Pesident Clinton

[JohnYayas]

Assumptions made due to someone's ethnicity is, by definition, racist.

No, it actually isn't. I don't think half the people throwing around the "racist" word actually know what it means.

[planters]

Regarding your question regarding the behavior of the alternate raced drivers, I don't think that anyone would get angry for being stopped after making such a dumb move. It's stopping without cause (or perceived cause in some cases) that results in a degree of "attitude". I do the same when stopped by traffic police in third world countries for no cause other than looking for a bribe.

This is not a response to my question. I said what are the ODDS in the cop's EXPERIENCE that two black males stopped for the same actions would have behaved as you did?

In any case this difference in treatment according to a study I saw is caused in part by unconscious bias. I don't think that's all though.

No! Not unconscious at all, but a reasonable response to their direct experience.

President Obama gave a great speech where he described how hard it is to be a police officer these days.

Duh! What a jack ass. This is like a wife beater lamenting the brutal treatment of a beaten spouse because she continually refuses to comply with his commands.

Regarding your final counter question, if I understood you correctly, such assumptions are textbook racist.

Wrong again! This is the published, formal POLICY of institutions such as Harvard and many California schools among others. This is not what I "feel". This was a rhetorical question, because the odds are 100% that the black (and Hispanic) will be judged as if their SAT scores were hundreds of points higher than they actually are. Yavas is correct here as well. Many people use the term racism, but do not understand it's meaning. These school's actions are not racism, but racial bias and that is the premise of this challenge.

You know, as horrified as I am at the likelihood that equal rights for many Americans will suffer at least in the short to mid term

This acknowledges that you are aware that the equal rights of Americans are subject to the whims of the power brokers, the elite. This is B**l S**t. They do not have this "right" and soon will not have this power. To mollify us by saying that this transgression will only be for a limited time (dependent on what criteria?, whose sensibilities?) is an incredibly weak rationalization; as you look down at your feet, shuffle around and sneak a peak to see if you got away with it. You didn't.

My best two buddies in high school was a smart Haitian guy and a smart Jewish guy.

I gave you a pass on your driving example as anecdotal, but not here. Your fellow students choose what they did for various reasons, but that proves nothing. I could say I know a brilliant Eskimo. That doesn't mean that all Eskimos are brilliant, nor that I met the only one. It is meaningless, except in a narrow sense to me alone.

there is something much more important that we haven't been discussing: climate change.

Here, I agree and disagree. I disagree that "climate change" is more important than institutional, racial, sexual and religious bias. I do agree that we haven't been discussing it. It is a non sequitur. This is not even tangential to the current discussion and comes across as a diversion from a position that you are having trouble defending. I'm happy to discus this topic as well, but lets not flop around.

[dkumpula]

Just so we are clear going forward:

Racism:
1. a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human racial groups determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to dominate others or that a particular racial group is inferior to the others.

2. a policy, system of government, etc., based upon or fostering such a doctrine; discrimination.

noun 3. hatred or intolerance of another race or other races.

Racist: (noun) a person who believes in racism, the doctrine that one's own racial group is superior or that a particular racial group is inferior to the others.

(Some among you may just find it easier to look in the mirror.) . To those same people, having a racist as president still doesn't give you a pass. Judging individuals is fine. Broadbrushing by skin color is immoral.

Regarding my personal stories, they are examples from my experience to point out that you should not make assumptions by race. It isn't fair to anyone.

Eric: I'm surprised at your reaction to President Obama's speech. In this same speech he remarked how challenging it is for police to distinguish criminals from non criminals when someone looks like (including dress) as the majority of the people you arrest for crimes. I thought it was a very balanced view that you would generally agree with.

I also don't get why you despise the government. I haven't had my rights infringed upon by the government at any level. My beef is that they don't protect us from private interests. You attack liberals, but they haven't been in power in either house in congress for several years. The Supreme Court has been conservative forever regardless of some "progressive" rulings. The right has accomplished no forward (or backward) progress for six years, yet you now appear to embrace them now like the second coming of Jesus. Why?

Finally regarding my climate change comments, they were after I addressed all other issues being discussed. It is directly related to the political positions of the candidates that this thread started with. It is not something anyone on this planet should dismiss unless you simply have no defense for Donald's stated positions. In fact, i think this issue trumps any other issue discussed in this thread. You have children. As a man that generally recognizes the value of science, why isn't this a critical concern for you?

P.S. I would generally agree that the best student should get the university slot and the most qualified person should get the job/promotion. Bias can come in both the flavor of unfairly promoting a candidate or suppressing another.

[JohnYayas]

Now that you have learned what racism is please cite examples where you believe Trump has acted as a racist.

[planters]

1. a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human racial groups determine cultural or individual achievement

Right. That is why the actions of these institutions are not necessarily racist. The racial bias in favor of Blacks and Hispanics does not mean that they consider these groups to be inferior. These advantages may be given to them because they feel that there are cultural reasons for this policy etc. But, the bias exists and this is why I give this example against "White male" advantage.

(Some among you may just find it easier to look in the mirror.)

This is specious.

Eric: I'm surprised at your reaction to President Obama's speech.

You're surprised? Based on my posts, this is predictable. My analogy was not snarky. It is spot on. Obama has undermined the rule of law, supported criminals and invited terrorists into the White House and he laments the difficult job of the cops? Give it up!

The right has accomplished no forward (or backward) progress for six years, yet you now appear to embrace them now like the second coming of Jesus. Why?

I am beginning to see that you don't read my posts. I do not support the "right". You and several others on this forum respond as if your see my philosophy as a caricature that you find it easier to argue with.

I also don't get why you despise the government. I haven't had my rights infringed upon by the government at any level

This is the third time you have resorted to anecdotal experience to support your position. Do you not understand the fallacy of anecdotal examples to argue for general policy?

Finally regarding my climate change comments, they were after I addressed all other issues being discussed.

No, you have not. You have failed to provide credible arguments for your statements. John and I and I suspect many others are waiting for your examples of Trump's raciest statements and actions. You have not shown proof of your claim of "white advantage". If you admit that you cannot or that you "feel" this way, but you don't have the time or the interest to support this then fine, I'm with you and let's move on.

[dkumpula]

Right. That is why the actions of these institutions are not necessarily racist. The racial bias in favor of Blacks and Hispanics does not mean that they consider these groups to be inferior. These advantages may be given to them because they feel that there are cultural reasons for this policy etc. But, the bias exists and this is why I give this example against "White male" advantage.

Understood, but these affirmative actions were put in place in the 60s to help provide some opportunities for groups that were actively suppressed by white supremacists and the like for centuries. A year ago, I would have agreed that the time for such programs had passed, but now I have the KKK marching proudly through Charlotte so I'm not so sure anymore.

In any case, this still is a one sided argument on your part. Are you really saying that if you were born a poor black child in Detroit or Chicago that you wouldn't have had a harder time getting to where you are today?

This is specious.

I think it is a fair statement, but wasn't directed at you, Eric.

You're surprised? Based on my posts, this is predictable. My analogy was not snarky. It is spot on. Obama has undermined the rule of law, supported criminals and invited terrorists into the White House and he laments the difficult job of the cops? Give it up!

What the heck? Its your turn to back up your comments with facts, I think.

I do not support the "right". You and several others on this forum respond as if your see my philosophy as a caricature that you find it easier to argue with.

Perhaps, but a year ago I thought you were a die-hard Libertarian perhaps with an extra dose of "government oppression" mixed in. It's easier to broadbrush using terms like right and alt-right, especially when including the larger group supporting "the Donald". You know, those guys that think 4.5% unemployment is terrible.

This is the third time you have resorted to anecdotal experience to support your position. Do you not understand the fallacy of anecdotal examples to argue for general policy?

Sure I do, but most of the racists and islamaphobes we have in our midsts lack any real experience with such cultures. To give you more ammo though, I am sitting in Malaysia right now and just had breakfast with just about every ethnicity and religion you can think of. It was pretty damn peaceful and friendly with the exception of one feisty 4 year old boy who thought I was in the way of his breakfast choices. . Oh, and 'the Donald' was screaming through the tv that was on until I had the manager change the channel. I think that helped all of us enjoy our meal more.

No, you have not. You have failed to provide credible arguments for your statements. John and I and I suspect many others are waiting for your examples of Trump's raciest statements and actions. You have not shown proof of your claim of "white advantage". If you admit that you cannot or that you "feel" this way, but you don't have the time or the interest to support this then fine, I'm with you and let's move on.

