• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Justices Rule for White Firefighters in Bias Case

Scarecrow Akhbar said:
Puerto Rican.
Click to expand...

Yet is Peurto Rican a race ? I just spoke with a Peurto Rican friend as this is what he said :. For all practical purposes Peurto Ricans consist of mixed race, and single race people.

There are a minority group of Peurto Ricans who can trace their decent to Spanish colonists who have not mixed with other races and being Spanish are caucasian. *

There are Peurto Ricans who had interbred with with Native Indians hense they are mixed race. Other may have bred with African slaves and other may be a combination of all three - Spanish, African, and Native Indian.

Sorry to diverge this thread temporarrly but it just bothered me to hear the racist charge against her and no one seemed to even know what race she was.
 
Reverend_Hellh0und said:
The Reason I am could not join the NYPD is because I wasn't a woman or a black man when I passed the exam in the 98%, they only had to score 68% to get ahead of me.


This was Dinkins.
Click to expand...

This is sad.

I see similar movements within my department, we have been holding special recruiting job fairs specifically focused on recruiting women and minorities to the job. Granted they won't turn down speaking to white men, but they are targeting women and minorities. I don't have any data on the specifics on who is getting turned down that probably shouldn't have been. But I am aware that since our new chief took office, he completely restructured the recruitment staff to better fit his "view" on recruitment in the department. One such Officer now works in my division, and was removed because he didn't agree with our new chief's "lowering" of the standards for employment.

Situations like this remind me of a statement made by Dennis Leary's character on the show "Rescue Me" when addressing "Black Shawn"'s argument that there is racism in the recruitment process for the NYPD, he stated something to the effect of, "Maybe not that many blacks are getting into the fire academy because not that many want the damn job."
 
atomsNvoid said:
That was a great post Justabubba!

I have read it a couple of times and let me tell you where I stumble. In your entire comprehensive summary of the case, I am unable to find the "beginning of the string". I can find no indication that anyone had any responsibility at any time.

The test designers have no responsibility. The test givers have no responsibility. The test takers have no responsibility. The city elders have no responsibility. Neither the trial nor appealate courts have any responsibility. It is not until you get to the Supreme Court that anyone takes any responsibility and all they say is: "You can't do it this way."

Is this really the way the system is intended to work? And if the answer to that question is "Yes" then I ask is this the system to which we all choose to give our affirmative consent?
Click to expand...

Good one atoms! When you say "affirmative consent " I am sure that you don't mean affirmatiove action !! LOL

Interesting analysis and conclusion on your part about the responsibility of the parties or lack thereof. You hit this puppy right on the head since the City "chickened" out by not abiding by the results of the test yet failed to determine if the they thought that the test was bad. They just refused to stand by their test and refused to over turn the test.

They chose the ignore path. Sad indeed by good old New HAVEN !!!
 
jamesrage said:
This is why there should be litmus test for allowing someone to be a judge. If they are going to ignore a discrimination because of the plaintiff's skin color then that judge is no better than some judge in the past who did the same thing because of skin color. Why do we allow these racist to be judges? I am so sick and tired of racial discrimination being called "revere discrimination", it is not reverse discrimination it is racial discrimination. Why the **** do a lot of people play along with the reverse discrimination label?
Click to expand...

I also hate this "reverse discrimination" label.

Discrimination is Discrimination.
 
Zyphlin said:
So are you saying that 4 of the current Supreme Court Justices are unquestionably racist simply because of their decision on this?
Click to expand...

I don't know what he is saying, But I am saying that they are apologists for the racial discrimination that is affirmative action.

In my mind there is no difference between a justice who supports the racist practice of affirmative action (of whose racism is two-fold), and the justice who supported the racist practice of discrimination in court decisions dealing with racial inequalities in the 1800s and early 1900s.

Affirmative action is racist in that
1. It assumes that by merely being a minority one is genetically challenged and incapable of being as proficient as a white or non-minority on merely the basis of skin pigmentation.
2. It discriminates against those non-minorities who are better qualified than their minority counterparts, on the basis that the minority somehow deserves a job or position merely because they are a minority, and not based upon their qualifications or lack thereof.
 
Zyphlin said:
So even assuming that is correct....

You're saying a single racist action makes on a "racist"?
Click to expand...

This is a pretty big racist action.,they are supporting rules and laws that are by nature racist. If they claim to not be a racist then how can they support racism in our laws,hiring practices and other such things? If those 4 justices are not racist they are hypocrites. It can not be denied that what the fire department did was racist and it can not be denied that what judges did by ruling in favor of racist policies is indeed support of racist practices. This is not any different than a judge who supported segregation and jim crow laws.
 
Last edited:
Caine said:
I also hate this "reverse discrimination" label.

Discrimination is Discrimination.
Click to expand...

You are philosophically correct and one can follow suit and say that there is no such thing as reverse racism or reverse sexism, and on and on.

Using that definition of afirmatve is racism since to grant some group precedence over another group based upon race alone is racist by that definition. Racial descrimination is against the law. Having said that then afirmative action is against the law. So to correct the sins of past racism and descrimination "we ' allowed descrimination and racism to be used to do that. Is that fighting fire with fire ? Or can someone say fighting stupidity with stupidity ?
 
Last edited:
aps said:
How so? Sorry, Reverend, but his cursory conclusion that she is a racist isn't cutting it for me. And just because he's white? Give me a break.
Click to expand...

You mean, my assessment of the known and published facts about the Latina Vagina doesn't cut it for you.

