Unbelievable
 

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp..._controversy_2

Now THAT was in bad taste and vulgar.

:mad: :rolleyes:

Re: Unbelievable
 

I can't believe in this day and age this kind of thing goes on. Stupid neocons. Maybe they should go to Bob Jones University instead.

I heard about one of these a while ago...gee, good to know they're starting to spread :rolleyes: :distress:

Things like this not only anger me, but the arguments the groups use as to why they do it are so ridiculous...in my opinion...

I tell you what...this is a far cry from some of the Liberal protests I saw at PSU. A FAR cry.

It's ok to call the president Hitler but when a group sets up a booth to make a point about Affirmative Action (And they said that was what it was for!), it's disgraceful...come on. Some of the Abortion protests on PSU's campus were ridiculous. But you know what? If I disagreed, I kept on moving and that was that. Protests and demonstrations should be allowed from all sides.

What is the BIG DEAL????

"What's the World Comming To?':distress:

:rolleyes:

I feel more ashamed than Natalie...this crap is sick...I'm so pissed right now I cannot even go on about this crapola. OMG, some people and their ignorance! :distress:

It's racist.

I agree - but it does show a point as most protests do. So, in the spririt of the 1st Amend. - it sucks, but I support their right to do it.

Which is exactly their point....


Rob:cool:

Ah...the voice of reason among a sea of extremism!:laugh:

Rob:cool:

Just don't get caught in any elavators with him in Chicago.:laugh: ;) :wavey:

Well, I wouldn't sing (Ok BELT) the entire score of "Oklahoma" for just anyone!!!!!! :wavey: ;)

Seriously, the first amendment stuff is hard. I mean even the ACLU (or "communist femi-nazis" as my father calls them :laugh: ) defended the KKK's right to march/demonstrate - talk about a sickening case for any lawyer. But, rights are rights. :nod:

What's that quote? - "The greatest of all rights is the right to be wrong."

- Jake

It's one of my favorite memories of this year. I'm sure Ella will remember it on her birthday for many years to come.:)

:xoxo: (the best blushing emoticon I could find). That night was for me as well just great and will ive in my head for a long long time. I am so glad we/I "carried on" the night before the show and "behaved" the day of the show so we could be up for platters of fried food :laugh: and conversation afterward. :cool:

Came across this article and remembered it was brought up here. Makes sense.

Rob


"The Conservative Cookie Rebellion"
By Wendy McElroy
Tuesday, December 16, 2003

Want to buy a cookie? If you are a white male, that'll be $1; for white females, 75 cents; blacks, 25 cents. The price structure is the message.

Through Affirmative Action Bake Sales, conservative groups on campuses across America are satirically and peacefully spotlighting the injustice of AA programs that penalize or benefit students based solely on gender and race. The cookie rebels are being slammed by such a backlash that the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) -- dreaded by many university administrators -- just shot "an opening salvo" in the rebels' defense.

Thor Halvorssen, CEO of FIRE, declared in a press release last Friday: "Parody and political satire are not illegal in this country. College administrators appear to be under the mistaken impression that protesting affirmative action is not covered by the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Freedom of speech is a right enjoyed equally and fully by both supporters and opponents of affirmative action."

What are the AA bake sales, and why do they engender such furor?

The sales are intended to spark discussion, not profits. They are in the same genre as guerrilla theater -- an effective counterculture tactic usually associated with the Left -- through which societal assumptions are challenged by acting out scenarios. To the amazed query, "Are you allowed to do this?" one cookie rebel responded, "Admissions officers do it every day." By shifting the context from university policy to baked goods, the assumptions of affirmative action policies are not only challenged as sexist and racist but also revealed as nonsense.

The cookie rebels are doing the one thing political correctness cannot bear: revealing its absurdity and laughing in its face. They are not merely speaking truth to power; they are chuckling at it.

To regain the moral indignation they prize so highly, the politically correct must demonize the sale of baked goods. Thus, at Indiana University one student filed an official complaint, saying that the cookie sale would "create a climate of hostility against students of color and women and can easily turn violent." (The fact that those students were the ones given a price break didn't seem to occur to the irony-starved critic who equated a buyer's discount with a threat of violence.)

