If done perfectly, which is not possible, affirmative action would only level the playing field and not inconvenience anyone.

Since it can’t be done perfectly and there may be reverse discrimination balanced against ending discrimination – I would guess people who suffered under Jim Crow laws would tell both blacks and white “you don’t know the meaning of the word discrimination if all you have to do is send out a few more resumes to get a job. When I was young, it was impossible to be a…”

what do you think blacks suffering through Jim Crow would say to the few whites inconvenienced by affirmative action? Poor______?

If you hold out a bit longer, If Archconservative Charles Murray of the American Enterprise Institute gets his way, you could get $10,000 EVERY year – and you don’t even have to leave the country. I haven’t read his new book:

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0844742236/sr=8-1/qid=1153684696/ref=pd_bbs_1/002-5335267-3974460?ie=UTF8

From Publishers Weekly
Libertarian Murray’s Losing Ground laid the groundwork for controversial welfare reform proposals. His latest volume continues in the same vein, positing that government support has exacerbated dysfunctional underclass behavior, and offering a compromise to social democrats who call starve-the-beast policies cruel. In “The Plan,” all the money currently used in transfer programs Murray doesn’t deem universal (Social Security, agricultural subsidies, corporate welfare, as opposed to national defense, clean air, etc.) would be redirected into a new program that gives each citizen an annual $10,000 cash grant, beginning at age 21.

Run like h@#$%!!!

My guess is nothing of substance. Has a payroll bonus check ever made a real difference in anyone’s daily life? It’s nice, but momentary. Then life goes on as always.

We had a huge uproar years ago about renaming a major street. A group made up of black activists and white liberals, combined with wimpy politicians, launched the fight, and eventually won. The street is now named Dr. Martin Luther King Blvd. They could have named a new street in honor of Dr. King, without the costs and uproar, but it simply had to be this one particular street. The costs to the city and to the business owners along that street were huge. And the result? What problems were solved? What improved in the daily lives of black citizens? Nothing.

Symbolism over substance, the liberal answer to everything. And it’s not really the answer to anything at all.

The house of burgesses member who introduced the bill was Antoine Johnson. He was a black man born in Africa. He was brought to Virginia in 1619 on that infamous Dutch ship that brought the first Africans to Virginia.

Contrary to standard history, the 1619 Africans were not auctioned off as slaves. They were indentured servants and after a few years were given land and farm equipment as payment for their work.

Antoine Johnson was one of them. He aquired more land, more indentured servants, became active in community affairs, was elected to the colonial legislature and wrote the bill that created slavery in virginia.

A huge amount of black or mulatto slave owners came to Louisianna around 1800 when the blacks of Haiti revolted against the white and mulatto french. Thousands of black slaves and their black and mulatto owners came to Louisianna.

I remember the flaw in these studies, and just because a study is flawed and can’t prove discrimination, does not mean that discrimination does not exist.

The “white” names they chose in the studies were all upper-middle class names (literally mothers’ education 10% above average for whites). No Cletus or Billy-Bobs need apply.

The “black” names they chose were all lower-class names (literally, mothers’ education 10% below average for blacks, which was about 10% below the average white). It seems like upper class “uncle Toms” choose white names like “Tom” so they were not included in the sample.

Likewise, black-power, single moms were more likely to choose black names for their kids, unfortunately identifying them as low class.

But some liberals don’t bother to use Google when an academic studies tells them what they want to hear.

it’s Management’s fault for agreeing to the bloated demands but it is the Union’s shortsightedness, sloth, greed, and stubbornness in the face of a changing marketplace that caused GM etc to fold or need help. See, liberal ideas, when extrapolated to large numbers of humans, almost always fail.

Trust the marketplace and Christians and all will be well.

Most folks compassionately accept that fact that there is a percentage of ALL people at the very bottom who are dysfunctional, many of whom do not have the wherewithall to take care of themselves.

What is objectionable is the receipt of welfare by those who are not at the bottom by virtue of their ability.

To me, it is more repugnant to say that all blacks who receive welfare are comparable to whites who receive welfare because the implication is that a far higher percentage of blacks are incapable than whites.

Most right thinking folks are appalled when anyone with normal ability receives welfare.

The US corporate tax rate is at the top of the developed world which hampers competitiveness enormously. Businesses do not pay taxes, people do. Corporate welfare generally denotes a tax break. Speaking of tax breaks, 120 million individuals in the US are outside of the federal income tax system, with the entire bottom 50% of the US paying less than 3.5% of all fed taxes paid. Equating a tax break with welfare is simply an emotive response that denotes a lack of economic understanding.

Typical Tiffany always looking for the speck in the eyes of others…..

That’s not the way it works. You buy stolen property and it’s later identified as stolen, you’re out whatever you paid. If a deal sounds too good to be true, it probably is.

>>– and the original owner deserves to be threatened.>>

Don’t think that one’s going to fly – at least, not in these quarters!

Unbelievable.

Interesting article, though. Reminds me of the old days when small town social pressures and the “grapevine” pretty much kept young people in line. Maybe two steps forward has resulted in one step back?

Maybe the black Africans who initially captured and sold slaves should pay for the reparations?

It’s just like when a brother on the street sells you a $350 phone on the street for $50. One does not know for sure that the phone was stolen?

Many whites were indentured servants for year to pay for their passage. It’s not our fault if someone sold us stolen merchandise/people.

Just like when you buy a phone on the street, it was not our responsibility to ask any questions – or the guy told us it was not stolen and said make all the calls you want as he was taking the $50.

And if someone buys stolen property for $50, they deserve their $50 – and the original owner deserves to be threatened.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/21/nyregion/21sidekick.html?ex=1308542400&en=d381f9622c0c59ce&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

which I found on Wikipedia.