RE: Liberal delusions on racism

RE: Liberal delusions on racism (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

BitYakin -> RE: Liberal delusions on racism (5/5/2014 12:34:14 AM)
DUDE you don't DISCUSS ANYTHING EVER you just call EVERYONE an IDIOT or MORON or IGNORANT like as if that PROVES YOUR RIGHT POT MEET KETTLE you DEMAND people PROVE what they say but show NOTHING that DISPROVES IT other than I SAY SO it must be nice to live in a fantasy world where all you have to do is call people names and it AUTOMATICLY MAKES YOU RIGHT

BitYakin -> RE: Liberal delusions on racism (5/5/2014 12:35:49 AM)
people have been giving you examples of it all night but you DISMISS it and call them NAMES

Kirata -> RE: Liberal delusions on racism (5/5/2014 12:39:05 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: joether quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: joether you are often one that hates people sitting on the welfare system and not working, Kirata. You're making shit up. Am I? Hmmm...... Why don't you quote me 'hating people sitting on the welfare system' then, show us what you've got. quote: ORIGINAL: joether Your idea is to spend money on those 3,000 resumes....BEFORE...weeding them down to the criteria for the job. You're making shit up again. quote: ORIGINAL: joether The person hiring, delegates to someone under them to handle the processing, and give the boss the best of the litter. Sherlock Holmes has nothing on you! K.

BitYakin -> RE: Liberal delusions on racism (5/5/2014 12:43:03 AM)
You would do well to look at what you wrote and consider how bias you have been towards liberals. You really do not understand them. They are first and foremost, your fellow Americans POT MEET KETTLE cause I have seen you bash repubs, conservative, and tea party people a lot harder!

joether -> RE: Liberal delusions on racism (5/5/2014 12:44:37 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BitYakin hmm that's not what the DICTIONARY SAYS reverse discrimination Houghton Mifflin n.noun 1. Discrimination against members of a dominant or majority group, especially when resulting from policies established to correct discrimination against members of a minority or disadvantaged group. but hey, make up anything you like! No that would be discrimination again. If white students were the majority and blacks were not. A black student beating up a white and not an Asian is discrimination, not, reverse discrimination. Donuts are a popular food in New England breakfast menus. If I eat a bagel or toast instead, is it discrimination or reverse discrimination? Go look up the definition of the word (from an actual dictionary): Discrimination

BitYakin -> RE: Liberal delusions on racism (5/5/2014 12:47:14 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Tkman117 Regulation of those who would abuse the freedoms of the individual, such as large businesses. We believe in personal freedom and a general moderation of businesses to prevent abuse of their workers. That's what he government should exist to do; to protect the rights of it's people. umm yet you are in favor of regulating my ability to be free to hire WHOMEVER I WANT for whatever dam reason I WANT how LIBERAL OF YOU, to protect one person's freedom you RESTRICT MINE

joether -> RE: Liberal delusions on racism (5/5/2014 12:58:04 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BitYakin quote: ORIGINAL: joether You would do well to look at what you wrote and consider how bias you have been towards liberals. You really do not understand them. They are first and foremost, your fellow Americans POT MEET KETTLE cause I have seen you bash repubs, conservative, and tea party people a lot harder! And what did I bash them on? 1 ) When they were behaving like little children 2 ) When they were being deceptive and nailed them in the act 3 ) When stating absolutely dumb and foolishly things 4 ) When evading discussions because the facts do not fit into their bullshit 5 ) When they get the facts wrong 6 ) That's its 'ok' for them to be disrespectful to others, but others can not be disrespectful back to them 7 ) When they belittle those opposing their viewpoints and/or arguments 8 ) When they cant handle the idea that their argument is full of shit and get called on it. Its not '...repubs...', its Republicans. Its not '...tea party....' its the Tea Party. Republicans follow an organization (generally speaking) called the Republican Party. The Tea Party, is an off shoot of the Republican Party. I find it easier to say 'Republican/Tea Party'. Being 'conservative' and 'conservatives' are very different. One is a political philosophy the other is a group of people following said political philosophy. Because conservatives are individuals not 'The Horde'; just like liberals. So it would make sense when referring to them and not their political philosophy to refer to them as 'conservatives', wouldn't it? And I corrected your quote, because you cant seem to do that either!

