Page 55 of 93 FirstFirst ... 545535455565765 ... LastLast
Results 541 to 550 of 921

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

  1. #541
    Dungeon Master
    Somewhere in Babylon
    Jetboogieman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Somewhere in Babylon...
    Last Seen
    @
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    24,341
    Blog Entries
    1

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Grant View Post
    Yeah, you'll be called an Uncle Tom and me a bigoted Racist, but it seems we are both people who can rise above that kind of talk.

    Thanks.
    Well...

    I don't think you're a racist grant

    But I do think you have a veiled form of bigotry that tries to justify itself with intelligence and well formed sentences, and so doesn't even realise the level of its own bigotry.

    And its actually not even on this subject, I don't think you hate black people, but to say you have a chip on your shoulder about muslims and an extremely unrealistic and black and white view of the world and particular the left/right wing divide. Believing that if someone is a liberal, they support and are accountable for every single action and result of others claiming to be liberal or thought to be "leftist".

  2. #542
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:30 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,148

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

    Quote Originally Posted by MrVicchio View Post
    The Tea Party doesn't give a rats rear about race, but those opposed to the Tea Party sure are mired in Race.
    that, sir, is absolutely correct. the actual racists here are the ones attacking the Tea Party, not the TP'ers themselves.

  3. #543
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:30 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,148

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

    Quote Originally Posted by theplaydrive View Post
    Are you saying that employers aren't responsible for their own actions?
    no, he's pointing out that the employers are wisely allocating their limited time and resources to focusing on the candidates they feel are most likely to become the best workers. that is what smart employers (who do not wish to be destroyed by their competition) do - allocate resources effectively.

  4. #544
    Sage
    teamosil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    San Francisco
    Last Seen
    05-22-14 @ 12:47 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    6,623

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

    Quote Originally Posted by RiverDad View Post
    As expected, a liberal cornucopia of big government, big spending "solutions' which don't work.
    It does work. That's why countries with decent poverty amelioration programs have high intergenerational income mobility and ours is the worst in the first world.

    Quote Originally Posted by RiverDad View Post
    **** That. This is exactly the tack that the Brits took with the issue of there not being enough rape convictions. The set out to reduce the evidenciary standards needed to secure a conviction.
    PLEADING standards, not evidenciary standards. Pleading standards are just how much proof you need in order to be able to do discovery. Discovery is basically the investigation. If the pleading standard is too high then you can't even investigate to find out whether there was discrimination or not. About 4 years ago they radically raised the pleading standards to the point where you basically need proof of discrimination before you can even investigate. That doesn't make sense. Raising pleading standards doesn't have anything to do with who wins, just whether they can investigate.

    Quote Originally Posted by RiverDad View Post
    You're not going to get any buy-in with your jack-boot stomping on freedom and liberty. You've already gutted the Constitution on the issue of free association, so now that we've seen how anti-liberty your vision is, I can't imagine that people will allow you to erode even more liberty.
    So the alleged victim of discrimination- the private citizen- is a jackbooted thug, but the alleged aggressor who is allegedly attacking the victim and stripping him of is liberty is not? That's just crazy talk all around.

    Quote Originally Posted by RiverDad View Post
    That's too bad, but designing equal outcomes is just not worth upending legal standards. If people are not overtly discriminating, then you're left with the SUGGESTION that there is covert discrimination taking place. Targeting innocent people based on suggestions is too intrusive of a tactic.
    You don't understand. They could be overtly discriminating. How would you know before you even investigate?

  5. #545
    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 teamosil View Post
    It does work. That's why countries with decent poverty amelioration programs have high intergenerational income mobility and ours is the worst in the first world.
    One must always control for population variance. Poverty in Sweden is not the same as poverty in America.

    PLEADING standards, not evidenciary standards. Pleading standards are just how much proof you need in order to be able to do discovery. Discovery is basically the investigation.
    Are liberals going to tick a box on their tax returns which activates a 5% income tax surcharge and have this money go into a fund which compensates companies for the expenses that they must incur from being subjected to discovery under relaxed standards? Who is going to pay the companies for these expenses?

    If the pleading standard is too high then you can't even investigate to find out whether there was discrimination or not. About 4 years ago they radically raised the pleading standards to the point where you basically need proof of discrimination before you can even investigate. That doesn't make sense.
    It makes absolute sense. If you have evidence, then proceed. If you don't, then you have no case.

    So the alleged victim of discrimination- the private citizen- is a jackbooted thug, but the alleged aggressor who is allegedly attacking the victim and stripping him of is liberty is not? That's just crazy talk all around.
    Liberty is not you forcing your association on someone who doesn't want to associate with you. This is fundamental stuff. Freedom of association, I know, I know, it's not something that liberals believe in, but it really is a fundamental right and you guys have gutted it like a fish.

    You don't understand. They could be overtly discriminating. How would you know before you even investigate?
    Overt discrimination is detectable, that's why it's overt. Covert discrimination is not detectable, that's why it's covert. Make sense? If there is no evidence of discrimination then all you're left with is a suggestion that it has occurred. When you're dealing with suggestions then there are always other plausible factors that can explain outcomes, one of which is coincidence. The burden of proof is on you to prove discrimination, not on the employer to prove their innocence.

