Page 16 of 93 FirstFirst ... 614151617182666 ... LastLast
Results 151 to 160 of 921

Thread: Andre Carson: Tea party wants blacks 'hanging on a tree'

  1. #151
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Canada, Costa Rica
    Last Seen
    05-16-16 @ 09:45 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,645

    Re: Andre Carson: Tea party wants blacks 'hanging on a tree' Read more: http://www.p

    [QUOTE]
    Quote Originally Posted by theplaydrive View Post
    My argument is that many of those who call the Tea Party racist do so as the result of an analysis of polices that Tea Party members support.
    Actually it would have more to do with their absolute lack of analysis regarding public policies and their poorly thought out, knee-jerk responses.

    We should not encourage these people by sympathizing in any way with their half baked opinions and ridiculous charges as it only debases public discourse.

  2. #152
    Sage
    RiverDad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    04-20-14 @ 02:16 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    5,039

    Re: Andre Carson: Tea party wants blacks 'hanging on a tree' Read more: http://www.p

    Quote Originally Posted by AdamT View Post
    Well, let me see if I can fill in the blanks for you. Slavery, followed by Jim Crow, put the black race at a huge disadvantage in a myriad of ways. Therefore, in order to redress those wrongs and to even the playing field a bit, we engage in affirmative action. Correcting a past wrong is not repeating the past wrong.

    Or we could use another analogy. Let's say that you defrauded me out of $10,000, and I take you to court and receive a judgment of $10,000 against you. Am I just as bad as you, because we both took $10,000 from each other? No. The $10,000 I received was to redress a wrong that was done to me.

    So not really a diversion at all, right?
    1.) Why then are we designating Hispanics, Asians, women and other minorities as classes who qualify? The favorite tactic is to invoke slavery and then let all the other groups tag along.
    2.) How is someone born 46 years after Jim Crow ended disadvantaged by what happened nearly half a century ago?
    3.) How do you justify to a newly arrived Polish immigrant that he should have to be discriminated against so that a minority who was born in the US in the last few decades can be given an advantage for the lack of opportunity that affected his dead grandparents?
    4.) How do you justify legalized racism that you say is designed to remedy wrong which result in inequality when the inequality disappears when the relevant factors are controlled for?

  3. #153
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Canada, Costa Rica
    Last Seen
    05-16-16 @ 09:45 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,645

    Re: Andre Carson: Tea party wants blacks 'hanging on a tree' Read more: http://www.p

    Quote Originally Posted by AdamT View Post
    Well, let me see if I can fill in the blanks for you. Slavery, followed by Jim Crow, put the black race at a huge disadvantage in a myriad of ways. Therefore, in order to redress those wrongs and to even the playing field a bit, we engage in affirmative action. Correcting a past wrong is not repeating the past wrong.
    Past wrongs, especially those as heinous as slavery or Jim Crow laws, can never be corrected. They will always be wrong and there is no getting around that.

    A more realistic way of putting it is that two wrongs will never make a right. Affirmative action is condescending, and wrong.

  4. #154
    Sage
    AdamT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    02-13-13 @ 04:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    17,773

    Re: Andre Carson: Tea party wants blacks 'hanging on a tree' Read more: http://www.p

    Why then are we designating Hispanics, Asians, women and other minorities as classes who qualify?
    To the extent that we do (and of course it isn't always true that Asians and women receive affirmative action) it's because affirmative action is about redressing the effects of discrmination, generally -- not just discrimination against blacks.

    2.) How is someone born 46 years after Jim Crow ended disadvantaged by what happened nearly half a century ago?
    The effects of systematic discrimination against an entire race do not disappear with the stroke of a pen.

    3.) How do you justify to a newly arrived Polish immigrant that he should have to be discriminated against so that a minority who was born in the US in the last few decades can be given an advantage for the lack of opportunity that affected his dead grandparents?
    I would tell a newly arrived Polish immigrant that he could have stayed in Poland if he wasn't happy with our policies.

    4.) How do you justify legalized racism that you say is designed to remedy wrong which result in inequality when the inequality disappears when the relevant factors are controlled for?
    Not sure what you mean by that.

  5. #155
    Sage
    AdamT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    02-13-13 @ 04:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    17,773

    Re: Andre Carson: Tea party wants blacks 'hanging on a tree' Read more: http://www.p

    Quote Originally Posted by Grant View Post
    Past wrongs, especially those as heinous as slavery or Jim Crow laws, can never be corrected. They will always be wrong and there is no getting around that.

    A more realistic way of putting it is that two wrongs will never make a right. Affirmative action is condescending, and wrong.
    I guess you don't believe in our civil justice system, then, because it is all about making people who have been wronged.

    I should add that I'm not a strong believer in affirmative action. Some of the issues you and RD raise bother me, too.

