From: arocho@acsu.buffalo.edu (Vance A. Arocho)
Newsgroups: alt.discrimination
Subject: Re: W.C. of AfAms
Date: 12 Apr 92 06:44:10 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: UB

From: john@anasaz (John Moore)
Newsgroups: alt.discrimination
Subject: Re: W.C. of AfAms

In article <1992Apr10.062636.12191@acsu.buffalo.edu> arocho@acsu.buffalo.edu (Vance A. Arocho) writes:
]***** Too bad he's the exception, not the rule. And too bad he has to be a con-
]servative in order for conservative politicians to help him further his career.
]*****

Well, that's how the system works. If he was a liberal, the liberal politicians
would help him, but not conservatives, wouldn't they? 

***** Agreed. However, would you put the conservatives' record for helping 
Blacks up against the liberals'?

BTW, your hero, President Bush, voted AGAINST the Civil Rights Bill of 1964.
What a guy, huh?
*****

]***** Supposedly Powell is a liberal on domestic issues so I think I can safely
]say that even if he calls himself a Republican we won't see him as any Republi-
]can Presidential candidate's choice for V.P. I have no problem with Powell but
]allow me to inform you that at the time of his appointment some in the military
]felt Powell wasn't the most qualified for the job. Hmmm...a Republican using
]quotas? Oh, no!!!
]***** 

Shock! Surprise! There was disagreement on who was the most qualified. I
assume you think this was racism or something?

***** I don't rule it out, no. It seems to me that African-Americans will never
be given the benefit of the doubt by Whites, who seem to have absolutely no
problem with doing so for their own. 
*****

]Not hypocritical at all. He didn't ASK for AA, and he apparently doesn't
]approve of it. That is not hypocritical - it is honest. Besides, he has
]also suffered from AA - lots of people conclude that he is successful
]because of AA, not because of his own merits.
]
]***** So presumably if Thomas knew at the time that he got into Yale Law 
]School through AA, he would have immediately dropped out and thus allow a more
]qualified (White) person to take his place? AA should not equal quotas, because
]quotas lead to tokenism, IMHO. If AA = quotas then yes, some un(der)qualified
]minorities will get hired/promoted and (non-Hispanic) Whites will stupidly con-
]clude that these individuals are representative of their ethnic group/race.
]*****

The problem with AA is that it DOES lead to quotas. My daughter yesterday
was looking at scholarships. She found most she could not get because
she is not black, and found one she could get (but others could not)
because she is a female math whiz. What sort of message do you think she
got from this?

Furthermore, as soon as AA is government sanctioned, it leads to quotas
because this is the only way a business or government agency can defend
itself against lawsuits.

***** So I guess your daughter wishes she were Black, huh? Blacks in this coun-
try got it so good, right? They're all livin' large, right, John?
*****

]***** See above (re: getting help from conservative politicians). But I don't
]think that the federal government has all the answers. Congress can make all
]the laws they want and provide all the economic and educational opportunities
]it can, but it can't make people take advantage of those opportunities, stay
]in school, start their own businesses, etc.
]*****

For once, we agree on something. If we could keep the feds out of
it (other than enforcing the 14th amendment), things would be a lot better.

]what you are implying. Black racism is a direct result of White racism. I am
]not saying that this justifies Black racism, but I think White racism must end
]first.

Bullshit! This really offends me. In spite of your disclaimer, by requiring
White racism to end first you are justifying black racism.

***** It was not my intent to offend you, John. I'm sorry you feel that way.
What I should have said was that society should concentrate more on ending
White racism. White racism is more prevalent and more widespread than Black
racism. Even if you regard Jesse Jackson as a 'Black racist' (I don't), I can
virtually guarantee you that he'll never become President. David Duke, on the
other hand, or someone like him, can. Some would say that this has already hap-
pened (see Reagan, Ronald Wilson; Bush, George Herbert Walker).

I am capable of admitting error and/or conceding a point. I notice, John, that
you didn't admit your error in asserting that I 'put words' in Clarence Tho-
mas' mouth and then 'condemned him for it'. You ignored the key phrase "if he
thinks". Care to admit your mistake, or could it be that it's too much for 
your ego to apologize to a Hispanic-American who stands up to you?
***** 

]***** Such as? And just because other appointees in the past had less qualifi-
]cation we shouldn't hold would-be appointees today to a higher standard? 
]Would you have said the above if Thomas were liberal?
]*****

I wouldn't have liked it, because I want a conservative on the court. That
has nothing to do with his qualifications.

***** The court was conservative enough already; for myself, I consider a li-
beral majority as bad as a conservative majority. I guess you'd be happy if the
U.S. were a one-party (Republican) nation. 

It's funny that Bush said Thomas was the most qualified person for the position
because when Souter was appointed, Thomas wasn't number two on Bush's list.
Bork's arrogance cost him, but from what I understand, he is generally regar-
ded as one of America's best legal minds. I'd rather have such an individual 
on the Supreme Court than Thomas.
***** 

]By whining, I mean:
]  -blaming every problem and failure of blacks on white people
]***** Fine. Analogously, then, America shouldn't blame all if its economic
]problems on the Japanese.
]*****

Of course america is whining when blaming all of its economic problems
on the Japanese. I don't condone this either.

***** How generous of you. Then you acknowledge that White people are whiners,
too?
*****

]
]  -not taking responsiblitity for their own problems
]
]***** I don't think I should have to take responsibility for your (generic 
]'your') bigotry and discrimination.

So don't. Live your life as best you can, and try to get people to change
their ways by persuasion, not coercion. I doubt if any bigot would get
less bigotted by coercion, by losing a job opportunity to AA, or by
being called a bigot.

**** Agreed. But flapping your gums won't do it, either, in most cases.

Peace.

-- 
"A young man who is a conservative has no heart; an old man who is a liberal 
has no brain." (Winston Churchill)
"Sin trabajo, no hay nada." ("Without work, there is nothing.")
Vance Arocho: arocho@acsu.edu (SUN)/V068PZYD@ubvms  (VAX)
Newsgroups: alt.discrimination