Should conservatives call liberals racist because of affirmative action?

My favorite movie is the soloist.

 

But AA hurts a lot of other minorities. Try to get into a California University if you are Asian. Because of the AA Quotas, you need to have a perfect 4.0+ average to even hope to get accepted.

And I fully believe that anybody that has been a slave should get preferences. But that horse has been dead for 100 years before I was even born. What next, preferences to the Irish because the British forced them to move here? Or to those from Australia because their ancestors were largely criminals?

 

Should conservatives call liberals racist because of affirmative action?

'Should' is a silly word. Obviously the teabags will call normal people ('liberals') anything loathsome they can think of until they get kicked out of politics as treacherous saboteurs. Perhaps a second civil war will end their squalid urinary imperialism.

 

And the asians do it. That's the elephant in the room that liberals refuse to acknowledge. If america is so racist why do asians do so well here.?

 

That's why obozo has been so secretive and won't release his school transcripts. He was a lousy student who's gotten everything thru affirmative action.

 

What do you mean he has been secretive? I have viewed everything about his schooling without any difficulty.

 

Don't you understand? Anything your President has ever done (breathing and such included) is totally EVIL, and anything the rightist lynchmobs squawk is true, even if it's drivel. It is a racial matter, you see.

 

I heard President Obama (obozo. Owebama. Owecrapster et al) was responsible for hurricane catrina and world war 2.

 

That was before he shot President Kennedy and was born in the Kremlin, of course.

 

My God, did you know the racist democrats where southern conservative democrats?

 

I am against any kind of race or religion or sex based quota system. Because it is unfair to all that are involved in them. Qualified individuals will not get selected, because their quota may have already been filled. And others who are not as qualified may get in, because their standards are lower because their quota has not been met.

And I see it wrong in any field, education, protessional, government service, and even the military. In my opinion, just asking for a person's race, religion, sexuality, or anything else should be fully illegal. Be it for enrollment or employment.

 

Yes and also before he (she) had a sex change and started dating ru paul.

 

Have you ever looked at the areas where the Voting Rights Act of 1965 applied? You should.

Yes, many of the areas involved are what most would call the "usual suspects". Alabama, Mississippi, South Carolina, and the like. But there are others that are missing that should shock people also, like Florida, North Carolina, Tennessee, and West Virginia.

And others are included, such as the states of Arizona and Alaska. And other places, like parts of California, New York, South Dakota, Michigan, and New Hampshire.

 

AA being racist is not a cut and dry issue. Many companies, schools, ect...Do hold minorities back......But giving someone extra points just for not being white is the wrong way to go.

Under AA, a less qualified black man will be given a job over a more qualified white man for no other reason than the employer is scared of being accused of being a racist.....Personally, I think the white man in that situation should be allowed to sue for racial discrimination in that scenario....because that is what it is.

 

Like hell. What was his school on the LSAT.?

 

You don't have to ask about race or sex, do you?

 

Like hell it ain't cut and dried. It's as wrong as anything can be. Minorities have to make it on their own and stop demanding whites be screwed just to help them.

 

Will you stop lying!? Whites are the number one beneficiary of this program. Asians are the number one targeted group.

 

We're talking about white MALES!!!!! You need to get your butt outta your head and pay attention.

 

You didn't say that. You said whites. Either way, half your people are profiting. Asians are not. Labs have to have non-Asian minorities, they have to have unqualified whites.

 

As we've seen from threads like this one and the MANY other threads/comments of this nature that the racism-enthusiasts on this forum continually post, AA is still needed. It's intent is to provide redress when a minority is not given a job for which they are qualified.

The cross-burners on this forum are more than a small indication that racism in the US is still interwoven in our society and that ignorance and intolerance are still applied merely based on the color of somebody's skin.

 

This was answered by the US Supreme Court in Regents of the University of California v. Bakke, 438 U.S. 265 (1978 )by stating, "race could not be the basis for excluding a candidate, race may be one of many factors in admissions considerations." The circumstances involved a white student seeking to be enrolled in a medical school which set aside 16 of the 100 seats for African American students.

Reverse discrimination is against the law.

As far as OP, "should conservatives call liberals racist because of affirmative action?" This is patently absurd.

 

HAHAHA. What BS that is. It's intent is to give minorities jobs they cannot get by ability.

 

And that is racism. Case closed.

 

And that is complete nonsense. That should not be the purpose of AA at all.

Because the way you say it, if I need to hire me and somebody who is black comes in, I must hire them purely because they are black.

I have been involved in the hiring process in the past. And I never look at race or religion or sex for who the best candidate is. I look at their experience, their work history, and their education.

And myself, I will also admit that one thing I tend to favor over many intangibles is military experience. If I have 3 equal candidates, and one of them was in the military, they will more then likely get my vote.

The problem with how most view AA, if I get 3 candidates, and 2 of the 3 are really outstanding, and one of them is average or even a bit below average but can do the job, I have to hire him because "he can do the job". Never mind that the other 2 are better candidates for many other reasons.

This is why AA is wrong. And I will be honest here, I have also helped in "resume screening". And you would be surprised how often we "round filed" resumes because somebody put their race on them. A few times we saw what looked like an outstanding candidate on their resume, but they would put something about their race or religion in their resume, and out it went.

And the very reason for that is because it is illegal to ask such things on an application. So most companies go the safe route and also consider them illegal in resumes, so toss those out as well, for fear of AA and other Civil Rights lawsuits.