joether -> RE: Liberal delusions on racism (5/5/2014 1:06:52 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: joether quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: joether you are often one that hates people sitting on the welfare system and not working, Kirata. You're making shit up. Am I? Hmmm...... Why don't you quote me 'hating people sitting on the welfare system' then, show us what you've got. Have you never stopped and actually looked at the number of threads on this forum? And the number of posts for each of these threads? That the Affordable Care Act has been law nearly four years now? And a year before that in discussions. That will take some time to research for all the juicy tidbits. I have some ideas on where to look. But it takes time all the same.... quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: joether Your idea is to spend money on those 3,000 resumes....BEFORE...weeding them down to the criteria for the job. You're making shit up again. Post #129... "You run the background check first. Because the next step is selecting which candidates to interview." Want to keep denying it? quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: joether The person hiring, delegates to someone under them to handle the processing, and give the boss the best of the litter. Sherlock Holmes has nothing on you! Sherlock Holmes never existed to begin with, Einstein!

BitYakin -> RE: Liberal delusions on racism (5/5/2014 1:11:18 AM)
you go look up REVERSE DISCIMINATION I found SEVERAL site giving almost the EXACT SAME DEFINITON but PRETEND ANYTHING YOU LIKE http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/reverse%20discrimination : the practice of making it more difficult for a certain type of person (such as a white man) to get a job, to go to a school, etc., because other people who were treated unfairly in the past are now being given an advantage http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverse_discrimination Reverse discrimination is discrimination against members of a dominant or majority group or in favor of members of a minority or historically disadvantaged group. Groups may be defined in terms of race, gender, ethnicity, or other factors. This discrimination may seek to redress social inequalities where minority groups have been denied access to the same privileges of the majority group. In such cases it is intended to remove discrimination that minority groups may already face. The label reverse discrimination may also be used to highlight the discrimination inherent in affirmative action programs. Reverse discrimination can be defined as the unequal treatment of members of the majority groups resulting from preferential policies, as in college admissions or employment, intended to remedy earlier discrimination against minorities.[1][2] Conceptualizing efforts as reverse discrimination began to become popular in the early-mid-1970s, the time period that focused on underrepresentation and affirmative action intended to remedy the effects of past discrimination. http://definitions.uslegal.com/r/reverse-discrimination/ Reverse discrimination describes policies or habits of social discrimination against members of a historically dominant group with an implication of unfairness. Sometimes reverse discrimination can result from affirmative action policies created to decrease discrimination in the workplace against minority employees. In many democratic societies, the dominant group is in the majority, and the disadvantaged is in the minority. It refers to any negative impact that affirmative action may have on whites, which is seen as equivalent to the illegal discrimination that has been faced by people of color and women for centuries. Reverse discrimination is sometimes considered synonymous with the term affirmative action would ya like a DOZEN MORE?

joether -> RE: Liberal delusions on racism (5/5/2014 1:12:35 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: ORIGINAL: joether quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub Will of course we all must decide what a liberal is for themselves... to me your description does not match mine. So be it...now it is up for others to decide their description. Butch Sure thing, Butch. "Liberal" only means what you like it to mean. Got it. Liberal lib·er·al [lib-er-uhl, lib-ruhl] adjective 1. favorable to progress or reform, as in political or religious affairs. 2. ( often initial capital letter ) noting or pertaining to a political party advocating measures of progressive political reform. 3. of, pertaining to, based on, or advocating liberalism, especially the freedom of the individual and governmental guarantees of individual rights and liberties. 4. favorable to or in accord with concepts of maximum individual freedom possible, especially as guaranteed by law and secured by governmental protection of civil liberties. 5. favoring or permitting freedom of action, especially with respect to matters of personal belief or expression: a liberal policy toward dissident artists and writers. And yet it was a man who said he agreed with all those things who said " freedom comes from regulation" You do understand the whole of the US Constitution is a regulation on how the government handles and conducts itself to all those under its domain of power? That the Bill of Rights are regulations by which the government must operate under? That the next seventeen amendments follow the same as the Bill of Rights? Because a regulation, is a law. So yes, freedom comes from regulation. I can understand how it sounds odds to see it that way, but it is pretty true all the same.

BitYakin -> RE: Liberal delusions on racism (5/5/2014 1:15:48 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: joether quote: ORIGINAL: BitYakin quote: ORIGINAL: joether You would do well to look at what you wrote and consider how bias you have been towards liberals. You really do not understand them. They are first and foremost, your fellow Americans POT MEET KETTLE cause I have seen you bash repubs, conservative, and tea party people a lot harder! And what did I bash them on? 1 ) When they were behaving like little children 2 ) When they were being deceptive and nailed them in the act 3 ) When stating absolutely dumb and foolishly things 4 ) When evading discussions because the facts do not fit into their bullshit 5 ) When they get the facts wrong 6 ) That's its 'ok' for them to be disrespectful to others, but others can not be disrespectful back to them 7 ) When they belittle those opposing their viewpoints and/or arguments 8 ) When they cant handle the idea that their argument is full of shit and get called on it. Its not '...repubs...', its Republicans. Its not '...tea party....' its the Tea Party. Republicans follow an organization (generally speaking) called the Republican Party. The Tea Party, is an off shoot of the Republican Party. I find it easier to say 'Republican/Tea Party'. Being 'conservative' and 'conservatives' are very different. One is a political philosophy the other is a group of people following said political philosophy. Because conservatives are individuals not 'The Horde'; just like liberals. So it would make sense when referring to them and not their political philosophy to refer to them as 'conservatives', wouldn't it? And I corrected your quote, because you cant seem to do that either! HAHAHAH whatever you say dude, bashing is bashing regardless of how you JUSTIFY IT!!!

joether -> RE: Liberal delusions on racism (5/5/2014 1:18:26 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BitYakin you go look up REVERSE DISCIMINATION I found SEVERAL site giving almost the EXACT SAME DEFINITON but PRETEND ANYTHING YOU LIKE http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/reverse%20discrimination : the practice of making it more difficult for a certain type of person (such as a white man) to get a job, to go to a school, etc., because other people who were treated unfairly in the past are now being given an advantage http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverse_discrimination Reverse discrimination is discrimination against members of a dominant or majority group or in favor of members of a minority or historically disadvantaged group. Groups may be defined in terms of race, gender, ethnicity, or other factors. This discrimination may seek to redress social inequalities where minority groups have been denied access to the same privileges of the majority group. In such cases it is intended to remove discrimination that minority groups may already face. The label reverse discrimination may also be used to highlight the discrimination inherent in affirmative action programs. Reverse discrimination can be defined as the unequal treatment of members of the majority groups resulting from preferential policies, as in college admissions or employment, intended to remedy earlier discrimination against minorities.[1][2] Conceptualizing efforts as reverse discrimination began to become popular in the early-mid-1970s, the time period that focused on underrepresentation and affirmative action intended to remedy the effects of past discrimination. http://definitions.uslegal.com/r/reverse-discrimination/ Reverse discrimination describes policies or habits of social discrimination against members of a historically dominant group with an implication of unfairness. Sometimes reverse discrimination can result from affirmative action policies created to decrease discrimination in the workplace against minority employees. In many democratic societies, the dominant group is in the majority, and the disadvantaged is in the minority. It refers to any negative impact that affirmative action may have on whites, which is seen as equivalent to the illegal discrimination that has been faced by people of color and women for centuries. Reverse discrimination is sometimes considered synonymous with the term affirmative action would ya like a DOZEN MORE? And what is the original of the concept 'reverse discrimination'? Discrimination. Is this really complicated for you? Lets try it another way.... Do Republicans reverse discriminate to Democrats? Or do they just oppose them on anything and everything?