  6. #156
    Sage
    RiverDad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    04-20-14 @ 02:16 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    5,039

    Re: Andre Carson: Tea party wants blacks 'hanging on a tree' Read more: http://www.p

    Quote Originally Posted by AdamT View Post
    To the extent that we do (and of course it isn't always true that Asians and women receive affirmative action) it's because affirmative action is about redressing the effects of discrmination, generally -- not just discrimination against blacks.
    Now the rationale has shifted. It was that blacks suffered under Jim Crow. Hispanics didn't. Asians didn't. Women didn't. Now the rationale is about redressing hypothetical effects arising from hypothetical discrimination.

    I'm someone who could be convinced of supporting a policy which gave blacks affirmative action for a set time. Blacks alone. I could be persuaded by the historical oppression argument. Well, not really, but that doesn't matter - as a matter of politics I'd go along with it just to get to a point where this whole oppression argument gets buried and done with. I believe that a lot of opponents of affirmative action policies would go along with this, and this means that we'd be violating our own principles, if everything was specified at the outset and an end-date was established and all other groups were cut out.

    As it stands now I'm opposed to the whole shooting match because it is out and out racism.

    The effects of systematic discrimination against an entire race do not disappear with the stroke of a pen.
    Says you.

    I would tell a newly arrived Polish immigrant that he could have stayed in Poland if he wasn't happy with our policies.
    Having an answer for every point doesn't mean that the answer adds anything of value to the conversation. This Polish immigrant has to endure legal discrimination against him and his family in order to repay some debt that society, you say, owes to black people. Why burden him with a debt he has no relation to? Why not excuse him from the obligation? Why not explore the issue instead of giving a flip, content-free answer.

  7. #157
    Guru
    LuckyDan's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Carrollton, TX
    Last Seen
    05-13-13 @ 11:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    2,758

    Re: Andre Carson: Tea party wants blacks 'hanging on a tree'

    Well what the hell else is member of a race-based "caucus" gonna say but their race is a victim? Especially a member of this caucus?

    That such a group as the CBC even exists is baffling. That anyone cares what it has to say is almost laughable. Who speaks of them until they say something really stupid? Like this.

    They base their name on race. It's all they have. Without a race question, they have no reason to be.

    They seem to have a conflict of interest. Do their members have only black constituents?
    Last edited by LuckyDan; 09-01-11 at 02:48 AM.

  8. #158
    Sage
    AdamT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    02-13-13 @ 04:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    17,773

    Re: Andre Carson: Tea party wants blacks 'hanging on a tree' Read more: http://www.p

    Now the rationale has shifted. It was that blacks suffered under Jim Crow. Hispanics didn't. Asians didn't. Women didn't. Now the rationale is about redressing hypothetical effects arising from hypothetical discrimination.
    No, the rationale has always been the same. Slavery and Jim Crow were just examples. Women, for example, were also systematically discriminated against. In many respects they still are. Nothing hypothetical about it.

    I'm someone who could be convinced of supporting a policy which gave blacks affirmative action for a set time. Blacks alone. I could be persuaded by the historical oppression argument.
    I seriously doubt that.

    As it stands now I'm opposed to the whole shooting match because it is out and out racism.
    If it was you would support it.

    Having an answer for every point doesn't mean that the answer adds anything of value to the conversation. This Polish immigrant has to endure legal discrimination against him and his family in order to repay some debt that society, you say, owes to black people. Why burden him with a debt he has no relation to? Why not excuse him from the obligation? Why not explore the issue instead of giving a flip, content-free answer.
    Why should someone who has been given the privilege of coming here step in front of an American citizen who has been disadvantaged by centuries of immoral and unethical U.S. policy?

  9. #159
    long standing member
    justabubba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:31 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    36,147

    Re: Andre Carson: Tea party wants blacks 'hanging on a tree' Read more: http://www.p

    Quote Originally Posted by mtlhdtodd View Post
    Yea lets correct racist policies and history of the past by creating, implementing and using overt racist policies in the present. Yea that's perfect liberal logic
    or, we could adopt the reich wing approach to allow the disparities of inequality emanating from decades of racial discrimination to continue to inflict successive generations of minorities
    we are negotiating about dividing a pizza and in the meantime israel is eating it
    once you're over the hill you begin to pick up speed

  10. #160
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Last Seen
    11-17-17 @ 12:48 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    19,610

    Re: Andre Carson: Tea party wants blacks 'hanging on a tree' Read more: http://www.p

    Quote Originally Posted by Grant View Post
    Actually it would have more to do with their absolute lack of analysis regarding public policies and their poorly thought out, knee-jerk responses.
    That's just how you see it, but as I said in another post, when you support a policy that affects a specific group of people, you should expect to have your relationship with that group analyzed. Republicans who want to end funding to PP will be called sexist even if they aren't, Democrats who want to heavily regulate business will be called anti-business even if they aren't and Tea Partiers who support eliminating or severely cutting programs that affect much of the black community will be called racist even if they're not. I don't think those judgments are poor analyses of the policies [necessarily], I think they just attribute intention where intention is unknown.

    We should not encourage these people by sympathizing in any way with their half baked opinions and ridiculous charges as it only debases public discourse.
    Eh, I don't know if I "sympathize" with them, but I think I understand how they get to their conclusions and understanding is not something I look down upon.

Page 16 of 93 FirstFirst ... 614151617182666 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •