Do We Still Need Affirmative Action?

Debate

Do We Still Need Affirmative Action?

“I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.” With an African-American in the nation’s highest office, have we realized the dream Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. spoke of nearly half a century ago--or do we have a long way to go? Are the affirmative action programs initiated since still necessary?

Yes - 21.9% (23 votes) 21.9%

No - 78.1% (82 votes) 78.1%

Share:: Facebook; Twitter; Other

Yes

By: American Association for Affirmative Action

Freedom Is Not Enough

President Lyndon B. Johnson said it best in 1965, and his words ring true today: "Freedom is not enough. … You do not take a person who, for years, has been hobbled by chains and liberate him, bring him up to the starting line of a race and then say, 'You are free to compete with all the others,' and still justly believe that you have been completely fair.

"Thus it is not enough just to open the gates of opportunity. All our citizens must have the ability to walk through those gates.

"This is the next and the more profound stage of the battle for civil rights. We seek not just freedom, but opportunity. We seek not just legal equity but human ability, not just equality as a right and a theory but equality as a fact and equality as a result."

The essence of affirmative action is opportunity, and the need to keep the doors of opportunity open to disadvantaged women and minorities remains today.

Affirmative Action Addresses Continued Discrimination

Discrimination still exists. Now more than ever, the continued use of affirmative action is needed to address existing discrimination, break down barriers and ensure that all individuals have an equal opportunity to demonstrate their talents and abilities. In fiscal year 2007, 82,792 charges of discrimination were filed with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, up from 75,768 in 2006.

Affirmative action prevents discrimination by encouraging efforts to investigate and eliminate barriers to equal opportunity before they become discriminatory acts. Affirmative action also calls on employers to diversify the pool of qualified individuals from which it makes a selection. It does not require quotas or preferences. Affirmative action eliminates race and gender preferences that some have enjoyed for centuries. Affirmative action gives everyone a chance to compete.

As a nation, we have made significant progress in recent years in creating equal access to opportunity, but much work remains to be done. Affirmative action presents itself as a proven solution to addressing existing discrimination and promoting equal opportunity.

Ending affirmative action would end the dreams of opportunity for many. Policies and programs to ensure equality of opportunity provide the only assurance that many women, people of color, veterans and the disabled have that they can compete--and be evaluated fairly--for jobs and educational opportunities.

Consider Race to Get Beyond Racism

In 1978, the U.S. Supreme Court in Regents of the University of California v. Bakke upheld the use of race as one factor in choosing among qualified applicants for college admission. At the same time, it ruled unlawful the University of California at Davis’ medical school practice of reserving seats in each entering class for disadvantaged minority students. In Bakke, Justice Harry Blackmun wrote, "In order to get beyond racism, we must first take account of race. There is no other way."

Opposition Miscategorizes Affirmative Action

Affirmative action refers to positive steps aimed at increasing the inclusion of historically excluded groups in employment, education and business.

Affirmative-action goals are not intended to achieve proportional representation or equal results. Numerical goals do not create guarantees for specific groups or preferences, nor are they designed to achieve proportional representation or equal results.

No requirement exists that any specific position be filled by a person of a particular race, gender or ethnicity. By casting a wider net and recruiting a diverse pool of qualified individuals, an affirmative-action employer eliminates preferences and levels the playing field for all. The essence of affirmative action is opportunity.

In seeking to achieve its goals, an employer is never required to hire a person who does not have the qualifications needed to perform the job successfully. Affirmative action prevents discrimination; it does not cause it.

Changing Demographics Necessitate Continued Affirmative Action

Affirmative action will continue to be necessary because of the nation’s changing demographics and the need to include these human resources for the sake of our domestic interests and international competitiveness.

The Census Bureau calculates that by 2042, Americans who identify themselves as Hispanic, black, Asian, American Indian, Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander will together outnumber non-Hispanic whites. Diversity strategies (including affirmative action) will be essential to integrate all of these segments of society, from the entry level to the executive suite, in government as well as the private sector. Affirmative action will continue to be important as a means to promote representation and to effectively manage increasingly diverse employees in the workplace. Affirmative action and diversity programs will also be needed to admit an increasingly diverse group of qualified and talented students into institutions of higher education.

While discrimination continues to exist, its antidote, affirmative action, will be necessary: for inclusion and prevention and to remedy the effects of past discrimination.

No

By: Center for Equal Opportunity

First, Define "Affirmative Action"

Let’s begin by defining “affirmative action,” since it includes a variety of policies--many noncontroversial. For instance, the term originally meant taking positive steps to end discrimination. No one opposes that today. It can also mean “casting a wide net”--that is, recruiting far and wide to make sure that you are hiring the best qualified person. That’s fine, too.

But if race or ethnicity is considered as a factor in admissions, hiring or promotion, or contracting, then we must acknowledge that discrimination is taking place. We can’t dodge this fact by saying that rigid quotas aren’t being used, that all those selected meet some minimum set of qualifications, that race is just one factor, or that alumni or athletes are also given preferences. Finally, we must acknowledge that the degree of preference given is often huge; race is not just a tiebreaker.

Too often, the debate focuses simply on whether there is some benefit to using racial preferences. As discussed below, we believe those purported benefits are unpersuasive. But even if you think there are benefits, you must also ask whether those benefits outweigh the costs.

Consider this example: Suppose someone argued against desegregation because he thought this would disrupt the coaching staff of the high-school football team, causing the team to lose more games. Even if this were so, we would conclude that getting rid of Jim Crow was much more important than the football team’s record. Likewise, even if you believe there is some marginal benefit to classroom discussion by having a more “diverse” student body, you have to ask whether such benefits are worth the costs of something as divisive and unfair as racial discrimination.

No Legal Basis for Affirmative Discrimination

Two basic justifications are given for affirmative discrimination. The first, which has the most visceral appeal, is that it is needed to make up for past discrimination. There is, however, a legal and a policy problem with this argument. The legal problem is that the Supreme Court has repeatedly rejected it, stating that racial preferences cannot be justified by pointing to broad societal or historical discrimination. And the Court was right to do so. Remember, those now receiving college-admissions preferences are not slaves, former slaves or individuals who were alive during the Jim Crow era. This does not mean that racial discrimination no longer exists, and perhaps some of these individuals can point in particular to socioeconomic disadvantages they suffer and can trace to discrimination. But people who suffer from socioeconomic disadvantages come in all colors, so why not include all of them in affirmative action programs? Conversely, the overwhelming majority (86 percent) of African-Americans given college admission preferences to select schools are not socioeconomically disadvantaged.

Racial Diversity Doesn't Guarantee True Diversity

The second justification is the benefit of having a student body or workforce that reflects a politically correct racial and ethnic mix. This presumes that we can use skin color and national origin to predict an individual’s background, experiences and perspectives, and that the individual will interact with the rest of the group in a way that reflects those characteristics. In other words, it relies on stereotyping.

But we cannot and should not assume that, because a person is Latino, for instance, he or she will have a particular history or perspectives. If a company wants to hire someone who knows about how to market a product in the American Southwest, it should hire someone with that expertise (regardless of ethnicity), rather than assuming that any Latino (including, say, a Puerto Rican who grew up in New York City) will do.

The Costs Outweigh the Benefits

But suppose you believe there are some benefits to using racial preferences. You must then ask if they are worth the costs--and the costs are considerable:

Affirmative discrimination is personally unfair, passes over better-qualified individuals and sets a disturbing legal, political and moral precedent. It creates resentment. It stigmatizes the so-called beneficiaries in the eyes of their classmates, teachers, coworkers and employers. It fosters a victim mindset, removes the incentive for academic excellence and encourages separatism.

In the case of college admissions, it compromises the academic mission of the university and lowers the overall academic quality of the student body. For employers, it lowers productivity by hiring and promoting those other than the best qualified. And it costs taxpayers money, by awarding contracts to those other than the lowest bidder, in the case of set-asides.

It creates pressure to discriminate in grading and graduation, or in employee evaluations. It breeds hypocrisy within schools and companies, and encourages a scofflaw attitude.

