Hello Bob,

The point of affirmative action is to insure success is
distributed regardless of race. Only those who oppose AA must
believe there is no racial compenent to poverty.

The point of affirmative action is to discriminate in favor
of minorities - in most cases meaning blacks. Once equality

You really are not familar with the history of affirmative
action, are you.

Of course I am! Of course I am! It is a history of discrimination!

Some years back I found one of the annual almanacs, don't recall
which but one of the top ones, had regular analysis of affirmative BK>action. They found that 90% of the benefits of affirmative action
went to whites.

White folks created it for their own benefit. By creating affirmative
action, white folks expanded the work force for employers. An expanded
work force meant more qualified workers for employers to choose from.

Although not part of affirmative action, this example says it all -

Paul "Bear" Bryant, head football coach at Alabama, wanted to offer
full scholarships to black athletes. But he was unable to do so due
to opposition from Alabama alumni. So he got the Alabama athletic
director to get in touch with the University of Southern California
athletic director, thus setting up a football game between Alabama
and USC. The game was televised nationally, and played at Alabama.
USC easily won the game, by a wide margin. I will not repeat the
taunts made by Alabama fans, which were very carefully edited out
from television. The Alabama alumni got the picture, and from that
day forward allowed black athletes to receive full scholarships.

has been reached, affirmative action programs are no longer
needed and should be dismantled. However, once inequalities
re-emerge, affirmative action programs should be put back
in place. This on again/off again approach is the only way
affirmative action programs can work in a truly fair manner.

Since Equality has not been reached, that's not relevant, yet.

The best that can be hoped for is a +/- percentage. Not really
a quota system, but an approximation.

Which is true. We need affirmative action for all the poor in
America.

Bob Dole said much the same thing, but wanted to change it
from being a race-based program to being an economic-based

Which would mean, in the real world, focusing on white poor
first.

That was Bob Dole's idea, basing his argument on economic terms
rather than on racial terms. Problem was he didn't follow up with
an actual plan of his own.

Black folks are more discriminatory of their own than any
other race. There are dark-skinned blacks, light-skinned
blacks, blacks who pass for white ...

When you are reduced to survival level your competitors are not
those well off, but those like you scrambling to survive.

Let's see how well those who are presently on disability
(SSDI) manage to survive when their checks are cut by 20
percent in 2016. Let's see how those on disability manage
to survive when conservative Republicans undo at least some
of Ronald Reagan's 1984 reform that expanded the kinds of
disabilities covered.

Yes, they worship the name of Reagan, but his actual policies
are anathema.

Ronald Reagan was another time, another place. When the sun went
down, politicians would meet after hours and have a few drinks.
Solutions were found, cabbies made money, and floozies found love.
Today there is no love, cabbies have no money, and solutions are
nowhere to be found.

Do you think the Congress will do anything to save the SSDI
trust program? By doing nothing, the cuts take effect

Not if the Tea Party can stop them.

Not to worry. Ted Cruz will come to the rescue. After all, he has
already stopped the Democrats. He has also stopped the Republicans.
So who else is left to stop him? You? Please. Give me a break.

automatically. What will happen is Republican lawmakers
will say something along the lines of "Let's compromise" to
the Democrats, and then refuse to go along with anything
the Democrats propose. To obstruct, by any means
necessary, resulting in getting exactly what they want,
while blaming Obama at the same time.

Well, yeah, but that's their SOP.

Ted Cruz has a new way.
Well, not exactly new.
More like the Cruz way.

After gutting the SSDI program, Republican lawmakers will
move on to gutting the Social Security program for retirees
age 65 and over. Won't that be grand?

Gutting SSDI will cause so much trouble, and even trying to end
Social Security, the republicans will lose all the control they
have now.

That is why the GOP had to gut SNAP first.
By starving the poor, there will be fewer mouths
to feed. And that means less opposition from
the poor, disabled, and elderly. Keep doing
that for a few decades and then Republicans
will win every election by default.

let's keep SSI and medicaid, as funding for those programs

Imagine that. Folks who never worked a day in their life
are better off than folks who worked their butts off their
entire lives.

An awful lot of those on SSI and Medicaid have worked, and
Medicaid is 2/3rds the handicapped and elderly, last I checked.

They have not worked enough to earn the credits they need for
retirement. For most people, 40 credits (quarters) is the minimum.
IOW, ten years of work over a lifetime (up to age 65). It should
also be kept in mind that not all governors have signed on to expanded medicaid, leaving many people unable to obtain insurance through
Obamacare.

seems to me that most folks would prefer having a bit of
free time after having worked for sixty or seventy fucking
years.

