Frameshop: A Picture of the GOP on Civil Rights

[Burgold]

Boy have we strayed from the topic...

The Republicans should have shown. It sends a bad message that they didn't. There are also topics they should be eager to address that would likely have been asked in that venue that would not have been asked at CNN or FOX or a local town hall.

At any rate, the symbolism is bad. The photo message could become a powerful tool in the dems mudslinging arsenal.

[Teller]

Boy have we strayed from the topic...

The Republicans should have shown. It sends a bad message that they didn't. There are also topics they should be eager to address that would likely have been asked in that venue that would not have been asked at CNN or FOX or a local town hall.

At any rate, the symbolism is bad. The photo message could become a powerful tool in the dems mudslinging arsenal.

So you'd no doubt agree that the democrats should schedule a debate at NRA headquarters then, right?

[chomerics]

My boss will love to here that he makes less money than me. As will our executive vice president and COO. :laugh: You're telling me that blacks are not able to make a decent wage in this country? On account of firsthand observation, I call BS. Also, seeing as the three positions I mentioned are "good jobs," I again call BS. Oh, and is Secretary of State a good job? Is NFL head coach a good job? How bout NBA head coach? How bout general manager? :laugh:

Look at the %'s, of people. What, one black man out of over 100 franchises? What is the % of black population? Please, think things through before you start to argue.

I am talking about how few there are, when looking at the context of the people in the sport as well as the population as a whole. . .

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0882775.html

In 2004, White males made 100%, black males made 74% and white women made 76%

That is the reason for everything you oppose, and when you cry, biatch and moan about how you didn't get free handouts because you are white, you sound like a spoiled kid. You have FAR and AWAY more benefits than anyone else because you are a white male. It is up to YOU to decide what to do with it. You can work in a dead end job, and complain about how everyone has it better, or you can do something about it.

One thing you fail to mention, the person who became a doctor had to work his ass off in school, more even they you would have had to. But pay no attention to someone who used the system to their advantage, just sit back, do nothing about improving your own life and complain about how everyone else in society has it better. So typically republican of you. . .

Actually the congressionally chartered mortgage lender that I work security for hires MOSTLY foreign nationals or naturalized citizens. My workplace happens to be about 60% middle eastern/Indian, and probably less than 25% native-born whites. And like I said, the executive VP at our site is black, the COO is black, the Chief Corporate Security officer is black, the training department manager is a black woman, etc, etc, etc.

I would suggest you stop complaining about how little you've had in life, take out a student loan, and get an advanced degree, and you will realize how good you have it in this world. Otherwise, spend your lifecomplaining about how all those around you have it better. . .while neglecting to mention that they actually had to work to make themselves better. . .

:2cents:

[Teller]

Boy...That was an awfully long-winded way of saying, "Nope, hog. You're right. I couldn't find EVEN one." :laugh:

[Burgold]

So you'd no doubt agree that the democrats should schedule a debate at NRA headquarters then, right?

Absolutely. Mind you I think they should all attend while wearing kevlar vests and standing behind 4 inches of bullet proof glass

[chomerics]

Chicken****s. Period. That's what your candidates are. And a chicken**** is incapable of leading our country in times like these.

[/quote}

LMAO, what like Bush??? Yea, he sure knows how to lead our country :doh: Let's take our eye off the guy who attacked us, let him get powerful again, and get the guy who went after daddy :doh:

You are better than this chldish and ignorant statement. . .well, at least I thought you were. . .

Please. Political tides in this country turn faster than an F-1 car on steroids. Remember when the ho-mongerer/disbarred perjurer laid waste to the democratic party? And wow, just six short years later you win back the house and senate. Amazing, isn't it? I kind of hope Hillary gets elected; you know to speed up our rebound even more.

Umm, political tides change every 2 decades or so. The democrats did not have power during Clinton, the Republicans have been gaining on them ever since Regan was in office. You will see the same thing this go around with the dems, trust me, it is going to happen. Political tides pass by generations, not by a few years. . .

He's done damage, sure. How much? Neither of us know yet. But I do know this. Middle-class, hardworking TRUE Reagan Democrats are waiting for a true fiscal conservative. They want to keep their money just like I do, and when they find that person, they WILL vote for him.

Are you so sure of that? Which candidate is that? Ron Paul? Not a chance to win. Face it, the right has done a lot of damage to our country and our standing in the world. They have tarnished our image and it will take a lot to gain the people back. Have you listened to the people who support them still? They are complete wackjobs, and they now have the voice of the GOP. They have done more to hurt the blue collar Americans than you realize, and people are starting to get it. Things like minimum wage are blue collar issues, and it is helping the dems get inroads into the south.