To its credit, Indiana University chose to protect the freedom of speech for both sides of the affirmative action issue; it allowed the bake sale to proceed. Other universities have made the opposite choice.

The College Republicans at the University of Washington sponsored an affirmative action bake sale on Oct. 7. CR President Jason Chambers reported, "Approximately 150 students were gathered around our booth discussing the issue [AA] by about 12:30 when our booth was attacked by leftist students who disagreed with our stance on affirmative action." The Leftists threw cookies to the ground, tore down the display and physically attacked one vendor.

When the leftists began making threats, one of the cookie rebels had called the police because he feared the discussion -- hitherto civil -- might turn violent. Chambers explained, "Unfortunately, rather than step in and arrest our attackers, the police stood by while the University said we, the peaceful ones, had to shut down because WE were creating an unsafe environment. ... Our protests that the CRs were peacefully demonstrating while the leftists got violent fell upon deaf ears."

I wholeheartedly agree that things often get taken too far when "protecting" a minority group from discrimination, but, folks should try putting themselves in the shoes of said minority group.

I mean, seriously, how bad do white male Republicans really have it, for example? Are they denied housing? Do people shun them when they move into the neighborhood? Are their kids harrassed at school for "being different"? Are they turned down for employment because of negative stereotypes about the work ethic of their "people"?

To me, the complaints come off like a spoiled child who's always had his way, and now realizes that he's no longer ruling the roost.
And I am a white male (though, being that I'm gay, I'm also a "minority").

Personally though, I don't think anyone should be treated any better than anyone else... we should ALL have the exact same rights and benefits.
Unfortunately, some people have been treated as second-class citizens (or worse) for so long, that overcompensation often exists as organizations search for a way to "make it all better."

Frankly, I dream of a world where we no longer have to have these types of discussions... because everyone is treated EQUALLY.

Re: Unbelievable
 

When I looked at the subject title of this thread and then read dissention's description of the link, I was expecting to find some wretched and horrifying incident - instead I found a harmless protest. I must say I'm surprised by the violence of the reactions against something so minor. I guess that shows the protests' effectiveness in getting the word out about the issue, though.

They certainly made their point. Affirmative action is unfair and racist. Hmm, maybe that's why people are getting so angry.

Re: Re: Unbelievable
 

Affirmative Action is such a dividing issue. Many, many people, myself included, feel it is unfair. Here is why I do. How would you like it if you as a caucasian applied to school and/or for a scholarship with stellar grades and your application was denied solely because a person with with far worse grades got accepted in your place solely because he had 1/4 or so American Indian blood. A friend of mine got into school with a scholarship this way and his family is/was loaded with $$$$. He did NOTHING to deserve this and did not even know or acknowledge his heritage until it became lucrative to do so. I submit anyone would be pissed if they were the poorer white guy "left pissin in the wind." I sure would be.

On the other hand, I am sure or at least hope that this example is rare and clearly Affirmative Action has helped many, many people overcome the horrors of racism that occurred far more strongly and in some cases with the govt.'s consent 40 or so years ago. In fact, that is the legal basis behind it - to cure the racial wrongs and inequity of the past. I think although there is much left to do, things clearly are better now than in the 1960's - no one is being sent to the back of the bus, no separate water fountains exist, different races are allowed to marry, etc. Personally, I think it is time to get away from judging solely on race because it is becoming a crutch. I think instead poverty should be the deciding factor. I mean isn't the whole idea to help all of the disadvantaged, not just the minorities who happen to be disadvantaged?

But, that will never, ever sell politically because the minute someone questions the relevance of Affirmative Action, they are branded a racist and all logical arguments fall to the wayside because that word is so devisive even if untrue and falsely asserted.

With all due respect, you present in this post a negative stereotype with your statement. Why is your stereotype different or more tolerable? Why is it okay to assume the rich are all carefree, privileged white Republicans who deserve in application less opportunities than all poor non-white Democrats? I submit to live equally (which is my dream as well), we have to get away from the whole "You don't know what suffering is" mindset and quit putting people in these pidgeonholes. I mean clearly there are poor white disadvantaged kids whose parents happen to be Republican. I think they do not deserve less opportunity than a minority child based on that fact alone? That is why I say give the poor more opportunities regardless of race or political affiliation.