Trust me, you are right. Though is just seems to me like a long
string of days off, or a very long vacation.

That's (marginally) better than terminal sleep (death).

When I was young they could tell us, if we succeeded in school
we would have jobs. Now they tell kids, if they succeed in
school it's less likely they will be the ones without jobs,
someone else will be. Not much of a guarantee.

Social Security used to be a guarantee. Not any more.
Pensions used to be a guarantee. Not any more.

Social security will survive, unless the republicans get so much
power they can eliminate it quickly enough so the resistance can
not get organized.

They'll probably water it down to the point that nobody will notice
when the plug is pulled.

LOL.... irony as it's best... vote for the man who doesn't give a
rat's ass about you.

You have to remember - we boil our crawfish LIVE. :)

Hmmm... that seems a bit... disturbing...

Not for the crawfish. They wave their little claws out the
water and stare at us with those beady little eyes ...

Thinking how they would like to reverse the positions?

When you go to pick up a crawfish, the crawfish run backwards as they
snap their little claws trying to give you a handshake. Of course, I
know that from past experience, being a real pro in conducting crawfish
races. However, I have retired from that activity long ago, allowing
today's youngsters to have all the fun. But I still enjoy boiling
those little beasts and eating as many of them as are placed on the
table ...

--Lee

--- MesNews/1.06.00.00-gb
* Origin: news://felten.yi.org (2:203/2)

Hello Bob,

it. Not only that, but unlike many black men, Strom
Thurmond was not a deadbeat dad. So don't you go around

Thurmond was the worst sort of deadbeat dad, one who would not
only not even admit he had a daughter, but one who saw to it his
daughter was classified in a group that was considered inferior
and discriminated against under the law.

Please, Bob. You've got your racists are mixed up. There was
Strom Thurmond. And then there was Jesse Helms. And of course,
the ever so loveable George C. Wallace. But none of those people
were really racists. Not hardcore racists, anyway. Not like
Lester Maddox. Lester was a racist's racist and really knew how
to go on a rant -

"That's part of American greatness, is discrimination. Yes, sir.
Inequality, I think, breeds freedom and gives a man opportunity."
- Lester Maddox, racist extraordinaire

So many white men are deadbeat dads. It's part of a society that
is breaking down, pushing the middle class into the poor and
turning the US into a third world country.

Here is what Strom Thurmond had to say about that -

"The white people of the South are the greatest minority in this
nation. They deserve consideration and understanding instead of the persecution of twisted propaganda."
- Strom Thurmond

telling anybody that Strom
Thurmond was a racist who did not care about black folks.
He loved them. He loved them very much ...

No, he did not.

"She walks well, she looks good. Let's see how she kisses."
- Strom Thurmond

Obviously, Strom and that 16-year-old black kid loved each other
very much. At least for a short period of time. And I am shure he
was thrilled to death when he learned he was going to be a daddy.
I mean, legal rape does have its benefits ...

When is Jindal on the menu?

He's on the republican's menu.

When we pick up our crawfish, they are brown. We heat up
the water

Is that a reference to Jindal?

Jindal is a Brown guy who painted himself Red.

Remember, Jindal graduated from Brown University.
And then he turned Red as a Republican ...

--Lee

--- MesNews/1.06.00.00-gb
* Origin: news://felten.yi.org (2:203/2)

The point of affirmative action is to insure success is
distributed regardless of race. Only those who oppose AA must
believe there is no racial compenent to poverty.

The point of affirmative action is to discriminate in favor
of minorities - in most cases meaning blacks. Once equality

You really are not familar with the history of affirmative
action, are you.

Of course I am! Of course I am! It is a history of
discrimination!

So, when did it start, who ordered it, and why?

Some years back I found one of the annual almanacs, don't recall
which but one of the top ones, had regular analysis of affirmative BK>>action. They found that 90% of the benefits of affirmative action
went to whites.

White folks created it for their own benefit. By creating
affirmative action, white folks expanded the work force for
employers. An expanded work force meant more qualified
workers for employers to choose from.

It said 90% of the benefits of AA went to white people.

Employers did not need a law to hire non-whites.

Although not part of affirmative action, this example says
it all -

Paul "Bear" Bryant, head football coach at Alabama, wanted
to offer full scholarships to black athletes. But he was
unable to do so due to opposition from Alabama alumni. So
he got the Alabama athletic director to get in touch with
the University of Southern California athletic director,
thus setting up a football game between Alabama and USC.
The game was televised nationally, and played at Alabama.
USC easily won the game, by a wide margin. I will not
repeat the taunts made by Alabama fans, which were very
carefully edited out from television. The Alabama alumni
got the picture, and from that day forward allowed black
athletes to receive full scholarships.

