminated against while simultaneously admitting that they are so what you believe is of no interest. You don't seem particularly rational.

What was racist about what I stated? Do tell.As to your second sentence it sounds like you are saying more brown, black or Asian people would doom the country to failure.

[roadmaster]

I don't doubt it at all, please show me where I said that. I said it is illegal to discriminate based on race, and that would include discriminating against white people. Well open your eyes because it's happening.

[Mister D]

I don't doubt it at all, please show me where I said that. I said it is illegal to discriminate based on race, and that would include discriminating against white people.

Did you not just chide Roadmaster for a justifiable complaint?

[Mister D]

As to your second sentence it sounds like you are saying more brown, black or Asian people would doom the country to failure.

More black and brown people obviously will. Are you insane? Really, that's a serious question. These groups do poorly in school, have long made us a minority in prison, have astronomical illegitimacy rates, and generally vote in their own interests as a group.

[Mister D]

Well open your eyes because it's happening.

It's been happening since before I was born. There is a segment of white society (a segment that is getting smaller thankfully) that is self-destructive.

[Ravi]

Did you not just chide Roadmaster for a justifiable complaint?
Please be a little more clear.

[Mister D]

Take heart, btw, it won't be long before white people are the minority and you'll no longer feel oppressed. :)

[Ravi]

More black and brown people obviously will. Are you insane? Really, that's a serious question. These groups do poorly in school, have long made us a minority in prison, have astronomical illegitimacy rates, and generally vote in their own interests as a group.
So you are a racist. No skin off my nose but why can't you just admit it?

[Mister D]

So you are a racist. No skin off my nose but why can't you just admit it?

What did I say that was racist? Please elaborate. :smiley: Did I say something wrong? What exactly?

[Common]

What did I say that was racist? Please elaborate. :smiley: Did I say something wrong? What exactly?

You didnt utter a single racist statement that ive read in this thread. I believe AA is coming to the end of its life cycle. More and more people that used to be ok with it are not. Just like anything else times and needs change.

[Captain Obvious]

Take heart, btw, it won't be long before white people are the minority and you'll no longer feel oppressed. :)

White people have been virtual minorities for some time now, especially white men.

I can't wait until white men become an actual minority, then we can play on the same playing field like everyone else.