joether -> RE: Liberal delusions on racism (5/5/2014 1:22:45 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BitYakin quote: ORIGINAL: joether quote: ORIGINAL: BitYakin quote: ORIGINAL: joether You would do well to look at what you wrote and consider how bias you have been towards liberals. You really do not understand them. They are first and foremost, your fellow Americans POT MEET KETTLE cause I have seen you bash repubs, conservative, and tea party people a lot harder! And what did I bash them on? 1 ) When they were behaving like little children 2 ) When they were being deceptive and nailed them in the act 3 ) When stating absolutely dumb and foolishly things 4 ) When evading discussions because the facts do not fit into their bullshit 5 ) When they get the facts wrong 6 ) That's its 'ok' for them to be disrespectful to others, but others can not be disrespectful back to them 7 ) When they belittle those opposing their viewpoints and/or arguments 8 ) When they cant handle the idea that their argument is full of shit and get called on it. Its not '...repubs...', its Republicans. Its not '...tea party....' its the Tea Party. Republicans follow an organization (generally speaking) called the Republican Party. The Tea Party, is an off shoot of the Republican Party. I find it easier to say 'Republican/Tea Party'. Being 'conservative' and 'conservatives' are very different. One is a political philosophy the other is a group of people following said political philosophy. Because conservatives are individuals not 'The Horde'; just like liberals. So it would make sense when referring to them and not their political philosophy to refer to them as 'conservatives', wouldn't it? And I corrected your quote, because you cant seem to do that either! HAHAHAH whatever you say dude, bashing is bashing regardless of how you JUSTIFY IT!!! At least I state a principle to it. You just like to indiscriminately bash others. But since us liberals tend to be the majority on this forum, would that mean you 'reverse discriminate' in bashing people? Or just 'discriminate' in bashing them since you have NEVER bashed a conservative and/or libertarian on this forum?

joether -> RE: Liberal delusions on racism (5/5/2014 1:30:12 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BitYakin quote: ORIGINAL: Tkman117 Regulation of those who would abuse the freedoms of the individual, such as large businesses. We believe in personal freedom and a general moderation of businesses to prevent abuse of their workers. That's what he government should exist to do; to protect the rights of it's people. umm yet you are in favor of regulating my ability to be free to hire WHOMEVER I WANT for whatever dam reason I WANT how LIBERAL OF YOU, to protect one person's freedom you RESTRICT MINE Actually....yes. There is a big difference between RESPONSIBLE freedom, and RECKLESS freedom. Standing in public grounds to protect something you think the US Government should or should not do, while being respectful and courteous to others, is Responsible freedom. Rushing into a crowded theater and shouting 'FIRE' at the top of your lungs is Reckless freedom. A well regulated militia, is an example of a responsible freedom. A band of armed thugs is an example of reckless freedom. Asking the police officer that pulled you over in your car to explain why you were pulled over, before being searched, is an example of responsible freedom. Telling the officer to fuck off and drive off without another word is an example of reckless freedom. So you hiring an assassin to kill someone, is NOT a responsible freedom, but a reckless one. Its also illegal.... You hiring a nurse to take care of an ailing relative is NOT a reckless freedom, but a responsible freedom. Its also quite legal. 'Liberal' does not mean 'anarchy'....

Kirata -> RE: Liberal delusions on racism (5/5/2014 2:32:00 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: joether quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata Why don't you quote me 'hating people sitting on the welfare system' then, show us what you've got. Have you never stopped and actually looked at the number of threads on this forum? And the number of posts for each of these threads? That the Affordable Care Act has been law nearly four years now? And a year before that in discussions. That will take some time to research for all the juicy tidbits. I have some ideas on where to look. But it takes time all the same.... Stop fucking babbling about the Affordable Care Act. Focus on backing up your claim about me 'hating people sitting on the welfare system'. You'll be posting those quotes real soon now, right? quote: ORIGINAL: joether quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: joether Your idea is to spend money on those 3,000 resumes....BEFORE...weeding them down to the criteria for the job. You're making shit up again. Post #129... "You run the background check first. Because the next step is selecting which candidates to interview." Want to keep denying it? I think we're misunderstanding each other. Yes, you thin out the resumes to as small a group as possible. But "the next level of decision making" after that is selecting which among the applicants to schedule for an interview, for which you need the background checks. K.

DaddySatyr -> RE: Liberal delusions on racism (5/5/2014 2:37:13 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata Denying what? You select which candidates to interview, and then background check them. Is English a second language for you? K. I applied for a job, some years ago, that actually required a physical exam before an interview. I was a bit confused but I just assumed that the company felt it was in their interests to spend the money on a physical before deciding to even consider a candidate. A little weird but it's their money to "waste" is the way I saw it. Screen captures *still* RULE! Ya feel me?

Kirata -> RE: Liberal delusions on racism (5/5/2014 2:49:15 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr I applied for a job, some years ago, that actually required a physical exam before an interview. I was a bit confused but I just assumed that the company felt it was in their interests to spend the money on a physical before deciding to even consider a candidate. A little weird but it's their money to "waste" is the way I saw it. As a side note, I edited the post you quoted. I think it was just a misunderstanding. As to applying for jobs, I've never had to have a physical, and my SSN sufficed for the usual third-party records search, but on two separate occasions I had to be fingerprinted for an FBI background check. Of course, that was before it was considered "racist" to know who the fuck you're hiring. K.

DaddySatyr -> RE: Liberal delusions on racism (5/5/2014 3:04:07 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata ... Of course, that was before it was considered "racist" to know who the fuck you're hiring. K. Who says the federal government doesn't operate a "lottery"? [:D] Screen captures *still* RULE! Ya feel me?

Kirata -> RE: Liberal delusions on racism (5/5/2014 3:18:40 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr Who says the federal government doesn't operate a "lottery"? [:D] You know, that one always cracks me up... not the Feds but the states. Gambling is illegal in many if not most states, it "destroys families" we're told, all while those same states are booking ads for their lotteries on billboards and TV. Is it any wonder so many kids can't seem to think straight? And why try? What's the advantage when the world you live in is nuts? And that's without even mentioning the fact that the odds you're getting make a casino look like a charity operation. K.

tweakabelle -> RE: Liberal delusions on racism (5/5/2014 3:24:09 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic quote: ORIGINAL: MarkinLaredo Is it beneficial to minorities to bind them to a system that takes their confidence in themselves and replaces it with a crutch of alleged inability to make it on their own? QFT, and for the benefit of those who are too obsessed with framing their snarky reply to even consider reaching the end of the post. I am unaware of the details of how affirmative action policies work in the USA. Here in Australia they work as follows in relation to employment: 1. The best candidate for the job gets the job - always; 2. In the event that there are 2 applicants of equal merit, then the position is awarded to an applicant from the given minority group; 3. For certain positions where ethnic background is a critical factor (eg. community development officer for a service that targets Aboriginal people) the employer may, by prior application to the Anti-Discrimination Board, seek to have the position reserved for people from the target group. It is impossible to reconcile this actual policy with a rhetorical claim about "binding" people to a "a system that takes their confidence in themselves and replaces it with a crutch of alleged inability to make it on their own". If, and only if the USA system is similar to the Australian system, then people who make this claim clearly have no familiarity with the system they are criticising so broadly and trenchantly.

Page: << < prev 6 7 [8] 9 10 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625