Which has nothing to do with what I said. Nor does it have
anything to do with affirmative action.

has been reached, affirmative action programs are no longer
needed and should be dismantled. However, once inequalities
re-emerge, affirmative action programs should be put back
in place. This on again/off again approach is the only way
affirmative action programs can work in a truly fair manner.

Since Equality has not been reached, that's not relevant, yet.

The best that can be hoped for is a +/- percentage. Not
really a quota system, but an approximation.

It's not even approximately equal.

Which is true. We need affirmative action for all the poor in
America.

Bob Dole said much the same thing, but wanted to change it
from being a race-based program to being an economic-based

Which would mean, in the real world, focusing on white poor
first.

That was Bob Dole's idea, basing his argument on economic
terms rather than on racial terms. Problem was he didn't
follow up with an actual plan of his own.

Maybe he didn't mean it.

...

Do you think the Congress will do anything to save the SSDI
trust program? By doing nothing, the cuts take effect

Not if the Tea Party can stop them.

Not to worry. Ted Cruz will come to the rescue. After
all, he has already stopped the Democrats. He has also
stopped the Republicans. So who else is left to stop him?
You? Please. Give me a break.

There are two effective political parties in DC. The Democratic
Party and the Tea Party. The republicans are just a figment of
some Tea Baggers imagination any more.

...

After gutting the SSDI program, Republican lawmakers will
move on to gutting the Social Security program for retirees
age 65 and over. Won't that be grand?

Gutting SSDI will cause so much trouble, and even trying to end
Social Security, the republicans will lose all the control they
have now.

That is why the GOP had to gut SNAP first.
By starving the poor, there will be fewer mouths
to feed. And that means less opposition from
the poor, disabled, and elderly. Keep doing
that for a few decades and then Republicans
will win every election by default.

Except! The rich need poor people to serve them, so starvation
will just mean they have to force more of the middle class into
the poor. In the end they will find their policies self
destructive.

...

Imagine that. Folks who never worked a day in their life
are better off than folks who worked their butts off their
entire lives.

An awful lot of those on SSI and Medicaid have worked, and
Medicaid is 2/3rds the handicapped and elderly, last I checked.

They have not worked enough to earn the credits they need
for retirement. For most people, 40 credits (quarters) is
the minimum. IOW, ten years of work over a lifetime (up to
age 65). It should also be kept in mind that not all
governors have signed on to expanded medicaid, leaving many
people unable to obtain insurance through Obamacare.

Yep, but even in Ohio the republican governor is trying an end
run around the republican legislature to get Medicaid expanded.

...

Trust me, you are right. Though is just seems to me like a long
string of days off, or a very long vacation.

That's (marginally) better than terminal sleep (death).

Nah, that's a lot better.

When I was young they could tell us, if we succeeded in school
we would have jobs. Now they tell kids, if they succeed in
school it's less likely they will be the ones without jobs,
someone else will be. Not much of a guarantee.

Social Security used to be a guarantee. Not any more.
Pensions used to be a guarantee. Not any more.

Social security will survive, unless the republicans get so much
power they can eliminate it quickly enough so the resistance can
not get organized.

They'll probably water it down to the point that nobody
will notice when the plug is pulled.

Then we must take to the ramparts at the first attempt!

Now, how's that French revolutionary song go?

...

BOB KLAHN bob.klahn@sev.org http://home.toltbbs.com/bobklahn

... Rationalization is White Wash for the soul.
--- Via Silver Xpress V4.5/P [Reg]
* Origin: Fidonet Since 1991 Join Us: www.DocsPlace.org (1:123/140)

Hello Bob,

it. Not only that, but unlike many black men, Strom
Thurmond was not a deadbeat dad. So don't you go around

Thurmond was the worst sort of deadbeat dad, one who would not
only not even admit he had a daughter, but one who saw to it his BK>>daughter was classified in a group that was considered inferior
and discriminated against under the law.

Please, Bob. You've got your racists are mixed up. There

They all look alike to me...

...



BOB KLAHN bob.klahn@sev.org http://home.toltbbs.com/bobklahn

... A mind is a terrible thing to... something or other...
--- Via Silver Xpress V4.5/P [Reg]
* Origin: Fidonet Since 1991 Join Us: www.DocsPlace.org (1:123/140)