It mismatches individuals and colleges or jobs, guaranteeing failure for many of the former.

It papers over and allows society to ignore the real social problem of why so many African-Americans and Latinos are uncompetitive for top schools and jobs. And it gets governments, companies and schools involved in unsavory activities like deciding which racial and ethnic minorities will be favored, which discriminated against, and how much blood is needed to establish group membership.

Preferential Treatment Takes America in the Wrong Direction

America is becoming increasingly multiracial and multiethnic. Individual Americans are becoming increasingly multiethnic and multiracial. In such a country, can we tolerate a legal regime that categorizes people according to skin color and what country their ancestors came from--and then treats some better and others worse on that account?

The longer we have preferential treatment, the more entrenched it will become and the more it will reinforce stereotypes. Affirmative discrimination makes mutual respect more difficult, becomes more divisive as America becomes increasingly multiethnic, and feeds a vicious circle of failure and victim-mentality among those groups supposedly being benefited. The time to end affirmative discrimination is now.

Answers. 37 helpful answers below.

by NYRican on February 2nd, 2010
voted: No
I voted No, and it has been no always. First of all I give God the thanks for all the jobs I have had, Second I work hard in any job I had, and if they did not want me because of my skin color, then that wasn't the job I wanted. Now I work for myself, Thanks be to God and I'm happy. Remember everybody is going to answer to God for the things done in this live time.
Comments
- Amen brother
  - Report
  by Wallacabayka on February 2nd, 2010
- Please remind me why God gets all the credit for all the hard work you've put in?
  You can give me some for doing nothing if you like. It'll look good on my CV.
  - Report
  by feenicks on February 3rd, 2010
- Well Feenick, You ask me why God get all the credit. If it wasn't for God I won't have what I have today a House, Family, Job, Health/Life, etc. All I have, all I am is because of Him. If it wasn't for God, I'll would have be dead, in my teenage year.
  You said I should give you credit for doing nothing, if I give God the credit. Fine that sounds fair, But you have to do a couple of things first.
  1. form a man out of the dust of the ground, and breath life into him. Genesis 2:7
  2. Make nature obey your voice. Exodus 14:21
  3. Send your only son to die for people who don't know Him, don't care about Him, beat Him, spit on Him, call Him names. and as you see all of this. Your Love for them, your creation (if you were God) is so great, that you don't stop your son but let Him finish His mission. Not for Him but for us, to give us eternal life. Matthew 26:67, 27:2, 27-35, 48 Mark 15:15-20,23 John 18:22, 19:1-3,17,18,28-30. Matthew, Mark, Luke & John tell you of Jesus time here on earth. give a read you'll like it.
  4. That another thing, give me eternal life. John 3:16
  If you can do any of those things I give you credit for doing nothing, as you said.
  Seek ye the Lord while He may be found, call ye upon Him while he is near. Isaiah 55:6
  
  May the Lord be with you -God Bless
  - Report
  by NYRican on February 4th, 2010
- Why cares, NYRican?
  
  If someone violates my rights in some way or other, which, of course, has happened numerous times in this life, why should I give a f*ck about some punishment that may, or may not, happen after their death?
  
  Give me a break.
  - Report
  by Arisztid in a COAT of Rromani awareness on February 5th, 2010
- Arisztid, Could you imagine if God felt like that, or could you imagine if we as humans felt like that, What would this world be like. I know people that feel that way, and I tell you, living next to them would not be fun. By what I read of the stuff you put out there, I know Your angry at what happening to your people. The Punishment that you say may or may not happen, it's a fact it will happen. You have to understand there's Heaven and Hell, Hell was prepare for the devil and his demon (fallen angels) and he does not want to go there by his self. And since the beginning of human life, he's being spreading evil non stop. You should Learn where evil come from, and how it started, to be able to fight it. Then you be able to help your people from the terrible evil that's happening to them. If and when you do this investigation, what ever books you get to read, Please do not leave out the BIBLE. The Bible is the most accurate history book you are ever going to come across. Peace be with you.
  - Report
  by NYRican on February 6th, 2010
- I could not care less about some nebulous punishment in the sky.
  
  It is an easy way to handle wrongs done to a person. I wish I could believe in it but I know that, unless something happens in this life to someone who wronged me, nothing is happening.
  
  I also thought there was some repent all your sins and you are forgiven stuff. If there is, just about everyone, no matter what they have done to me, is getting away. If it is only sincere repentance, then someone who sincerely repents gets away scott free. I do not care if they repent and are forgiven... that does not affect me in any way.
  - Report
  by Arisztid in a COAT of Rromani awareness on February 6th, 2010
- Let me ask you, what do you want to see happen to does that did you wrong?
  - Report
  by NYRican on February 9th, 2010
Add a comment...
- Like (3 people like this.)
- Report
7 comments | Post one | Permalink
by Closed Account on January 2nd, 2010
voted: Yes
But we need to stop the abuse and use it the right way
Comments
- What is the right way to discriminate?
  - Report
  by OhLook - IamNoLongerAnonymous on February 1st, 2010
Add a comment...
- Like (3 people like this.)
- Report
1 comment | Post one | Permalink
by LifeAfTeRU on February 9th, 2010
voted: No
NO< NO NO NO- more excuses this is 2010 guys
Comments
Add a comment...
- Like (TAPriceCTR s son is wearing his COAT likes this.)
- Report
No comments. Post one | Permalink
by notperse on February 7th, 2010
voted: No
I feel that affirmative action is demeaning for many people out there. It's a little bit of a toss-up, because people should respect eachother no matter what. But I think that affirmative action did what it NEEDED so badly to do at the time. But minds change...they get wiser...and they get wider...and affirmative action has probably reached its time to stop looking back to the past.
Comments
Add a comment...
- Like (TAPriceCTR s son is wearing his COAT likes this.)
- Report
No comments. Post one | Permalink
by RosieGHM Jetpacker on February 7th, 2010
voted: Yes
I don't know if the playing field will ever be level no matter how long we try to make it so. I don't see any harm in giving an extra helping hand to those who need it. Cutting taxes for the rich is affirmative action, isn't it? Benefits the wealthy at the expense of the poor? Paying farmers to not grow food is affirmative action, isn't it? The money is diverted from other areas so that is also at the expense of those who are in need. Whatever you do that benefits one group of people over others is affirmative action, isn't it? Happy Sunday to you! :)
Comments
- while I disagree with your answer, your arguments are sound.
  - Report
  by TAPriceCTR s son is wearing his COAT on February 11th, 2010
- Thank you although I'm confused. If you find the arguments are sound how can the conclusion be anything but appropriate? Thank you and Happy Thursday! :)
  - Report
  by RosieGHM Jetpacker on February 11th, 2010
- because in my opinion they are outweighed by other arguments which are also sound... but they are apropriate to support your stand.
  - Report
  by TAPriceCTR s son is wearing his COAT on February 11th, 2010
- Thank you for the clarification and Happy Friday TAP! :)
  - Report
  by RosieGHM Jetpacker on February 12th, 2010
Add a comment...
- Like (TAPriceCTR s son is wearing his COAT likes this.)
- Report
4 comments | Post one | Permalink
by Old School on February 6th, 2010
voted: Yes
This boils down to two very specific questions:

1) Do you believe our society is a meritocracy?

2) Do you believe the aphorism "It's not what you know, it's who you know"?

If your answers are 1) Yes 2) No, then there is little evidence to support your belief.

If your answers are 1)No and 2) Yes, then you are on your way to understanding why Affirmative Action is necessary.

Because people in disadvantaged groups suffered OVERT discrimination in the past, they suffer from structural discrimination today.

They don't have parents who went to prestigious universities, who can get them 'legacy' admissions (George W. Bush, I'm looking straight at you...)

They don't have uncles who are executives at MegaGlopCorp who can get them jobs in the mail room.

The don't get to hang out in the computer lab of their local university while still in high school.

They don't don't get access to SAT-test-taking courses (which their schools don't offer and their parents can't afford).