I will make this a point when I can quote him in his own words. I told you I couldn't from here. I have provided responses to nearly every other point including references to scientific studies all the way down to antidotal experiences from a particularly handsome guy who has travelled and worked around the world. What more could one ask for in such a discussion?

Now can you please address climate change without further deflection? I really do want to hear your view regarding Donald's claims that it is a hoax, that wind turbines are bad for human health and that we need to remove restrictions on burning coal and fossil fuels.

[edison]

Clinton, obama , trump they are not in control. Big corperations like Nestle and Mossanto are who ever controls the water is the winner. Michigan is going to be bone dry soon....... Sign the petition please....

Oh and if you Google Nestle you will quickly how criminal they really are......



https://actions.sumofus.org/a/nestle...4731&source=fb


Michigan is about to sell 100M gallons of groundwater to Nestlé for $200



Only miles away from Flint, Michigan -- where the government switched the water supply and poisoned the community's water to save a few bucks -- the Michigan water authorityis considering letting Nestlé double the amount of groundwater it takes to bottle and sell for profit.


The cost to Nestlé? $200 a year.

Tell Michigan’s Department of Environmental Quality to cancel this ridiculous plan.

Residents are furious, and rightly so. This is a massive corporate giveaway.

Nestlé is already the largest owner of private water sources in Michigan, and the water-guzzling corporation has deep ties to Governor Rick Snyder’s office. Deb Muchmore, the head spokesperson for Nestlé Michigan, is married to Governor Snyder’s former chief of staff. Perhaps we should stop wondering why Nestlé keeps getting so much from the state government for so little.

Luckily Michigan water regulators haven't made a final decision yet -- and we still have time to raise a huge outcry and pressure them to back down. What's more, the pressure is working -- after public pressure earlier in November, the Department of Environmental Quality promised to hold a public hearing and accept public comments on the project.

No one fights Nestlé’s greedy water grabs like SumOfUs members. Just last summer, the corporate giant was taking millions of gallons of water from Canada’s western water table for pennies while wildfires threatened the entire coast. Hundreds of thousands of us stood up and said: “NO!” We made front page news in Canada and got the government to commit to review water rates. And we’ve helped do the same in California and in Oregon -- where the tiny county of Hood River stopped Nestlé in its tracks.

Tell the State of Michigan to say no this massive corporate giveaway. Stop Nestlé now.

[planters]

In any case, this still is a one sided argument on your part.

Not quite,but almost. It is a one sided argument, but maybe we'll just have to leave there.

This is near the core of our very different positions. You said "you". I have very dedicated parents who worked hard, remained, married (to each other) and are simply... brilliant. They passed on their values if not all their opinions and my sibling and I inherited these values and very good genetics. We have achieved everything we have through merit despite the institutional advantages we were excluded from. Given these very same characteristics in the same measure, your "po black child" would have done at least as well.

To give you more ammo though, I am sitting in Malaysia right now and just had breakfast with just about every ethnicity and religion you can think of.

I don't need any more ammo. As you said, this has been a one sided argument and isn't evolving.

I will make this a point when I can quote him in his own words. I told you I couldn't from here. I have provided responses to nearly every other point including references to scientific studies all the way down to antidotal experiences from a particularly handsome guy who has travelled and worked around the world. What more could one ask for in such a discussion?

What, are you on lock down? George Clooney is pretty good looking and is an idiot. These references you hint at, are not obvious and if you are prevented from supporting your positions then you should probably refrain from calling Pence a White supremacist and Trump a racist so casually. These are very strong positions to hold without any evident proof.

Now can you please address climate change without further deflection?

The correct word is defer. I have given you multiple opportunities to defend your position and you choose not to or are simply unable. You have been the one to try to deflect this discussion and I am not willing to be lead astray as if, as you claim, it has been "fully addressed.

OK, we'll move on.

[edison]

Still screaming to eachother? That won,t get you know where, no one is right or wrong. Its better to set your differences aside and sign the petition. People need your voice.......

[planters]

edison,

I, at least for one was writing for others who may or may not choose to read this.

Regarding your petition, this sounds like a slam dunk except for one thing. Is the ground water in Michigan, in any way limited? THIS is not a rhetorical question. I do not know. If it is simply restricted without cause and Nestle is being allowed to have what others are not or alternatively, not paying a market price for this resource, then this should absolutely be stopped. If it is limited and Nestle is not compensating the owners (Residents of Michigan) what they demand, then this too should absolutely be stopped.