I largely agree with you here (save for the excessive hyperbole about the destruction of blah blah blah.) I'm thoroughly disappointed with the immigration situation, NSA, etc. But I realize this was one man in our party who happened to be a **** up. That doesn't change what I stand for.

I am not saying that it changes what YOU stand for, I agree you are not a person the left is ever going to win. They are not going for you vote either, they are going for the moderate republicans. They are going for the ex democrats who have been decimated in the past 6 years under Bush. People who are struggling to make ends meet with their low wages and high gas prices. Just start talking to people in different areas of the country, and see how disheartened they are by the GOP now. Then did nothing for the people who supported them. . .well, unless you consider Teri Schaivo a good thing they did.

[Teller]

Absolutely. Mind you I think they should all attend while wearing kevlar vests and standing behind 4 inches of bullet proof glass

:rotflmao: :notworthy

[Mooney]

Look at the %'s, of people. What, one black man out of over 100 franchises? What is the % of black population? Please, think things through before you start to argue.

I am talking about how few there are, when looking at the context of the people in the sport as well as the population as a whole. . .

So you are saying only 12% of the players in the NBA and NFL should be black?

[Teller]

So you are saying only 12% of the players in the NBA and NFL should be black?

:owned:

[PeterMP]

Based on the info. discussed in the link below, it appears that statistical data is allowed to be used as evidence.

http://www.jstor.org/view/01621459/di985954/98p07082/0

If that is the case, then there is a perfectly good mechanism to fight discrimination. Take the companies to court, make them pay fines, or even put some people in jail. We just need to a have a President and a Justice Dept. serious about doing it, but you will never hear either side commit to it because they are both relatively happy w/ the status quo, and are much more happy debating something they know (e.g. affirmative action programs) and know where their followers stand rather than a new solution that might actually fix the problem.

[PeterMP]

So you are saying only 12% of the players in the NBA and NFL should be black?

I'm sorry, but this just stupid. As has already been pointed out in this thread, study after study repeatedly demonstrates that in a statistically significant manner blacks are discriminated against w/ respect to getting jobs. The combination of these studies goes well beyond anything that can be considered "reseasonable doubt". Find me one study or white guy that is claiming he is not in the NFL or NBA bacause of racisim.

[Teller]

I'm sorry, but this just stupid. As has already been pointed out in this thread, study after study repeatedly demonstrates that in a statistically significant manner blacks are discriminated against w/ respect to getting jobs. The combination of these studies goes well beyond anything that can be considered "reseasonable doubt". Find me one study or white guy that is claiming he is not in the NFL or NBA bacause of racisim.

And here we have it again. The old, "Well, African Americans are naturally better athletes," argument. Which is socially exceptable for some as-yet unknown reason. But let me say, "Well, whites are naturally better businessmen," and what happens?

:doh: :doh: :doh: :doh: :doh:

[Mooney]

I'm sorry, but this just stupid. As has already been pointed out in this thread, study after study repeatedly demonstrates that in a statistically significant manner blacks are discriminated against w/ respect to getting jobs. The combination of these studies goes well beyond anything that can be considered "reseasonable doubt". Find me one study or white guy that is claiming he is not in the NFL or NBA bacause of racisim.

Well if statistics bother you, then don't only use them when they suit your argument.

Regarding the "studies" that have been marched out, please demonstrate just one actual case today where a black man is making 75% of his white counterpart, in any actual job. I'll wait.

[twa]

Well if statistics bother you, then don't only use them when they suit your argument.

Regarding the "studies" that have been marched out, please demonstrate just one actual case today where a black man is making 75% of his white counterpart, in any actual job. I'll wait.

I can show you one that obese people make less.

http://www.hoover.org/publications/digest/8101162.html

Not really related but I had to share.

Obese workers earn less per hour than their thinner colleagues—a finding that is surprisingly robust and does not appear to be explained by differences in education, age, or training. This obesity wage gap is greater for female workers, but it is also true for men. Most often, economists attribute the gap to discrimination against the obese. Occasionally, economists argue that in some jobs (think of supermodels), thinner workers are more productive than obese ones.

[Larry]

Seriously, if you're afraid of a television network, you are not capable of leading my country.

Yeah, I heard Rush handing out that talking point a few days ago, myself.

So, does this mean you're 100% behind Tancredo?

Or does your absolute bar to holding public office due to lack of guts only apply to one party? (Coincidentally, the one you weren't going to vote for, no matter who they run.)

[Teller]

Yeah, I heard Rush handing out that talking point a few days ago, myself.

So, does this mean you're 100% behind Tancredo?

Or does your absolute bar to holding public office due to lack of guts only apply to one party? (Coincidentally, the one you weren't going to vote for, no matter who they run.)

Well, it's nice to know one of us is listening to Rush. Personally, I haven't listened to a word he's said since his TV show was cancelled, and that was, what, 15 years ago? :laugh: Keep listening though. There's hope for you to turn from the Dark Side.

We've only been through this 87,609 times. I DO NOT LISTEN TO RUSH LIMBAUGH. FABRICATE A NEW ARGUMENT.

Thanks.

[DjTj]

And here we have it again. The old, "Well, African Americans are naturally better athletes," argument. Which is socially exceptable for some as-yet unknown reason. But let me say, "Well, whites are naturally better businessmen," and what happens?

:doh: :doh: :doh: :doh: :doh:

Well, people generally look at Michael Irvin funny when he makes the "blacks are better athletes" argument too ... the politically correct argument is that African-Americans tend to come from a socioeconomic situation where athletics often provide a greater opportunity than education ... this is true for the country white kid as much as the urban black kid.

I'm not sure we can completely dismiss the idea that blacks are on average better athletes or that whites are on average better businessman, but I think we can agree that these ideas were inherently dangerous. Perhaps it's true that on average, Blacks are better athletes (because they were once brought to this country for manual labor), whites are better businessmen (because it was the most entrepenuerial that chose to come here), or that Asian-Americans are better at math (because our current immigration policy favors those with technical backgrounds), but it does not follow that all blacks are better athletes, all whites are better businessmen, and Asians are better at math. Also, these stereotypes become less true with each successive generation because an athlete's son is not always an athlete, a businessman's son is not always a businessman, and an engineer's son is not always an engineer. A group stereotype, although it may have some statistical validity, is useless when applied to individuals. If it is acted upon, even subconsciously, it can amount to discrimination, and it can be a self-fulfilling prophesy if society pushes all blacks towards sports, all whites towards business, and all Asians towards engineering.

I think this is what Martin Luther King was talking about when he had a dream that his "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." He wanted a world where the stereotype no longer existed that blacks were less capable than whites. King wasn't just fighting against acts of discrimination; he was fighting against the widespread belief among Americans that blacks were inferior to whites.

Part of the way to remove those stereotypes was to actually put blacks in places where they could prove themselves - on police forces, in law schools, and in the business world. Placing blacks in those situations would lessen the stereotypes simply because people would see them as no longer subservient but standing on their own. Unfortunately, there was a Catch-22, because as long as the stereotypes existed, it would be hard to get blacks into those positions in the first place. Affirmative action was certainly necessary in the beginning, in King's time.

Affirmative action certainly becomes less necessary as the stereotypes fade, and you could even argue that the affirmative action in the present day reinforces the stereotypes to a certain extent because it implies that minorities are somehow inferior. However, I would strongly argue that statements like "whites are naturally better businessmen" are something that should be strongly criticized, because such group stereotypes are precisely what we should be trying to eliminate in a society that values the individual.

[PeterMP]

And here we have it again. The old, "Well, African Americans are naturally better athletes," argument. Which is socially exceptable for some as-yet unknown reason. But let me say, "Well, whites are naturally better businessmen," and what happens?

:doh: :doh: :doh: :doh: :doh:

That would be a valid assesment if that's what I said.

As for the other comment, go back to the stats posted earlier. Whites w/ worse crediantials regularly get interviewed over Blacks w/ better credentials. The statistical studies are irrefetuable. To pretend otherwise is just ignorance. Our discrimination laws are not being followed or enforced by either side.

[chomerics]

So you are saying only 12% of the players in the NBA and NFL should be black?

Are you that ignorant and obtuse? Are you saying racism exists in professional sports on the field level?

As for hog's "owned" comment :doh: my god, how is that being owned. Professional sports is the one area race is not a factor, and look at the differences when compared with the population.

[chomerics]

Regarding the "studies" that have been marched out, please demonstrate just one actual case today where a black man is making 75% of his white counterpart, in any actual job. I'll wait.

I can give you a personal story where the head of HR at a fortune 500 company told me to "place those resume's in the back because they are not "Parker" material" when three black kids dropped of their resume at a job fair.

