response 96 of 217:

Jan 29 17:30 UTC 2003

re:  "#93 (gull):  Re #84: What about Henry Ford?  Definately an 
American, but he wrote fan letters to Adolf Hitler and published an 
anti-Semitic newspaper.  He got a fair amount of support from other 
Americans on that issue."

I don't know what you call "fair amount," but from what I've read his 
newspaper was pretty much a failure, along with the rest of his 
campaign.  Which proves my point.

and:

"how much effort should we really go to
for people who won't vote for us anyway?"

Exactly.  This is why the Democrats take them from granted.  Our 
process is base upon change from the inside.  Why is it required 
to "reach out?"  Shouldn't blacks realize they're getting screwed by 
the current social security system because they have shorter life span 
than other groups so, as a result, they collect less and end up 
subsidizing?  You'd think they'd back private accounts.  We are seeing 
a lot of blacks bucking their "leadership" on the school voucher issue, 
however.  So perhaps things are changing.

and

"Re #88: So you're saying, basically, "We'll never solve the problem
completely, so we should give up on trying to improve the situation"?"

No.  I am saying that at some point marginal returns diminish.  Move to 
another area where the gains may be greater for the effort put forth.

and

"Re #91: what bothers me most about articles like that is the
pandering nature of them"

Maybe he's trying to "reach out."


janc:  Mind telling me what bookstore you got that bible at?  ;)

response 98 of 217:

Jan 29 18:55 UTC 2003

The findings of a study conducted in Michigan do not support 
your "guess."  If a black man can make it to age 75, he will probably 
outlive a white of the same age, but less than age 75, whites have 
longer expected lifespans.
http://www.msue.msu.edu/msue/imp/modfl/51596001.html

Also, your comments indicate you are not familiar with the private 
account concept that is currently being proposed.

response 100 of 217:

Jan 30 23:26 UTC 2003

 I don't really think there's such a thing as a liberal Christian. 
Now, a Christian Liberal, that's another thing entirely. 

    In other worlds, the ten commandments still apply. But you're 
supposed to practice them in your life towards everyone you meet, 
rather than in the hours in church during service.

   As for the second ten, I can think of a response to  couple. GOd 
created this planet for us, so it behooves us to treat it with 
respect, and honor his gift. I suppose if you can tolerate a quote 
from the new testamanet, I'll offer one.

response 102 of 217:

Jan 31 14:38 UTC 2003

        Sure there's such a thing as a liberal Christian - but when you put
"liberal" before "Christian", it changes the meaning to someone whose views
on religion aren't in line with the Christian orthodoxy.  I suppose a gnostic
or Arianist (not Aryanist) Christian, or someone who didn't believe in the
sacraments, would qualify.

response 104 of 217:

Jan 31 20:03 UTC 2003

Re: 91 - "But the black civil liberties movement found by far it's
 strongest support in the Democratic party."

This is a persistent myth.  The 1957 Civil Rights Act was pushed by
Eisenhower, a Republican, and voted against by Senator Kennedy, and
filibustered for 24 hours by another Democrat senator.  Senator Johnson, a
Democrat, stripped out enforcement provisions from it rendering it
meaningless.

In 1960, another civil rights act was introduced, and again Democrats kept
enforcement measures out of it.

In 1964, only 69% of Democrats in the Senate (46 for, 21 against) voted
for the Civil Rights Act, as opposed to 82% of Republicans.  All of the
southern Democratic Senators, including former KKK leader Robert Byrd
and Al Gore, Sr, voted against it, and the primary opposition to the Act
took the form of a 74-day filibuster by the Democrats.

In the House, 61% of Democrats voted for it, and 92 of the 103 southern
Democrats voted against it, while 80% of Republicans voted for it.