What would that broad have to do for you to see her racism, rule against a bunch of white men that studied for and took a test honestly and passed who were idscriinated against by a city that refused to certify their own test because not one black man studied well enough to pass?
 
justabubba said:
those who are insisting the pending appointee is racist because the sc, by the narrowist of margins, refused to uphold a ruling in which she relied on legal precedent, would seem to instead prefer a judge who legislates from the bench. sotomayer refused to do that
Click to expand...

Sotomayor agreed with the presumption that a test is racist because blacks wouldn't pass it.

justabubba said:
the lower court rulings, the decisions upheld by sotomayer, hinged on adhering to the concept of "disparate impact"
Click to expand...

Yes, Sotomayor agreed with the assumption by the EEOC that the givers of tests with disparate racial impact are guilty of racism, instead of asserting the old fashioned white-guys idea that men are innocent until proven guilty.

It's her job to annul laws that do not conform to such basic constitutional standards, and her racism prevented her from doing that.
 
Reverend_Hellh0und said:
The Reason I am could not join the NYPD is because I wasn't a woman or a black man when I passed the exam in the 98%, they only had to score 68% to get ahead of me.


This was Dinkins.
Click to expand...

A decade or so ago Los Angeles had an open test for new fireman positions.

Whites were told to not bother taking the test.
 
Scarecrow Akhbar said:
You mean, my assessment of the known and published facts about the Latina Vagina doesn't cut it for you.

What would that broad have to do for you to see her racism, rule against a bunch of white men that studied for and took a test honestly and passed who were idscriinated against by a city that refused to certify their own test because not one black man studied well enough to pass?
Click to expand...

Do you swerve to run over small children?
 
Scarecrow Akhbar said:
You mean, my assessment of the known and published facts about the Latina Vagina doesn't cut it for you.

What would that broad have to do for you to see her racism, rule against a bunch of white men that studied for and took a test honestly and passed who were idscriinated against by a city that refused to certify their own test because not one black man studied well enough to pass?
Click to expand...

"Latina Vagina " ooops you must be spelling it wrong it's Latina Regina , you know Latin Queen, LOL
 
F107HyperSabr said:
Yet is Peurto Rican a race ?
Click to expand...

No, of course not. Neither is "latina".

But the race baiters on the left are best served by putting every person in the smallest pigeon hole possible and convincing them they're oppressed by white people.

F107HyperSabr said:
Sorry to diverge this thread temporarrly but it just bothered me to hear the racist charge against her and no one seemed to even know what race she was.
Click to expand...

Queen Latifah provided the voice for a nine-ton opossum in Ice Age 2. Her character didn't have to be a opossum to identify with them and be biased in their favor.

Sotomayor doesn't have to be a particular race to be biased against another, like whitey.
 
Scarecrow Akhbar said:
No, of course not. Neither is "latina".

But the race baiters on the left are best served by putting every person in the smallest pigeon hole possible and convincing them they're oppressed by white people.



Queen Latifah provided the voice for a nine-ton opossum in Ice Age 2. Her character didn't have to be a opossum to identify with them and be biased in their favor.

Sotomayor doesn't have to be a particular race to be biased against another, like whitey.
Click to expand...

maybe de Soto Mayor is a equal opportunity racist - hates everyone the same way lol

Seriously though I may not agree with her New Haven decision but one case should not a racist make !! I also think that she will hobble through the confirmation process. It will not be smooth for her or POTUS 'BAMA but she will get through. The only way she won't make it is if she really screws up a few answers and flips the Senators the bird!!
 
F107HyperSabr said:
maybe de Soto Mayor is a equal opportunity racist - hates everyone the same way lol

Seriously though I may not agree with her New Haven decision but one case should not a racist make !!
Click to expand...

Fair enough.

Claiming her latina vagina gives her special inspiration, that's racist and sexist.
 
I find it hilarious how many people here are talking about racist judges and claiming racism in the four dissenting judges when it is clear they have read neither the majority nor minority opinion the court sent down. Hint for you guys: it's important to understand what is being said to comment on it.
 
Caine said:
This is sad.

I see similar movements within my department, we have been holding special recruiting job fairs specifically focused on recruiting women and minorities to the job. Granted they won't turn down speaking to white men, but they are targeting women and minorities. I don't have any data on the specifics on who is getting turned down that probably shouldn't have been. But I am aware that since our new chief took office, he completely restructured the recruitment staff to better fit his "view" on recruitment in the department. One such Officer now works in my division, and was removed because he didn't agree with our new chief's "lowering" of the standards for employment.

Situations like this remind me of a statement made by Dennis Leary's character on the show "Rescue Me" when addressing "Black Shawn"'s argument that there is racism in the recruitment process for the NYPD, he stated something to the effect of, "Maybe not that many blacks are getting into the fire academy because not that many want the damn job."
Click to expand...



Well my "98 percentile" mind, realized that moment walking out that door, that, no, not with "68 percentile" idiots having my back, that I no longer wanted to be nypd. :lol:
 
Redress said:
I find it hilarious how many people here are talking about racist judges and claiming racism in the four dissenting judges when it is clear they have read neither the majority nor minority opinion the court sent down. Hint for you guys: it's important to understand what is being said to comment on it.
Click to expand...

Oh wise and all knowing poster who knows so much can you please give us a summary of what the four judges said so that we may be better educated about the facts as to why some one would support racial discrimination.(sarcasm)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom