Guest NoCalMike Posted January 16, 2003 Report Posted January 16, 2003 Ok, this another issue where BOTH sides IMO have good points. However, with the Trent Lott garbage just dying down, and the Republicans to once again try to convince everyone how diverse they are, why in the hell is Bush going after affirmative action right now?? Does he think things through at all?? Now, there is a lot of people who will seperate the issues from each other and think it through, but I am sure Bush and his advisors have GOT TO KNOW that there are plenty of IDIOT VOTERS out there that will relate the Trent Lott stuff to the attacks on affirmative action and try to raise hell. If Bush wants to end affirmative action well ok fine, I may not agree, but we don't have to agree, however you'd think the guy with the "most important job in america" would be a little smarter in picking when to address certain issues. Thoughts?
Guest RobJohnstone Posted January 16, 2003 Report Posted January 16, 2003 I am against affirmative action. I feel that the better man or woman should always get the job. Wheter he/she is black, white,asian,hispanic,europeon,... whatever. That is the way it should be. --Rob
Guest NoCalMike Posted January 16, 2003 Report Posted January 16, 2003 The problem is that the social and economic classes set certain people up for a disadvantage long before college even starts. I wish affirmative action was not necessary, but without it, the system would go back to being totally biased. Anyways, my post wasn't really meant to be about affirmative action itself, moreso about Bush's decision to go after such a race-sensative issue RIGHT AFTER the Trent Lott stuff died down. It just doesn't seem like a smart move on his part.
Guest Dangerous A Posted January 16, 2003 Report Posted January 16, 2003 NoCal, just let it go man. Bush is going to be out in 2004, it's just a year and a half more. He'll be out because he has done a sub par job and the liberal media has done a fine job slicing and dicing him since he's been inaugurated. But unfortunately then a democrat will be in office and they will do about the same sub par job because there isn't much difference between Republican and Democrat presedential candidates. Bipartisanship sucks, IMO.
Guest NoCalMike Posted January 16, 2003 Report Posted January 16, 2003 NoCal, just let it go man. Bush is going to be out in 2004, it's just a year and a half more. He'll be out because he has done a sub par job and the liberal media has done a fine job slicing and dicing him since he's been inaugurated. But unfortunately then a democrat will be in office and they will do about the same sub par job because there isn't much difference between Republican and Democrat presedential candidates. Bipartisanship sucks, IMO. Well, if we go to war, then it is almost a given he is out. However if he is smart, he will avoid the war at the last minute and call himself a "man of peace" hahahaha. Dangerous A, as long as you do YOUR PART in 2004, and vote for whoever, then I will "let it go" Since you registered to vote, I assume you might be a little more motivated to vote than before, so just go for it. You will LOVE the cool little "I voted" sticker you get. Alright, that is all.
Guest Dangerous A Posted January 16, 2003 Report Posted January 16, 2003 Fuck the sticker. BTW, don't be surprised if I write in a vote for Steve Austin for governor or president just to be an ass. All kidding aside, I will probrably vote for anyone BUT a Republican or Democrat. I don't see eye to eye with either parties platforms and the other parties are so small and minuscule that they are a meer blip on the political radar. But in 2004, I will contribute to that blip.
Guest RobJohnstone Posted January 16, 2003 Report Posted January 16, 2003 buchanan is neither and a great pick for president. --Rob
Guest NoCalMike Posted January 16, 2003 Report Posted January 16, 2003 buchanan is neither and a great pick for president. --Rob Oh please.....well Pat is a "blip" on the radar screen, so I guess I would support your decision rather than voting for Bush's 2nd term. I will probobaly end up voting for Nader or whoever runs for the Green Party, but I am not sure, I entered a search for political parties and there are so many "blips" it is crazy, however, with the Green Party making a little TINY bit of ground each election, I better ride the gravy train.
Guest RobJohnstone Posted January 16, 2003 Report Posted January 16, 2003 buchanan grows every election also. I don;t support the green party, way to socialist. --Rob
Guest NoCalMike Posted January 16, 2003 Report Posted January 16, 2003 buchanan grows every election also. I don;t support the green party, way to socialist. --Rob Hey Rob, I just saw your line under the banner about Annie. Is it me or does she remind you of a liberal version of Marney.
Guest RobJohnstone Posted January 16, 2003 Report Posted January 16, 2003 only for the fact they are lesbians. I hates marney but every once in a while she would argue a good point where as annie is just plain dumb. And to top that off she has a posse to protect her. I might add she has a fascism complex heh --Rob
Guest kkktookmybabyaway Posted January 16, 2003 Report Posted January 16, 2003 "Ok, this another issue where BOTH sides IMO have good points. However, with the Trent Lott garbage just dying down, and the Republicans to once again try to convince everyone how diverse they are, why in the hell is Bush going after affirmative action right now??" This case has been in the courts for years now -- it's not like Bush picked this case out of a hat and said, "Yeah, I think I'll try to end AA right now." Besides the U of Mich.'s policy is b.s. Giving extra points to disadvantaged applicants?! Please...
Guest DrTom Posted January 16, 2003 Report Posted January 16, 2003 Bush and his advisors have GOT TO KNOW that there are plenty of IDIOT VOTERS out there that will relate the Trent Lott stuff to the attacks on affirmative action and try to raise hell. Isn't that what you're doing right now? Just saying. The timing is unfortunate, but the point is valid.
Guest cartman Posted January 17, 2003 Report Posted January 17, 2003 for once I actually like something Bush is doing...wow...
Guest lomasmoney Posted January 17, 2003 Report Posted January 17, 2003 Hey don't bash u of m's admissions policy. It may be sad that my skin color can get me into a school like that but thats the way shit goes
Guest lomasmoney Posted January 17, 2003 Report Posted January 17, 2003 I still can see the arguements for and against affirmative action
Guest kkktookmybabyaway Posted January 17, 2003 Report Posted January 17, 2003 "Hey don't bash u of m's admissions policy. It may be sad that my skin color can get me into a school like that but thats the way shit goes" And I'll be saying something similar when driving past you at 1 a.m. when the police pull you over for driving a nice car...
Guest Samurai_Goat Posted January 17, 2003 Report Posted January 17, 2003 Racism is racism. Being admitted into some colleges can now be more of a question of race than ability. That is racism. I don't see where the confusion comes from.
Guest NoCalMike Posted January 18, 2003 Report Posted January 18, 2003 I would be hard-pressed to find someone who can name at least 5-10 white folks they know that were denied their college application.
Guest lomasmoney Posted January 18, 2003 Report Posted January 18, 2003 Frankly the police don't bother me. My dad has been a cop for the last 16 years, so I have respect for what they go through. I will admit there are asshole cops but there are also some very hardworking police officers who do their job the right way. In fact, I don't think that I deserve to get in to Michigan because of my race. Both of my parents are college graduates and good jobs. My first car was a 91 Tempo that broke down on me from the start. My mom took money she saved for my college education to buy me my current car since my dad wasn't cooperating with her at the time. I didnt want her to spent her hard earned money on a car i really didnt need. I was basically pointing fun at the fact that I could get in before some of my better qualified friends due to my race. I really hope that Michigan doesn't look at my race and admit me based on that. I would rather have them look at the fact that I am a good student who has good test scores. It would make me happy if i got in because I'm the oldest of three kids who has basically taken on adult responsibilities since i was 11 years old. When I visited the Michigan campus today, i picked up a copy of the school paper which had a cartoon poking fun at President Bush. It basically was him giving a speech about how affirmative action is wrong. The reporter responds by asking him about the "grandfather clause" which allowed him to go to Yale and the White House.
Guest SupaTaft Posted January 18, 2003 Report Posted January 18, 2003 U of M eats bags of dicks. GO STATE!! -Taft
Guest lomasmoney Posted January 18, 2003 Report Posted January 18, 2003 State was happy to accept me and that's where i'll probably go
Guest lomasmoney Posted January 18, 2003 Report Posted January 18, 2003 and U of M girls can't hold a candle to MSU girls
Guest Vern Gagne Posted January 18, 2003 Report Posted January 18, 2003 Bipartisanship sucks, IMO. Well, if we go to war, then it is almost a given he is out. However if he is smart, he will avoid the war at the last minute and call himself a "man of peace" hahahaha. How is it a given Bush is out if we go to war? So far he's got a U.N resolution passed, let the inspectors look in Iraq. He's talking tough with Hussein but so far no military action has occured. It wouldn't suprise me if some sort of war resolution inside the UN isn't passed in the next couple months.
Guest Kingpk Posted January 18, 2003 Report Posted January 18, 2003 People seem to think Bush won't be reelected in the event of war, since his father didn't. They forget that H.W. Bush had over a 90% approval rating after the Gulf War, but he pissed it away by mismanaging the economy and various domestic issues. It didn't help that Clinton was a charismatic SOB either.
Guest ant_7000 Posted January 18, 2003 Report Posted January 18, 2003 Well im for AA (like for the millionth time), I wish it wasn't necessary but it has to be in place. Its funny to me Bush benefitted from AA and now he's against it. After I saw a news story on "Name Discrimination" (And I do have a ethnic name) reinforce my view on AA.
Guest spiny norman Posted January 18, 2003 Report Posted January 18, 2003 I agree that AA has its pros and cons. But, in the end, I think it has more benefits than disadvantages. It is necessary until equality occurs.
Guest Dangerous A Posted January 19, 2003 Report Posted January 19, 2003 I still don't like the idea of affirmative action. To me, it's shifting the discrimination from one group to the next. If the idea behind AA is for retribution against the white man, then come out and say it. I think AA is morally bankrupt. I'm not saying I have a better solution, but I can't get behind something that is still discrimination. I think one step in the right direction would be perhaps to leave the "check the box next to your appropriate race" part off of college applications. From there, other people paid more than me will have to figure it out.
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now