I reported the person to corporate, and nothing was done, but she retired two years after the incident. Racism exists in this world, and it will continue to exist until we weed out the SOBs that are racists. Only then can we remove benefits to minorities, unfortunately it is an evil that is a necessity in today's society.

Boy...That was an awfully long-winded way of saying, "Nope, hog. You're right. I couldn't find EVEN one."

Heck, I don't agree with affirmative action at all, and I think it causes more problems and resentment in people like yourself. People who feel slighted in life because they did not get a free ride, while never doing anything to better their situation in life. . .but. . .it is a necessary evil to combat the racist ****s like the head of HR at my old company. It doesn't level the playing field completely, but it at least gives people a little help, and those who WANT to better their lives CAN better their lives.

There are plenty of programs for white people, and plenty of government aid you can get for things like college and tuition reimbursement. If anything, you STILL make out better, because after graduation, the difference in salary more than makes up for the extra scholarship. The problem lies in people like yourself though who disagree with Affirmative Action. Your story about your Iranian friend was quite telling, because you made it seem as if he is a doctor only because he was Iranian. . .ummm, no he is a doctor because he worked his ass off and wanted to make something better of his life. He may have had a little more help in paying for college, bt he still had to take the classes, get the grades, get accepted into an Ivy league school and work his ass off to be successful.

Maybe one day you will get it hog. "Those -people" who use the system to their advantage still have it rough. They will never make the same thing you and I could make in their lifetimes because of their color. If does not discourage them though, and instead a lot of people use it as a motivation tool. They may have used the system to help them pay for college, and to that I say GREAT!!! THey are the reason the system exists in the first place!!! Heck, white Americans can get scholarships as well as other financial aid for college, it is not that hard. All it takes is hard work to find the money, but it is entirely doable. I would think that being a republican, you would want to hold these people up high as an example of how hard work gets you to the top. Instead you are using them as an example as to how you haven't had your free handout in life too, and you deserve what they have. . .yet neglect to see the hard work and dedication they put into their lives.

Think about that last paragraph for a while, and try to understand where I am coming from. I was in your position once to, I was a blue collar worker, but I wanted more in life so I decided to change it. I went back to school, got a degree, and started a new career in life. I used the system to my advantage, and ended up paying only $15K total for 4 years of college. Yea, go figure, a white male could get scholarships, who would have thunk it, you can do the same thing hog, get your education and do something you want to do with your life. It will also help you our with your other issues, because it will decrease the amount of money you will have to shell out. In other words, instead of talking about how easy everyone else has it, and how hard you have it, do something about it. Live your life, don't observe it

[SkinsHokieFan]

The NAACP is lock step with marching orders for the Democratic Party

Show up at the Urban League where you may actually have people give you the legitimate time of day and listen to what you have to say

Similar with CAIR, if I were running as an R for President and CAIR invited me for a debate I would never show

[SkinsHokieFan]

Believe me, you are just seeing the beginning of the rise of the democrats, and you better get used to blue because you'll be seeing it for a LONG time.

And this is what was said in November of 1992 :laugh:

8 years later the situation was completely reversed

[Mooney]

Are you that ignorant and obtuse? Are you saying racism exists in professional sports on the field level?

Nice. You call for quotas, but only one way. Gotcha.

Where did I say racism exists in professional sports on the field level? You called for employment based on racial percentages. I pointed out a couple of examples of how ridiculous that could look in reality, that everybody here could relate to. According to you, only professional sports, on the field level, is racism free. Again, gotcha.

I can give you a personal story where the head of HR at a fortune 500 company told me to "place those resume's in the back because they are not "Parker" material" when three black kids dropped of their resume at a job fair.....

.....instead of talking about how easy everyone else has it, and how hard you have it, do something about it. Live your life, don't observe it

First part of 2nd quote: You marched out this same "personal story" the last time I called you on your wage disparity bull**** propaganda. Sad story and she should've been fired.....and I can assure you that in todays corporate world, she would've been fired immediately.

Still waiting on just one actual case where a black person today is making 75% of his/her white counterpart, in the same exact position.

Second part of 2nd quote: Since you called me ignorant and obtuse, aside from constantly talking, whining and complaining about it on a messageboard....and repeating old stories.....

What are you personally doing about racism? Are you marching, volunteering or organizing?

[The Sisko]

Great responses HH. However, as usual you take your own limited personal experience and extrapolate it to everyone.

As for Mooney's request for an example of a study that shows disparate incomes....