They don't get access to adequate nutrition, and suffer a 10-point drop in IQ relative to their fully-nourished counterparts.

Etc., etc., etc.

Of course, it is a curious aspect of human existence that enormous numbers of people can answer 1) Yes 2) Yes to the questions above, and not even realize that the two questions are mutually exclusive and contradictory (never mind what the evidence is on these questions)

Does this answer mean that I support every affirmative action program that has ever been implemented anywhere? Of course not.

But it does acknowledge that where there are wrongs, there need to be remedies.
Comments
- guess what. there are plenty of white men who call under all those "less fortunate" catigories who affirmative action neglects.
  - Report
  by TAPriceCTR s son is wearing his COAT on February 11th, 2010
- @Tap - Yes, this is true. There are thousands of men in Canada who never had the opportunity to be professional hockey players because they were NOT born in January, February, March or April.
  
  (For details, read Malcolm Gladwell's book Outliers)
  
  The fight to identify and eliminate all forms of arbitrary discrimination is a never-ending struggle.
  
  But step one in that struggle is to acknowledge that we DO NOT live in a meritocracy. In fact, to create meritocratic opportunity in a society requires enormous vigilance and sometimes uncomfortable amounts of social engineering.
  
  But the alternative is to let wrongs go unremedied.
  - Report
  by Old School on February 11th, 2010
- so as long as those unfortunate men are white you needn't do anything, but if they are a minority then no matter what teh reason you must give them a leg up?
  - Report
  by TAPriceCTR s son is wearing his COAT on February 11th, 2010
Add a comment...
- Like (RosieGHM Jetpacker likes this.)
- Report
3 comments | Post one | Permalink
by Juxtapose on February 6th, 2010
voted: No
This is absurd. Enough is enough.
Slums and ghettos are not racially specific, the unifying reason for people to be there is not the color of their skin, but that they did not take advantage of the opportunities laid before them.

If anything, caucasion males are having their opportunities (and in many cases, constitutional rights) stripped from them in a blind attempt to balance the economic system even farther in favor of those whose ancestry had a difficult past. Economic hardship is no longer racially specific, and as long as we continue to put emphasis on what color our skin is we only perpetuate racism and segregation.

You want equal opportunity? Drop every single opportunistic program placing emphasis on gender or the color of skin, and make it situationally based on hard numbers. Slavery and economic racism is in the past, drop it already and move on. There are more important things to worry about and fund than petty grudges.

Oh, and for those who cry about still getting discrimination:
Do you have any idea how terrifying it is to be a white male and say anything to anyone who isn't a white male? All it takes is one statement which can be twisted into a racist comment for us to lose our jobs, our money, and be treated like a racist pig. I've seen it happen too many times. Stop complaining, we're completely discriminated against on a daily basis because of you people who treat everyone white as racist. You're the real racists.
Comments
- @Omar - Wow! So much bigotry and so much ignorance in one answer, it's difficult to know where to begin...
  
  How about here?...You should read up on the University of Michigan Law School's analysis of its affirmative action program.
  
  When it compared the statistical outcomes of its AA students with those that were admitted without AA assistance, it found NO SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCES in terms of earnings, professional awards, etc.
  
  And, as a society, shouldn't the point of law school be to produce successful lawyers?
  
  So, from a societal perspective, what harm did UofM's AA program have? According to the evidence...NONE!
  
  From the perspective of a few individuals, yes, they were denied opportunities that other people received on somewhat arbitrary criteria.
  
  But our societies are rife with such denials. People who are short, people who are fat, people who are ugly, people who are the 'wrong' religion, people with Asperger-like syndromes, and on and on and on ALL suffer from arbitrary discrimination.
  
  http://www.gladwell.com/blink/blink_excerpt2.html
  
  If the basis for opposing AA is because it's discriminatory and therefore inherently unfair, then we have a lot of work to do as a society.
  
  Why do we get to say all these other arbitrary bigotries are OK, but race-based bigotry (either individual or institutional) is not?
  
  Think about that, why don't you?
  - Report
  by Old School on February 6th, 2010
- Whoops! I apologize. This comment was meant to go under Omar Little's answer elsewhere on this poll question.
  
  OTOH, based on some exchanges I've had elsewhere with Juxtapose, the comment is relevant to his thoughts on this topic.
  - Report
  by Old School on February 6th, 2010
- ROFL oldschool... I was ready to say you proved jux's point :)
  - Report
  by TAPriceCTR s son is wearing his COAT on February 11th, 2010
- @Tap - and what point would that be?
  - Report
  by Old School on February 11th, 2010
- "All it takes is one statement which can be twisted into a racist comment for us to lose our jobs, our money, and be treated like a racist pig."
  but then your comment was meant for another answer which was actualy racist.
  - Report
  by TAPriceCTR s son is wearing his COAT on February 11th, 2010
- @TAP - I acknowledge that there have been some truly egregious overreactions to dumb things people have said (Dodgers executive Al Campanis on Nightline being the most famous).
  
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al_Campanis#Controversy
  
  But I encourage everyone to pay attention to history. I wonder what the ratio of "Driving While Black" incidents...
  
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Driving_while_black
  
  ...to "White man makes dumb statement, gets called 'racist'" incidents is.
  - Report
  by Old School on February 11th, 2010
Add a comment...
- Like (TAPriceCTR s son is wearing his COAT likes this.)
- Report
6 comments | Post one | Permalink
by Blessed has a COAT of many colors on February 3rd, 2010
voted: No
Affirmative action has had almost fifty years to work. If it was effective, wouldn't it have done its job by now? I mean really, you only have two choices here, maybe three. Either Affirmative Action is ineffective and possibly even harmful to blacks, or blacks are incapable of being equal citizens and are somehow inferior. I absolutely don't believe that blacks are in any way inferior, so I'm left with the idea that affirmative action is actually holding them back. I think it is high time we stop holding them back and making them second class citizen and either lead, follow or get the heck out of their way.
Comments
- Ah yes, the old "The Law in it's Infinite Wisdom equally forbids the Rich and the Poor from begging in the streets, stealing bread, or sleeping under bridges" argument...;-D...
  - Report
  by Old School on February 6th, 2010
- What the heck are you talking about?
  - Report
  by Blessed has a COAT of many colors on February 6th, 2010
- @Blessed - I am poking fun at your poorly constructed argument.
  
  Just as it's not necessarily the Law's fault that poor people continue to beg, steal, and sleep in public, it is NOT necessarily the case that disadvantaged ethnic groups continuing struggles to achieve equality are the (affirmative action) Law's fault.
  
  There are any number of possible explanations for the current state of affairs, including:
  
  --There haven't been enough/strong enough AA programs
  --Other factors have overwhelmed whatever positive gains AA programs (assuming there are some) have produced
  --Forty years hasn't been long enough (Anti-Semitism is still rampant in many parts of the world, and they've been fighting it for centuries)
  --AA programs would have been more effective if political opposition had not been so aggressive and vociferous
  --Etc., etc., etc.
  
  I'm not saying I know the answer, I'm just saying that your construction of what has happened is waaaay too simplistic.
  - Report
  by Old School on February 6th, 2010
- Anti-Semitism may mean that some people still hate Jews, but it hasn't kept them from being successful. It hasn't kept them from having intact families. It hasn't kept them from raising successful children. Jews have not needed any programs to help them be successful. They don't need someone to tell everyone that they are good enough to hire. Neither do blacks. In fact, spending that much time, effort and money to tell everyone that they are good enough is a backhanded way of saying they aren't good enough. It is a great way to hold them back. Let them succeed on their own and in a generation, no one will even question it anymore.
  
  Let's talk about who started this whole mess. Lyndon Johnson was a progressive and a New Dealer, according to Time Magazine. http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,841674,00.html Now you don't have to look far at all to find connections between progressivism and some pretty nasty racism. Here is one. http://reason.com/archives/2006/05/05/when-bigots-become-reformers Now I hadn't heard much about these connections and hadn't thought much about it until I read this article eight years ago. http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history-archaeology/lbj.html Now, Smithsonian isn't exactly known for being a conservative magazine and I don't think they intended this story to hit me the way it did. This is a glowing account of how LBJ worked both sides in order to bring civil rights to fruition and there is a quote in there that hit me in such a way that it was like scales falling from my eyes. They quoting LBJ as telling a senator to "be ready to take up the nigra question again." And it hit me, even in the late fifties, a man who was on the side of African American would have used the word colored, which was the politically correct term at the time, not a crass word such as nigra. And I suddenly realized that this was a man who hated blacks, not a man who wanted to help them. And by the way, black is the politically correct term of my day, as in "Say it loud, I'm black and I'm proud." I don't see any reason why they shouldn't be proud of being black.
  
  So having realized that this is a man who hated blacks instead of loving and wanting to help them, it suddenly made everything clear. The reason why blacks aren't succeeding under affirmative action is not because blacks aren't capable of succeeding. They are perfectly capable people. They have not succeeded under affirmative action because it was set up by a progressive southerner who disliked blacks to keep them under control.
  - Report
  by Blessed has a COAT of many colors on February 6th, 2010
- @Blessed - Here is something Lyndon Johnson also said:
  
  "You do not wipe away the scars of centuries by saying: 'now, you are free to go where you want, do as you desire, and choose the leaders you please.' You do not take a man who for years has been hobbled by chains, liberate him, bring him to the starting line of a race, saying, 'you are free to compete with all the others,' and still justly believe you have been completely fair . . . This is the next and more profound stage of the battle for civil rights. We seek not just freedom but opportunity—not just legal equity but human ability—not just equality as a right and a theory, but equality as a fact and as a result." -Commencement address, Howard University, 1965
  
  So, which is the 'real' Lyndon Johnson, the one who uttered 'nigra' or the one who made the eloquent plea for remedying past wrongs?
  
  I don't know....AND NEITHER DO YOU!
  
  You are filling in the gaps of a complex multifaceted issue with bad logic (1890 Progressives were blatant racists, so 2010 Progressives must also be) and unwarranted assumptions (LBJ used the word 'nigra', so he must have hated Blacks).
  
  I think a little more intellectual humility is in order here....
  
  "It's not what you don't know that will hurt you, it's what you do know that isn't so" --- attributed to various famous people
  - Report
  by Old School on February 6th, 2010
- Hmmm, when was LBJ born?
  - Report
  by Blessed has a COAT of many colors on February 6th, 2010
Add a comment...
- Like (TAPriceCTR s son is wearing his COAT likes this.)
- Report
6 comments | Post one | Permalink
by Omar Little on February 3rd, 2010
voted: No
Yes, we absolutely do still need AA, allow me to explain why.
You see, women are inferior to men, and non-whites are inferior to whites, in every way, shape, or form, anyone can see this, we all know it, and no-one knows it more than those in favour of AA. Since women could never possibly compete with the sheer brilliance of men, and non-whites couldn't even dream of equalling whites in anything, then it's only fair that they're given a helping hand, a leg up if you will, because without an unfair, enforced advantage, they'd stand no chance of competing.

I know to most who witness endless streams of (usually black) women snapping their fingers and insisting they can do anything a man can do, only better, will think that AA is insane, since black women themselves are claiming superiority, even singing about such superiority (example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Usz-vwNGCxA ) over men, but the fact is, although they talk a good game, they know they're inferior, so they should have the benefit of AA.

Right, I'm voting no, just to clear up, my first 2 paragraphs are just me giving an example of how AA comes across, I do not actually hold those beliefs, just trying to let people see how offensive, patronising, and utterly insulting on the most grotesque level, AA actually is.

The following is what I do believe.
Equal opportunity does not mean equal outcome.

I have said this before, and annoyed a lot of people in the process, and I'll do the same again, OK, here goes, for as long as AA is in existence, I will never take any woman, or any non-white person seriously when it comes to their profession, from plumber to surgeon, from cleaner to Secretary Of Defence, I will not take any of them seriously, not as long as they are given an advantage over anyone else simply because of the way they were born, no matter how small and insignificant that advantage may seem, any advantage at all removes all possibility of me taking them seriously.

Something that those who favour AA need to understand, and need to understand well, is that there is no amount of shaming language in the world that will change my mind. Call me misogynist, say I'm racist all you want, if that's what makes you sleep easier at night, go ahead, but know this, I do not think the way I do because of any personal hatred, malice, or resentment I have for a particular part of society, I feel the way I do because people like yourself force me to do so, and leave me very little option, this is something you really need to understand.

I will simply do a little checklist, lumping all adult women and non-whites into one category, let's see how many we can tick off as "yes";
Are they capable human beings? Check.
Are they intelligent adults? Check.
Should they be treated as adults in all aspects of society? Check.
Should they be given the same opportunity as everyone else? Check.

I'm having great difficulty finding a reason for them to be given an unfair advantage over anyone else.

Just to clarify, I'm a white male, and I would like to give an example of how pathetic those in favour of AA are, so here's my impression of one;
"Sob, sob, boo-hoo, gush, gush, us poor white men never win the 100m race at the Olympics, this is because the Olympic committee just don't like white men, and have constructed the race to be a disadvantage to us, sob, sob, can we get a 10, maybe 20m start? It'll even out this horrible injustice against the white man once and for all (although if you give us this, we'll push our luck and demand it in every single corner of society)".
Aren't they just pathetic? Of course they are, crying about an injustice that does not exist, or directly affect them, and then demanding an advantage based on their lies, those white men are just pitiful, is what I'm sure you'd hear if white men behaved this way, yet when women and non-whites behave this way, we've not to mention it in fear of being labelled racist or sexist, well label away, you'll never change my mind on this.

Although AA is cast-iron discrimination against men and whites, it's not them that get my sympathy, men and whites are brilliant, we'll cope, my sympathy goes out to those women and non-whites who have genuinely earned their position on merit, those who have worked hard and had to overcome the same barriers any white man would, they get my genuine sympathy, because they are now nothing more than a needle in a haystack, there's no way of knowing if they earned their position on merit, or earned it with a little helping hand that white men do not get, so trying to find the female, or non-white professional who is actually a professional, is like finding, well, a needle in a haystack, and although most will not admit it, no-one will take the genuine professionals seriously, I mean actually seriously, in case that professional turns out to be an amateur in professional's clothing.
Comments
- A lot of words with so little content.
  So much emotion so few facts.
  Trash talk.
  - Report
  by feenicks on February 3rd, 2010
- I agree with most of your answer. No one should be given a fair advantage. I do, however, believe that it is very simple to pick out those who have been chosen for their position by Affirmative Action and those who have truly earned it. I don't think any "women and non-whites" should be untrustworthy just because Affirmative Action exists.
  - Report
  by Sabrina on February 4th, 2010
- Sabrina, if you can show me a way to be able to tell the difference between one person who earned their position on merit, and one who was given a leg up, then please explain to me how to do so.
  Should I wait until someone puts too much medicine in a syringe intended for my son, due to their ineptness, or should I choose not to gamble with my son's life and stick to my principals?
  
  Feenicks, you must have bypassed the part about shaming language. Your comment has no substance whatsoever, just a load of hot air which just makes me even more determined to stick to my principles.
  - Report
  by Omar Little on February 4th, 2010
- There is no possible way to decide until you see the quality of work and effects. I just meant professional demeanor, confidence, and a positive outcome is an easy way to tell. It is always possible, no matter what circumstance, for an idiot to make their way into any profession. If you can not trust women or not-whites, you should not be able to trust anyone. How do you know the white man giving your son the shot isn't only there because his father is an important figure in the medical community?
  - Report
  by Sabrina on February 4th, 2010
- My point regarding not trusting women and non-whites does not mean I automatically trust whites or men, it's just that if I was a gambling man, and I was to bet on which candidate was far less likely to have a leg up due to the way they were born, my money would have to go on the white/man.
  It's just playing the odds, if I'm faced with a group of people from all backgrounds, the white man is the one out them all who is more likely to have attained their position on merit, but don't get it twisted, I'm certainly not saying non-whites or women are incompetent, in fact quite the opposite, I think they're more than competent, which is why I'm so against them being patronised with an advantage, no matter how small.
  
  So to me, no-one can be automatically trusted based on the way they were born, but playing the odds, there's only one way to go.
  - Report
  by Omar Little on February 4th, 2010
- Well then we are in agreement, Omar.
  - Report
  by Sabrina on February 10th, 2010
Add a comment...
- Like (Sabrina likes this.)
- Report
6 comments | Post one | Permalink
by Zofmui on February 2nd, 2010
voted: No
I would like to see the question regarding a person's race or ethnicity removed from job applications and school admission forms. Then the choice would be made without race influencing the decision.
Comments
Add a comment...
- Like (TAPriceCTR s son is wearing his COAT likes this.)
- Report
No comments. Post one | Permalink
by Wary Old Guy bit the dust on February 2nd, 2010
voted: No
Affirmative Action was never intended to drone on in perpetuity. It was supposed to give the disadvantaged a "jump start" at a time when overwhelming bigotry existed in many areas of the US- so bad that blacks, in the main, faced a future not unlike the serfs in the Middle Ages.
Affirmative Action has done all it can do; that much should be obvious, since two generations have come of age since Affirmative Action first was enacted.
I believe one should be able to answer the question in the negative without being labeled a bigot. I believe that the protected groups have seen enough success, among those (seemingly) motivated to succeed, that it is not only "okay" to phase out Affirmative Action, but obligatory, as testament to those who used it to their advantage and made their own way in the world.
They've proven that it can be done, and the hangers-on that perpetually rely on such class preference(which it has become) only discredit true achievement.
Comments
Add a comment...
- Like (TAPriceCTR s son is wearing his COAT likes this.)
- Report
No comments. Post one | Permalink
by quicknuss on February 2nd, 2010
voted: Yes
As long as a certain peoples lives in a "ghetto/slum" than we are obligated to support them in their success.
Comments
- I don't understand what you mean. Please explain.
  - Report
  by Zofmui on February 2nd, 2010
- Slums and Ghetto's have being around from the beginning of time pretty much. At what point do we abandon Affirmative Action? Bottom line if your not qualified for the job you dont get it. You think i want a Fire fighter or EMT, etc to come to my aid because he or she got there job through the Affirmative action clause? Not because they were the most qualified person, but because of Affirmative Action? That is absolutely ridiculous.
  - Report
  by dking124 on February 3rd, 2010
Add a comment...
- Like (Anti-Semantic - ORIGINAL All-Black Avatar likes this.)
- Report
2 comments | Post one | Permalink
by BigDog1234 on February 2nd, 2010
voted: No
Affirmative action is just legalized discrimination against white people. People shoudl be judged by their talents and abilities, not the color of their skin. Affirmative action goes directly against Dr. King due to the fact that all men aren't being treated equal.
Comments
- Boo hoo
  - Report
  by Great Dane on February 4th, 2010
Add a comment...
- Like (TAPriceCTR s son is wearing his COAT likes this.)
- Report
1 comment | Post one | Permalink
by ThatGuyTed on February 1st, 2010
voted: No
Having no racial discrimination means NO racial descrimination. A person is hired only by thier qualifications, not by some arbitrary quota.

The race card is maxed out. Time to start paying with some personal responsibility.
Comments
- I LOVE YOU TED, WELL SOMETIMES. The race card is played out. By having Affirmative Action in place it only justifies racial discrimination. Its initial purpose was sound and fulfilled. Its a different age and time in 2010.
  I read an article from the FDNY, that is the New York city Fire department. Saying that minorities were discriminated against because the "TEST WAS TO HARD", so as a result we lowered the bar made the test easier, and now you have someone that is not qualified for his job, but yet bumped the white guy of the list whom passed the original test, with flying colors.
  
  So now I have an idiot that's supposed to save my life on the job, and guess what, those other guys in the fire house, they don't trust you, not because of your skin color, or blah blah blah, its because you are not qualified to do the job that needs to be done.
  - Report
  by dking124 on February 3rd, 2010
- Well, we can't agree on EVERYTHING. But on this issue, I'm with you.
  - Report
  by ThatGuyTed on February 3rd, 2010
Add a comment...
- Like (TAPriceCTR s son is wearing his COAT likes this.)
- Report
2 comments | Post one | Permalink
by Twisted Taco on February 1st, 2010
I prefer Negative Action myself
Comments
Add a comment...
- Like (Don Gorgeous George likes this.)
- Report
No comments. Post one | Permalink
by SalientAlien on January 1st, 2010
voted: No
Affirmative action is an academic idea that is disconnected from the real world. It's a rigid command and control structure inserted into a complex, dynamic, decentralized system. Hiring decisions must be made on merit. If you had an inadequate education, you're going to have to work harder to get where you want than those with a good education. Nobody ever said life is fair.
Comments
- merit? I am against affirmative action but the biggest screwups get to keep millions after destroying companies. merit amounts to little anymore
  - Report
  by TAPriceCTR s son is wearing his COAT on February 11th, 2010
- OK, so if you started a company how would you make hiring decisions?
  - Report
  by SalientAlien on February 11th, 2010
- I was not saying merit is not hte way to go.... I am saying that we do not hire like that these days.
  - Report
  by TAPriceCTR s son is wearing his COAT on February 11th, 2010
Add a comment...
- Like (Wallacabayka likes this.)
- Report
3 comments | Post one | Permalink
by Missnicolehw on February 8th, 2010
voted: Yes
It's not just the Affirmative Action for black kids but aisain and handicaps too.
Comments
- yesh. thes screw the white guys
  - Report
  by TAPriceCTR s son is wearing his COAT on February 11th, 2010
- thats not the point The point is we're all human beings It doesn't matter what color we are The Edu. is for all not just white people. We are all equal. Least should be.
  - Report
  by Missnicolehw on February 14th, 2010
- affirmative action prevents all possibility of equality. the ending of it in washington state was the first innitiative I have the privilege of voting on and the big pushers of the bill were blacks who recognised that affirmative action is racism.
  - Report
  by TAPriceCTR s son is wearing his COAT on February 15th, 2010
Add a comment...
- Like
- Report
3 comments | Post one | Permalink
by Don Gorgeous George on February 19th, 2010
voted: No
Affirmative action is complete nonsense. We have a white guy who is the most qualified to do a job, but by law we have to hire the less qualified black guy just to even out racial percentages in the workplace. What a joke. Fighting racism with discrimination is like putting out a fire with a flame thrower.
Comments
Add a comment...
- Like
- Report
No comments. Post one | Permalink
by vedabindu on February 8th, 2010
voted: No
Virtually most of the existing 'affirmative action' intended government and NGO gestures have all been either just a 'token service' towards the really derserving OR a more materialistic one and that in favour of the least deserving ones in terms of material needs or mental talent.

So - Let us vote for an 'all humanity affirmatice action' to 'Promote Justice and Virtue in particular' - individually or institutionally.

veda
Bengaluru
India
Comments
Add a comment...
- Like
- Report
No comments. Post one | Permalink
by sammy105 on March 6th, 2010
voted: No
I have a number of reasons why I"m anti-AA. First and foremost - if any person enrolled in a university or community college ACCIDENTALLY finds out they were slid into the establishment mainly due to the color of their skin or their sexual orientation, they'd be crushed 10 times more than the standard letter of refusal one gets from a college they apply to in first place.
Second, I believe this would actually promote racism and hatred. If there's a racist or homophobic person in too high of a place in a school making decisions on who gets in and who doesn't, and Affirmative Action forces his/her hand to allow in the minority they dislike - their hatred for that minority is likely to go up exponentially.
If someone has a problem with a certain race or orientation, one way or other - it'll show its ugly face and cause problems. However, I believe these issues should be solved on everyday basis. If I hear someone put down gay people, or black people, or Asian or Hispanic, I'll have to keep an eye open all the time and wonder if their comments would affect other people, too.
But AA would only lead to more finger pointing and frustration.
Comments
Add a comment...
- Like
- Report
No comments. Post one | Permalink
by Superjay45 on February 9th, 2010
voted: No
Nope not at all, I think 2008 is good enough prove we don't need affirmative action anymore maybe back in the 50s through 70s but now that we are all truly "equal" I think I should be able to take a test and be evaluated fairly to my peers why should a minority get a better chance at my job just because he is a minority, its totally unfair and quite possibly racist against all races.
Comments
Add a comment...
- Like
- Report
No comments. Post one | Permalink
by The Editor on February 13th, 2010
voted: No
No. Although I believe entirely in equal rights, I think it's starting to get to the point that we need to take the crutches off.
Comments
Add a comment...
- Like
- Report
No comments. Post one | Permalink
by AryanJake on February 11th, 2010
voted: No
It's a symptom of Cultural Marxism, the backwardness that's plagued the West and turned great men into oppressors and racists, and the bottom into the poor defenseless oppressed 'minority'. Well folks, Whites are the ever shrinking world minority and are undergoing cultural genocide, as well as a literal murderous genocide in South Africa. We speak our minds and we're racists. We gather in crowds, representing ideas rather than ourselves as a people (tea parties) and we're evil racists. We're slaughtered, and the murders rationalize their evils by demonizing us as yep, you guessed it, racists.
Comments
- @AryanJake - Gee, I never would have guessed from your 'handle' that you hold these views. I'm shocked....SHOCKED....
  - Report
  by Old School on February 11th, 2010
Add a comment...
- Like
- Report
1 comment | Post one | Permalink
by johnny5401 on February 11th, 2010
voted: No
Real simple guys- 12% of the population is black, of that probably 6% are working ages and actually do work. Of that 6% probably 1/3 are in non-blue collar jobs with real advancement potential. So if 98% of the executives and CEO'S etc. Are not black I say ..."sounds about right".
Comments
Add a comment...
- Like
- Report
No comments. Post one | Permalink
by leonardbiblitz on February 16th, 2010
voted: Yes
But make sure you don't follow Canada's mistake with aboriginals http://www.askbiblitz.com/res-compensation.php, that you impose some sort of review process to see whether such a program is still required. Canada, unfortunately, seems to be locked into a post-war reparations scheme with Indians that's gone on for 250 yrs with no end in sight even tho Canada is a considerably more liberalized country now. Don't leave these things open-ended!
Comments
Add a comment...
- Like
- Report
No comments. Post one | Permalink
by feenicks on February 3rd, 2010
voted: Yes
For the the people at the Center for Equal opportunity.
When equal opportunity is available to all I will agree with you.
As of today opportunity is not available equally, as why would large demographic groups still be overrepresented in one social position or another.
Are you a CEO of a large company? You are more likely to be male and WASPish.
Are you a prisoner in one of the "correctional" (what a joke) facilities. You are more likely to be poor and non-white.
Equal opportunity in action eh?
Comments
- In my experiances in both the case of CEO and inmate White male is the majority, and why is that? Because in America "white" is a majority race. If we cast our views globally most CEO's and inmates are of Asian descent. Now women are fairly equal to men in number but there still remains in America a large number, and the number only gets bigger globally, of women with no corporate aspirations. The reasons range from as noble as Stay at Home Mom, to as sleezy as gold digger. There is also social pressures on men to be workers. If a man decides to be a stay at home dad while his wife goes off to work, he will be viewed by other men as unmasculine (really a pansy) and he will be viewed by women as lazy, selling out his responsibilities and sponging off his wife. (though any stay at home mom will tell you that it is not an easy position, it's hard work). So because of the social acceptance of women who do not work and the social pressures on men to work there is a higher number of men in the work place (so we should expect a higher number of male bosses).
  As for there being more men than women in prison, it is not mainly because cops are prejudiced against men. Psychologically men are more prone to commit crimes of passion, hit someone out of rage, steal something because the opportunity seems to have presented itself. Women criminals on the other hand tend to be more deliberate more subtle (where a man would use a gun, a woman would use poison) For this reason two things happen, women commit less crimes (since crimes take much longer for a woman to commit) and woman criminals get caught less (a properly thought out plan leaves less evidance than a spur of the moment crime).
  As for the final letter in the WASP acronym. Protestant, I see no problem in hiring based on religion. Religion is such an intrinsic part of who we are. It affects how we act, our political views, our level of personal moral accountability. If someone hates me because of my religion... well I can't think of many better reasons to hate me. It's something I chose, something I believe in and something that has shaped me into the person I am today.
  - Report
  by John Cox on February 4th, 2010
Add a comment...
- Like
- Report
1 comment | Post one | Permalink
by Siyanor on February 1st, 2010
voted: No
We never once needed Affirmative Action. It has done absolutely nothing useful. All it did was lower the US standards of education. That is LITERALLY the exact function of Affirmative Action. It's not meant to educate, it's meant to force teachers to pass students who don't know anything by making them not need to know anything to pass.
Comments
Add a comment...
- Like
- Report
No comments. Post one | Permalink
by Anonymous on February 1st, 2010
voted: Yes
Yes we do still need affirmative action black are still being discriminated againist on every level.Just becasue we got we got a black president doesnt change the fact we are still being discriminated againist.
Comments
- What evidence do you have that blacks are being discriminated against "on every level"?
  - Report
  by OhLook - IamNoLongerAnonymous on February 1st, 2010
- ...Do you even know what Affirmative Action is?
  
  It has absolutely nothing to do with discrimination. If anything, it itself discriminates against blacks by assuming that they're all poor and uneducated.
  - Report
  by Siyanor on February 1st, 2010
- Yes, YOU need AA, as you obviously view yourself as inferior, but not all blacks want to be treated like mentally deranged children, some of them are actually capable you know.
  - Report
  by Omar Little on February 3rd, 2010
- Ok you all want evidence come to the South you find all the evidence you need. Blacks are certain prositions simple to be tokens. You all right I want to get someone because I earn it not becasue they need to hire so many black people to make themselves look good. My husband was working for a company that didnt have one black vice president, no black directors, and a hand full of black managers with no real power. Some departments had no blacks in them at all. Any ideas that the black majority of them simply disregarded. I would love to get somewhere strickly on my merits, but the fact of the matter is alot blacks dont get that opportunity and have to used AA to get through door that should be open to everyone.
  - Report
  by Anonymous on February 3rd, 2010
- ..Anonymous, maybe if you actually went to school, you/your husband could get a decent job. Based on what I'm reading in that post, you have no clue how to speak English and you have a horrendous knowledge of demographics.
  - Report
  by Siyanor on February 3rd, 2010
- HA!!!!!!!!
  - Report
  by Anonymous on February 3rd, 2010
- “Ok you all want evidence come to the South you find all the evidence you need.”
  
  So you are saying you don’t have any evidence? I have been to the South, and in the South Black people own property, have jobs, and live similar lives as there fellow white Americans. So do you have any actual evidence of discrimination “on every level”?
  
  “My husband was working for a company that didn’t have one black vice president, no black directors, and a hand full of black managers with no real power. Some departments had no blacks in them at all.”
  
  How is that evidence of discrimination? Blacks make up ten percent of the population. Thus, if you saw a black vice-president in every company, that would indicate that non-black Americans are being discriminated against.
  - Report
  by OhLook - IamNoLongerAnonymous on February 3rd, 2010
- Lovin' the new name change.
  Sorry, carry on.
  - Report
  by Omar Little on February 3rd, 2010
- Let make my stance clear.Discrimination still exist how many black that are very qualified but are constantly over look, then they must train the same individual who will become their boss.How many times are blacks look over when we have they the experience and the education?Then some companies will use this excuse "you are over qualified" or "we feel you would do better in this prosition". Then when we do make it, we have come correct at all times, stay on our P's & Q's dot every I and cross every T.
  
  For those who believe discrimination is no longer a problem are blind, you all see what you want to see. Maybe because it personally havnt touch you, or you feel you have gotten there by merits alone. that may true for you, but its not for everybody. African American have come a long way and we have a history to be proud of yet, since we got a little money, fame, and a black president we think we made it, that the battle is over. The war will never be over until everybody can get a piece of the American pie equally and fairly.Until all doors are open and open to everyone qualified to walk through them. When we get rid of the ghettos and the mind set of those in ghetto then we can claim victory. It will be at that time that Affirmative Action can go the way the dinosaur. Until that time I will continue to support it. You all can sit behind those computer screen talk about my English and make fun of me, I dont care . This is my opinion and I stand by it.
  
  One more thing blacks have been the majority in this country for decades, futhermore since alot of people do not particpate in the US Census or they just coniveniently arrive just simply misplace the main thing is since we think we are the minority they are going to keep up right there and wont say anything different.
  - Report
  by Anonymous on February 3rd, 2010
- “Let make my stance clear. Discrimination still exist how many black that are very qualified but are constantly over look, then they must train the same individual who will become their boss.”
  
  How many? Can you provide any evidence as to how often this occurs? In fact, can you provide any evidence that this still occurs at all?
  
  Let’s be clear: racism still does occur in this country, and it will always occur so long as we have a 1st Amendment. However, the only systemic racism left is that perpetuated by blacks (and other minorities) against whites.
  
  When Henry Gates was confronted by a police officer responding to a burglary call, what did Mr. Gates do? Well, he made a racist response by falsely assuming that the officer was racist. This is what you are doing right now. You are accusing others of racism without any evidence that any racism exists.
  
  There is none so blind as he who chooses not to see. If racism is so apparent, you should be able to cite evidence of that racism.
  
  “When we get rid of the ghettos and the mind set of those in ghetto then we can claim victory.”
  
  Then why not champion that cause? Ghettos are not created by white people. White people don’t create the ghetto mindset. It is the entitlement mindset that holds people in ghettos behind.
  
  “One more thing blacks have been the majority in this country for decades….”
  
  Apparently you do not know what “majority” means.
  - Report
  by OhLook - IamNoLongerAnonymous on February 3rd, 2010
- I know what it mean, if you dont believe me take a look back.
  - Report
  by Anonymous on February 3rd, 2010
- ...
  
  Blacks were the majority in the Southern half of the country before it was a country and a few years after.
  
  Beyond then, they were ALWAYS a minority.
  - Report
  by Siyanor on February 3rd, 2010
- There were also cases were blacks up North out number the the whites.Think about this if you look back there is one consisted theme that is high number of kids blacks would have. This trend would continued through slavery, post slavery years all the way up into the 1960's were trend shifted back towards having less kids.Think about this if that trend continue all the way up until the 60's wouldnt that support higher number of blacks then what is being reported now, plus we must also take into account all the mix babies, also the ones that wasnt consider black because of their mother.It was during these(Slavery & Post Slavery) times that states and local agenices they did not keep good records of black births. So the numbers they have now are mostly likely incorrect.
  - Report
  by Anonymous on February 4th, 2010
- A census is conducted every ten years. Thus, even if past records are inaccurate, that would have no bearing on current census data.
  - Report
  by OhLook - IamNoLongerAnonymous on February 4th, 2010
Add a comment...
- Like
- Report
14 comments | Post one | Permalink
by Old School on February 1st, 2010
voted: Yes
OF COURSE we still need affirmative action.

How else would can Upper Class Twits like George W. Bush grow up to be President if we don't provide them a leg up.

How would GWB ever have gotten into Yale if his grandapa wasn't Prescott Bush?

How would GWB ever have gotten into Harvard Business School if not for being a member of the downtrodden Bush 'legacy'?

Imagine if poor GWB had been subject to the military draft, instead of being stashed in the National Guard because of Grandpa and Daddy's influence.

How could GWB ever have been allowed to start up and run into bankruptcy three oil exploration companies if not for the 'affirmative action' of Bush and bin Laden family money?

How would GWB ever been able to be the 'face' of the Texas Rangers ownership group if not for 'preferential treatment' given to Bush family money and connections.

Would anyone have taken seriously the political aspirations of a coke-snorting alcoholic overgrown frat boy if not for the 'government handout' of his family name by Grandpa and Pappy Bush?

If not for the 'affirmative action' of dynastic family wealth, old-boy networks, and nepotism, the imbecilic rich would be seriously underrepresented in many walks of life.

Is that an America you want to live in?

I remember back in the late '90s when Ira Katznelson, an eminent political scientist at Columbia, came to deliver a guest lecture to an economic philosophy class I was taking. It was a great lecture, made more so by the fact that the class was only about ten or twelve students and we got got ask all kinds of questions and got a lot of great, provocative answers. Anyhow, Prof. Katznelson described a lunch he had with Irving Kristol back either during the first Bush administration. The talk turned to William Kristol, then Dan Quayle's chief of staff, and how he got his start in politics. Irving recalled how he talked to his friend Harvey Mansfield at Harvard, who secured William a place there as both an undergrad and graduate student; how he talked to Pat Moynihan, then Nixon's domestic policy adviser, and got William an internship at The White House; how he talked to friends at the RNC and secured a job for William after he got his Harvard Ph.D.; and how he arranged with still more friends for William to teach at UPenn and the Kennedy School of Government. With that, Prof. Katznelson recalled, he then asked Irving what he thought of affirmative action. "I oppose it", Irving replied. "It subverts meritocracy."
Comments
- So you're going to judge an entire race of people based on the stupidity of one person, and use that to justify your racism?
  
  Here, this must mean all black people are drug dealing serial killers:
  http://www.stormfront.org/forum/showthread.php?t=487981
  
  One rich family is not a fair representation of an entire race of people, very few people (white or black) have those kind of advantages in life. The American I want to live in stops bickering about inane points such as the racial card and start focusing on production, progression, and scientific progress. You are wasting everyone's time, money, and energy with these sorts of arguments.
  - Report
  by Juxtapose on February 6th, 2010
- @Juxtapose - No, I don't think I'm wasting time.
  
  The hidden assumption most affirmative action opponents make is that we live in a meritocratic society.
  
  We don't...and the Bush family is just one example of how society is not meritocratic.
  
  Unless we are also willing to take steps to eliminate the 'affirmative action' that comes from being born rich and well-connected, or growing up to be tall, or being born in the first three months of the year, or etc., I don't see why singling out race-based affirmative action makes logical sense.
  - Report
  by Old School on February 6th, 2010
- You're correct in that singling out race-based affirmative action doesn't make sense, in that affirmative action in general doesn't make sense.
  
  Black people are no longer slaves.
  Women can vote.
  Legal immigrants are no longer shunned from society.
  
  AA was effective when there was a strong imbalance of white control, which has since diminished.
  
  It seems to me that you have a strong dislike for white people in general, acting under the ridiculous assumption that most white people are born rich. That's completely untrue, but I'll tell you what: if my hard work yields profit I'm going to do everything I can to make my family as rich and powerful as possible. That's the essence of a capitalist economy, to succeed through effort.
  
  The world's not fair, and throwing my tax money towards people who are in the same situation as I am with a different colored skin or different gender is just one example of that. That doesn't mean I have to sit back and accept it. I sincerely hope that all race and gender-specific funding is put to more reasonable benefits, such as people who genuinely come from impoverished families.
  
  It's because of people like you that racism won't end. You support a system that is biased because you have this paranoid delusion that the world is against you, and that because you're not white everyone treats you with racism. I've got news for you: the world sucks and people will treat you like crap just because they don't like you. It's got nothing to do with your skin color, you're just a jerk and people don't like you for it.
  
  Go take your "fight the power!" "down with the cracka" attitude and shove it, the world would genuinely be better off without assholes like you.
  - Report
  by Juxtapose on February 6th, 2010
- @Juxtapose - First things first, personal abuse and profanity is not tolerated on AB and if you continue to make personal insults, you will get banned (either temporarily or permanently).
  