Note: Johnny - I am not picking on you personally and respect your opinion - I am just commenting on the general topic of your post. ;)

Agreed. I was thinking the same thing when reading Johnny's post. Not all white men are rich Republicans. Hell, not even all Republicans are rich. And even if a white man was rich and Republican, should he be denied an education or a job based solely on the the color of his skin and/or his gender. IMO that'd be an AFFIRMATIVE NO. I pity the poor white man these days.


Joe

Guys,

He wasn't saying all white men are rich Republicans, he was making an example of how white, male Republicans have it compared to certain minority groups (gays, blacks, latinos, etc.). He made his point perfectly well by giving examples of this, i.e. their children aren't minorities, so they don't have to worry about being called racial slurs. They aren't denied housing like some minorities just because of their race. They don't get denied jobs because they're of dark skin and look poor. At least that's how I read his post.

Agree with his opinion or don't, but don't put words in his mouth.

That's the quote, not putting words in his mouth. White male Republicans can be poor and in need of help/assistance too. Why even use Republican, there are rich white male Democrats too. It was a very stereotypical statement. Let's not use affirmative action based strictly on gender and race but more on one's poverty level.


Joe

What percentage of Blacks, Hispanics and women live below the poverty line? Now, what percentage of white men live below the poverty line?

I'd say the percentage of the first group would be higher. However there ARE white men who live below the poverty line. Let's not forget them based upon the color of their skin or their gender.


Joe

Nor should they be more important.

I would agree with that.


Joe

Needless to say there ARE rich Hispanics and Blacks. In this day and age their children would get preferential treatment, based on affirmative action, over a male from a poor white family. Let's just make it fair for everyone.


Joe

Absolutely...If I start a business, I want to be able to hire the brightest and the best people I can find to help grow said business whether they are white, brown, yellow, green, purple with white polka dots, etc.

It should have nothing to do with race. A buddy of mine HATES affirmative action. He's black and considers it a slap in the face because he busted his $ss in school and doesn't think he or anyone else should be handed anything without working for it.

Plus...being rich and being Republican are not the same thing. Many times I hear people bitch about the "rich Republicans." I'm a Republican and I'm nowhere near being rich. Although, I believe in our system and the ability to make a decent living if you work hard at it.

Rob:cool:

Amen brother, AMEN!


Joe

Who said that they should be? I don't understand how judging people based on their qualifications rather than their race makes white men more important.

Very true...

BTW, I love the PC banner you have.:nod:

Rob:cool:

Your inferring too much from his comment. He *never* said that white male Republicans are necessarily rich, so therefore, his supposed "stereotypical" comment isn't a stereotypical comment. He was comparing groups: white male Republicans and minorities.

I think the inferences I drew from the quote were correct. I wasn't the only one who saw it that way. Why not say white male Democrats or white male Independents or what ever. There was a stereotypical comment that white male Republicans are not as disadavantaged as minorities or even the aforementioned other white males of other political denominations. It WAS a stereotypical comment.

I still love you Johnny Stew. :laugh:


Joe

You're not actually going to challenge the fact that, in general, many minorities have more disadvantages than white male Republicans, are you? :confused:

I think the point Joe is trying to make is that being Republican has nothing to do with how well off someone is.

Johnny Stew said "I mean, seriously, how bad do white male Republicans really have it, for example?"
And I do believe that some people on the left stereotype Republicans as being rich and vice versa. I know plenty of minority Republicans.

But, alas, we are all just nitpicking...the original point was made and understood.:laugh:

Rob:cool:

NO! :laugh:

Thank you Rob. :)


Joe

Republicans, when compared to Democrats, Greens, and Independents, are factually more wealthy and more advantaged. When compared to minority groups, they can be no doubt that they are. Eight years ago, Newsweek even conducted a poll and they concluded that almost 75% of the countrys richest were Republican.

But alas, if Johnny had said Democrats, no one would have said a single thing. ;)

That's all the vindication I need. :D