The following research shows exactly how and why race/sex based discrimination within an organization results in lower pay for minorities and women in spite of the fact that they perform equally as well, if not better than whites. Additionally, the author also points out a reason for you guy's inability to see what's actually happening.

The conclusion of this paper is clear-cut. I find evidence that African American employees receive lower performance ratings than white men within a given occupation and establishment. I also find evidence that women’s performance ratings are higher than men’s (consistent with

Lewis 1997). This finding is also consistent with the evidence to date, which indicates that the formalization of employment systems tends to have a positive effect on women’s earnings (Anderson and Tomaskovic-Devey 1995; Bridges and Nelson 1989; Huffman and Velasco 1997; and Reskin 2000).

In the long run, however, I find that some conscious and/or unconscious

organizational processes over the tenure of employees might end up in wage inequality: Controlling for education, job experience and performance, job class, work unit, and supervisor, I find that there are significant demographic differences in the allocation of salary increases over time. This is also consistent with the Elvira and Graham study (2002): Compared with traditional pay types, employers’ increasing use of incentive or performance-based bonuses distributed at managers' discretion may provide greater opportunity for gender biases to operate.

This supports the prediction made by Ridgeway in 1997 that “wage inequality (…) will be present even in employment settings where the usual organizational structures and practices that produce them are relatively absent, such as internal labor markets and biased job evaluation

systems.” (Ridgeway 1997: p. 231). In this organization, this is the case even if we assume that there is not bias in the performance evaluations of employees.

Because I find that females and certain minority employees get lower salary increases than white males when performing at the same level, this paper is relevant to several streams of theoretical and empirical research. First, it provides evidence for an additional form of discrimination, what I call “performance-reward” discrimination, i.e., the form of discrimination

that happens when employers consciously or unconsciously under-weight the work of certain minority employees. This is independent of other processes generating ascriptive inequality described in the most recent article on discrimination processes in organization (see Petersen and Saporta [2004]).

Even assuming 1) that women and minorities are equally sorted into jobs (i.e.,

there is no allocative discrimination), 2) that women and minorities receive the same starting salary within a given occupation, within a given establishment (i.e., there is no within-job wage discrimination), and 3) that female and minority dominated occupations with the same skill

requirements and other wage-relevant factors are valued the same (i.e., there is no valuative discrimination), I still find that the work of certain minority groups can be discounted in organizations over time (consciously or unconsciously), even when they are performing at the

same level.

This argument is also independent of the fact that the performance evaluation rating process itself, because of its subjectivity, might also be affected by gender, race, or nationality bias (i.e., the performance evaluation stage).

Many mechanisms explain why, in an organization such as

this, neither employees nor administrators seem to be aware of this performance-reward bias. For example, previous experimental research has shown how individuals seem less able to perceive any gender or race discrimination on a personal level than at an organizational or societal level. Crosby, Clayton, Alksnis, and Hemker (1986) argue that this phenomenon is feasible in part due to an information-processing bias; i.e., the perception or awareness of discrimination processes is more difficult when one makes case-by-case comparisons than when one encounters information in the aggregate. Conforming to this information-awareness argument are my findings that the most visible aspects of employee career outcomes such as getting a salary increases (regardless of the quantity) or being promoted are not necessarily subject to this performance-reward bias process. I argue that it is the visibility of such employee career outcomes that forces organizations to be extra careful in the implementation of such decisions, given that any signs of unfairness would more likely be noticed (and therefore corrected) by the other employees in the organization, both within and across units.

A second mechanism explaining why there is performance-reward bias in this particular organization is consistent with the gender and race-based shifting standards of competence model proposed by Biernat and Kobrynowicz (1997). My study provides some field evidence of the “lower minimum standards and higher ability standards” argument: Even when it might be equally likely for women and minorities to meet low standards, still these same individuals must

work harder to prove that their performance is ability based. In my setting, I find that that after controlling for ratings (and jobs), there is disparity in salary growth by gender and minority status. This key finding can be interpreted as women and minorities’ performance appraisals being discounted so that they need to work harder to prove that their performance is ability based in order to get a similar salary increase at the end of the year.

Full article at: http://www.mitportugal.org/files/castilla.pdf

Now I realize that's only one study. However, I'd be glad to find more if and when either of you coughs up legitimate research that says otherwise.

[AsburySkinsFan]

How many generations does that last?

And does the liability for the king's sins miraculously expand to everyone in the kingdom?

That's the question, by my thoughts are that the new King has yet to realize complexity of the injustice that his father perpetrated.