"At the signing of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, President Lyndon B. Johnson
 praised the Republicans for their 'overwhelming' support. Roy Wilkins,
 then-NAACP chairman, awarded Republican Senate Minority Leader Everett Dirksen
 of Illinois the Leadership Conference of Civil Rights Award for his
 'remarkable civil rights leadership.' Moreover, civil rights activist Andrew
 Young wrote in his book An Easy Burden that 'The southern segregationists were
 all Democrats, and it was black Republicans... who could effectively influence
 the appointment of federal judges in the South' (p. 96). Young added that the
 best civil rights judges were Republicans appointed by President Dwight
 Eisenhower and that 'these judges are among the many unsung heroes of the
 civil rights movement.'"

response 106 of 217:

Feb 1 03:42 UTC 2003

Lots of the former "Southern Democrats" are now Republicans, too.

response 108 of 217:

Feb 1 05:28 UTC 2003

"Reagan Democrats" were primarily of Irish descent.

response 110 of 217:

Feb 1 12:55 UTC 2003

Re #106:  Indeed.

response 112 of 217:

Feb 2 02:35 UTC 2003

(I'm too impatient to wade through this partisan claptrap.  did the Whittier
College Republicans ever report on their event, or was the declaration more
important than the action?)

response 114 of 217:

Feb 3 18:06 UTC 2003

From a Jewish World Review article:
http://www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/leo.html
--
A Harvard University Press book exploring a fairly narrow question-why aren't
there more black and Hispanic professors?-is about to take center stage in
the affirmative action debate. 

The book, "Increasing Faculty Diversity: The Occupational Choices of
High-Achieving Minority Students," reports that roughly 10 percent of
high-achieving black and Hispanic college seniors want to become
professors-about the same percentage as whites. But only a small pool of
non-Asian minorities earn grades good enough to get them into graduate school.

And the study finds that affirmative action is making things worse: It steers
minority students to selective colleges where they are underqualified and
likely to get lower grades. The low marks make them less likely to attend
graduate school. They also erode students' confidence, often convincing them
that they aren't suited for academic careers. 
===see link for rest of article===

response 116 of 217:

Feb 3 21:18 UTC 2003

The argument boils down to, "black people aren't capable of making good
decisions on their own, so we should limit their options for their own
good."

response 118 of 217:

Feb 4 02:36 UTC 2003

The argument made in the article linked to in resp:114 is similar to one
I've made many times here.  I consider the argument plausible, and think it is
one that needs to be considered seriously, but I have never seen anyone pull
together sufficient evidence to prove it.

If convincing evidence for this exists, then my "solution" would not be to
eliminate affirmative action admissions.  It'd be to provide the information
to students who are being given a prefered admission.  Tell them that they
have been accepted, but that their GPA/SAT scores are significantly below
those of most students at the institution, and that students admitted with
such scores tend to have higher drop-out rates and lower grades.  To succeed,
they will probably have to work harder than most other students on campus,
studying while other students are partying.

Are you substantially more motivated, more willing to work, than other
students you know who are as smart as you?  Are you prepared to sustain this
level of work for four years, while seeing others around you succeed with
less effort?  If you are prepared for that challenge, then we welcome you.
If not, you may want to consider the alternative of attending a college where
you can be accepted without preferment, where you will be on a level field
with other students.

My point is that for some students a preferment is a real boon.  It depends
on how big the preferment is, but mostly it depends on the student.  For
bright-but-lazy types (like me), or for easily discouraged types, it isn't.
Either way, the student should know what they are getting into.  They should
take some time to contemplate the pluses and minuses, not just grab for the
most prestigious school that accepts them.

response 120 of 217:

Feb 4 03:31 UTC 2003

re:  "#116 (gull): The argument boils down to, 'black people aren't 
capable of making good decisions on their own,'"

Are they now making the decisions "on their own?"  Or are they being 
pushed, pulled, and steered by the colleges, their high schools, the 
civil rights establishment, their families, and who know who else to go 
to the prestigious school because they deserve it on account of the 
rotten treatment their people received, not because it is the best 
choice for that individual?  It is a lot of pressure to put on a 17 year 
old.