  6. #546
    Sage
    teamosil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    San Francisco
    Last Seen
    05-22-14 @ 12:47 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    6,623

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

    Quote Originally Posted by RiverDad View Post
    One must always control for population variance. Poverty in Sweden is not the same as poverty in America.
    Every first world country spend more on their safety net and every one of them has better intergenerational income mobility than we do, so it isn't some Sweden fluke. It includes more diverse countries than the US, less diverse countries than the US, poorer countries than the US, richer countries than the US, etc.

    Quote Originally Posted by RiverDad View Post
    Are liberals going to tick a box on their tax returns which activates a 5% income tax surcharge and have this money go into a fund which compensates companies for the expenses that they must incur from being subjected to discovery under relaxed standards? Who is going to pay the companies for these expenses?
    The courts can just limit discovery if cost is a big issue. Usually it isn't except in massive corporate-to-corporate lawsuits.

    Quote Originally Posted by RiverDad View Post
    Liberty is not you forcing your association on someone who doesn't want to associate with you. This is fundamental stuff. Freedom of association, I know, I know, it's not something that liberals believe in, but it really is a fundamental right and you guys have gutted it like a fish.
    This is the crux of it I guess. You feel that a nation where people are allowed to discriminate is better than one where they aren't. No point continuing to debate really, you just have different values than I do. To me, the more discrimination there is going on the less free we are. The freedom to discriminate just isn't as important as the economic freedom discrimination takes away from its victims to me.

    Quote Originally Posted by RiverDad View Post
    Overt discrimination is detectable, that's why it's overt. Covert discrimination is not detectable, that's why it's covert. Make sense? If there is no evidence of discrimination then all you're left with is a suggestion that it has occurred. When you're dealing with suggestions then there are always other plausible factors that can explain outcomes, one of which is coincidence. The burden of proof is on you to prove discrimination, not on the employer to prove their innocence.
    Huh? The point of discovery is to see whether or not there was overt discrimination. For example, maybe the hiring manager emailed a buddy saying he wouldn't hire black people or whatever. That's overt, but you can't find it until discovery. The only kind of discrimination you can really have firm evidence of without discovery would be the case where somebody flat out tells the person that they didn't hire them because of their race. Obviously that practically never happens, so if that is the only kind of discrimination the system addresses then the system isn't working.

    As for the burden of proof, nothing we're discussing changes the burden of proof, so not sure where you're coming from on that.

  7. #547
    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 teamosil View Post
    The courts can just limit discovery if cost is a big issue. Usually it isn't except in massive corporate-to-corporate lawsuits.
    The moment any discovery effort begins it produces costs for the company which must submit. You wanting to look at something is not sufficient reason to burden others with costs. You "voting" to shift costs onto innocents so that you can advance your equal outcomes agenda is, frankly, immoral. If you want to advance this scheme then you need to find a way for liberals to pay for it without burdening innocent people and that effort only gets you to the table where we discuss the trade-off of liberties against your goal, for even if you compensate these companies for their time, you're still trampling on their liberty.

    The freedom to discriminate just isn't as important as the economic freedom discrimination takes away from its victims to me.
    The freedom to discriminate is something that we all enjoy. Ask the woman who discriminates against male OB/GYNs if she like the freedom to choose her own physician. Taking away that freedom, or restricting it further, means that associations are FORCED onto people who don't want them. Why? To satisfy your ideological agenda of creating equal outcomes across society. This sounds like the reasoning behind "We need to destroy the village in order to save the village."

    Obviously that practically never happens, so if that is the only kind of discrimination the system addresses then the system isn't working.
    The system is working as it was designed to work. This is precisely what the originators of these laws set out to stop - "No Blacks Need Apply." Now you liberals are on a complete diversity destroying bombing run and intruding deeper and deeper into affairs that government has no business involving itself in. That's the creeping road to totalitarianism - throwing people into jail because they're exercising rights to free association.

  8. #548
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    In your dreams...
    Last Seen
    05-29-12 @ 02:53 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    10,621

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

    Covert discrimination is not detectable, that's why it's covert. Make sense? If there is no evidence of discrimination then all you're left with is a suggestion that it has occurred. When you're dealing with suggestions then there are always other plausible factors that can explain outcomes, one of which is coincidence. The burden of proof is on you to prove discrimination, not on the employer to prove their innocence.
    The evidence is sound, many minorities do not get hired at the same rate for the same work with the same qualifications as their counterparts. I don't see what else you need. Might I possibly play a broken record for you. Feel free to wriggle your way into another argument.
    Last edited by MKULTRABOY; 09-04-11 at 01:36 AM.

  9. #549
    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 SE102 View Post
    The evidence is sound, many minorities do not get hired at the same rate for the same work with the same qualifications as their counterparts. I don't see what else you need. Might I possibly play a broken record for you. Feel free to wriggle your way into another argument.
    The researchers should then submit to the EEOC the identities of the companies that were involved in this test and let the law deal with them. Problem solved.

  10. #550
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    In your dreams...
    Last Seen
    05-29-12 @ 02:53 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    10,621

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

    Feel free to wriggle your way into another argument.
    Quote Originally Posted by RiverDad View Post
    The researchers should then submit to the EEOC the identities of the companies that were involved in this test and let the law deal with them. Problem solved.
    Congrats.

    Yet the problem does not reside with any single company its endemic to society itself, also to adress the issue every company would basically have to be consulted on instituting its OWN affirmative action plans to prevent themselves legal issues.

    round and round we go... whats next...?

Page 55 of 93 FirstFirst ... 545535455565765 ... 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
  •