  Next - It is interesting how you stereotype me as a poor, ethnic and discriminated against, when pretty much the opposite is true. In fact, it is the knowledge that I possess numerous advantages other people lacked that makes me support the concept of affirmative action.
  
  Finally, a brief parable - Let's suppose that you and I both grew up in some rural area. My father stole your father's gun. Not only did he keep the gun, but he used the gun to kill and skin many animals, thereby making himself prosperous. His prosperity got me better nutrition, better education, better health, and more connections than you received because your father was impoverished. As a result of those advantages, I do much better in life than you do.
  
  Are you going to demand the gun back? Or are you going to say "That's OK. The world's not fair. You (Old School) clearly earned your station in life"?
  
  THAT is what affirmative action is about.
  
  'Nuff said!
  - Report
  by Old School on February 6th, 2010
Add a comment...
- Like
- Report
4 comments | Post one | Permalink
by Anonymous on December 18th, 2009
voted: Yes
But it's done now.

I just thought it was funny when White folks in California got upset when the amount of White students went down in the top university and they started talking about diversity. I mean you got what you wanted.

I think it's funny in TX how Affirmative Access isn't really working because it fails to address the fact that the top students from underprivileged areas have a poor quality education and have trouble competing in the top state Colleges and University.

As long as you are poor you will get the shaft.

No Child Left Behind my ass!

The only way to improve problem areas is to focus on them. They should look at how the military went about addressing educational deficiencies with its underprivileged recruits.

Taking money away from schools that need it and giving extra money to those who don't is backwards.
Comments
- I have no clue what you're talking about..
  
  You voted Yes, and yet your entire comment says No...
  - Report
  by Siyanor on February 1st, 2010
- Re-read it and then make inquiries. I'll explain any point of my comments that was misunderstood. But thank you for taking the time to read it.
  - Report
  by Anonymous on February 1st, 2010
- Explain all of them except the second to last.
  - Report
  by Siyanor on February 2nd, 2010
- I'll go paragraph by paragraph because I don't understand the confusion.
  
  "I just thought it was funny when White folks in California got upset when the amount of White students went down in the top university and they started talking about diversity. I mean you got what you wanted."
  
  Many of the complains made by Whites typically is "that unqualified person/minority was taking their spot", they failed to realize that they benefited from Affirmative Action as well. When AA was ended in California the amount of white students in top State Colleges and Universities dropped. Whites complained. They failed to see the irony. They were under the misguided impression that minorities were "taking" their spots, it never occurred to them they might be taking someone else's that was more qualified.
  
  "I think it's funny in TX how Affirmative Access isn't really working because it fails to address the fact that the top students from underprivileged areas have a poor quality education and have trouble competing in the top state Colleges and University."
  
  Affirmative Access is not the same thing as Affirmative Action. Affirmative Access is the top 10-30% of state High Schools get a free ride or a significant portion of their education paid for. Sounds good on paper. However it failed to take into account that not all education is equal. Being in the top 10 at a terrible school is worthless. More kids went to college but a lot of them failed or dropped out because they were inadequately prepared. This was the glaring failure of Affirmative Access. My point was the intended alternative was inadequate.
  
  No Child Let Behind is an administrative failure. A lot of teachers spend an exorbitant amount of time teaching kids how to beat the tests so the schools don't lose funding. Wasted time spent on remedial basics.
  
  That clear it up?
  - Report
  by Anonymous on February 2nd, 2010
- I thought NCLB was a part of Affirmative Action? Was it completely separate?
  - Report
  by Siyanor on February 2nd, 2010
- NCLB, that was merely a personal add-on since I was talking about education. Education in general needs to be improved across the board.
  
  Affirmative Actions and NCLB are separate.
  - Report
  by Anonymous on February 2nd, 2010
- Ah.. then I guess my own answer was completely irrelevant, because I was only talking about NCLB.
  - Report
  by Siyanor on February 2nd, 2010
- No child left behind is crap OK . Sorry we can not educate every one the non verbal kid with cp or autism will not go to college we can not but everyone in the same boat it wont work.
  - Report
  by nat2001 on March 8th, 2010
Add a comment...
- Like
- Report
8 comments | Post one | Permalink
by Wallacabayka on February 2nd, 2010
voted: No
This is an emotionally charged topic for our African Americans. Affirmative Action has good intentions, but it was quickly exploited by politicians and other snakes looking for leverage and easy money. Our generation is definitely past the point of needing such a thing. Slavery caused years of segregation and distrust between whites and blacks. We do not need the bitterness of the past dictating our future as Americans. By keeping Affirmative Action, we are saying that we never really triumphed over slavery and mindless hatred. I say we HAVE obtained victory over the evils of our ancestors, and therefore do not need Affirmative Action.
Comments
- AA reaches much farther than African Americans. By zeroing in on this particular race, you're proving that AA is still needed.
  - Report
  by Great Dane on February 4th, 2010
- The reason I mention African Americans is that they were the ones abused by our British ancestors. Slavery has always been evil, dating all the way back to the Hebrew race that was enslaved by the Egyptians. I realize that every race can be discriminated against, but Affirmative Action would't even exist if not for the civil war- a war that was fought over the freedom of African Americans. Does that elaboration help you G.Dane?
  - Report
  by Wallacabayka on February 5th, 2010
Add a comment...
- Like
- Report
2 comments | Post one | Permalink
by MrJosh on February 3rd, 2010
voted: Yes
Yes, we do need affirmative action, but we need to understand it better (and apply it better). At its most basic, affirmative action means that you are taking steps to remove race and sex from the decision making process and include access to all. It is NOT a quota for minorities, and is NOT a policy of giving unqualified minorities positions over qualified white males.
Comments
Add a comment...
- Like
- Report
No comments. Post one | Permalink
by kate123 on February 5th, 2010
voted: No
We will always have these problems...I know in school I got judged by other ethnic groups and called names more freely for being white. I am not at all racist. I refuse to associate with anyone who is. But it is not fair or right for it to be accepted for people to be mean to me bc I am white. Girls got beat up for accidentally bumping into ethnic girls at school bc they were white...My sister is half japanese and had to be taken out of school for kids being so mean to her...and we lived in a normal area...its a very broad range issue...
Comments
Add a comment...
- Like
- Report
No comments. Post one | Permalink
by Aspergers syndrome on February 5th, 2010
voted: No
I do mostly support affirmative action. However it should only be used as a tiebreaker.
Comments
Add a comment...
- Like
- Report
No comments. Post one | Permalink
by Great Dane on February 4th, 2010
voted: Yes
The Affirmative Action system is far from perfect. However, it beats discrimination and the 'good ol boy' network.
Comments
- I have news for you. discrimination is illegal without affirmative action and even with it the "good old boys" system is still in place
  - Report
  by TAPriceCTR s son is wearing his COAT on February 11th, 2010
Add a comment...
- Like
- Report
1 comment | Post one | Permalink
by J and B on December 14th, 2009
voted: No
Actually "we" (the people) never needed it. It was simply a way to get around hiring the best qualified, which usually weren't a protected class minority, and simply hire the qualified, or marginally qualified.
Comments
- I can see you didn't bother staying awake in your history classes...;-D...
  - Report
  by Old School on February 1st, 2010
Add a comment...
- Like
- Report
1 comment | Post one | Permalink
by American-In-Training on February 7th, 2010
voted: No
While there are some exceptions, black people generally only have to look at themselves as a big factor for why they have not advanced in the world more than they have.
Its not always other people's fault.
There are tons of ego problems and wrong attitudes that get in the way of black people's lives and until these change, black people will not advance.
Comments
- Amen. I agree its not us white peoples fault that black women are seen as a piece of ass and not respected by black men. Maybe if they respected each other then they would get the same from other races but when you go around calling each other the N word and degrading each other that way what do you expect. Many us whites should go around calling each other crackers then they may see how stupid they sound. These are just a few things i see. i have a good friend who is black i love her to death but i do not like being blamed for things because i am white.
  - Report
  by nat2001 on March 8th, 2010
Add a comment...
- Like
- Report
1 comment | Post one | Permalink