How is this allowed at a publicly funded School?

The right does not say that. That would be your straw man.

The right simply does not think that college admissions should be based on skin color but rather on merit.

 

your fluffing of biden's affirmative action pick is touching but you have no idea if she is more accomplished than anyone on this board. I'd bet my last dollar my LSAT score and GPA at Yale was better than what she had at Harvard

 

should not be allowed, someone should file a complaint

 

Nah. What you did, is rather than addressing the topic, you opted instead to change the subject . You are fooling no one.


Hey look!..... a SQUIRREL!!!!

 

It’s freakin’ Berkeley people … nuff said

 

it was not right when southern conservatives did it, and it's not right now

 

It was the Democrats that fought tooth and nail against School desegregation..... Joe Biden being the prime example.

 

southern conservatives who at the time called themselves democrats - we know who supports the Confederate flag and States today

 

yet who is the first person to bring up the Golden Cow in this thread.... lol

 

It makes sense that they would support the flag under which slavery was legal for 77 years.

And to this very day their party is the one who promotes things like we see here with this blacks only graduation event.

 

sure does

 

It was the Black Students Association at the University to do this on school grounds. And that is an organization recognized by the University.

 

I'm not "justifying" anything. I'm doing the same thing as you think you are: pointing to a seemingly racially biased attitude.

 

No, in recap, you cannot read. The thread already had the name, "Uncle Clarence." I did not give it that name. Therefore, when I passed along the there was news of more apparent corruption, by Thomas, so that Gateman_Wen would need make his thread, tracking that corruption, into a series, I only added a "More corruption from," before the preexisting name of the thread, and a "number 2," after the name of his thread. My typing the name of his thread, is not "racist," and it is not calling Justice Thomas, an "Uncle Tom."

In truth, though, as I stated, Thomas fits the definition of that term. That is not just opinion, but fact. In that thread, I posted the Frontline episode on the Justice (& a little bit, on his wife). Watch it, if you are ignorant of how Thomas became a Supreme Court Justice, with only one year's experience as a judge. In Thomas's role in the Reagan administration, he was playing that part, it cannot be denied. So, my stating this fact, is still not the same as using the derogatory term. That was your original contention, wasn't it-- that I go around, using this term, wantonly? And all you have is my repeating the title of a person's thread, which uses something akin to that term. And then, without using the term, I commented-- since the term being alluded to, in the thread title, had become a subject of conversation-- that though I would not have used that term, nonetheless, "that was the role Thomas chose, to climb the ladder of power." Again, this is a factual statement. And your contentions about my calling people Uncle Toms, is a false statement.

 

And that doesn't follow blacks, in your discriminatory view? PLEASE! That was a major reason why Clarence Thomas was against Affirmative Action-- he believed that he had earned his spot at Yale, but all his fellow students, he believed, just assumed that he would not have been accepted w/out some racial benefit. Then, when he graduated, and all his classmates only needed to mention Yale, to have plum jobs handed to them, in Thomas's opinion, no one wanted to hire him.

Also, in my supporting evidence-- which, BTW, your contentions could not be so easily dismissed, if you tried using that, yourself, sometime-- I quoted someone on the Right (and he's far from the only one) who is still depreciating the abilities of a black woman who had risen to be named to the Supreme Court, by calling her an "affirmative action choice." So much, for it is only the " racist grounds" of college admission, which gets held against blacks, by the Right, especially these days.

See below for my re-quoting of the words that show your contentions to be a fairytale.

No, it does not end there-- it follows them, ever after; and I had quoted one of your fellows, to show that this is the case! So your asserting that I am putting forth a straw man, could not be any weaker of a charge. Here is a reminder from my post, but if I were to go back to the threads on Brown- Jackson's appointment, I could fill up the rest of this thread, with pejorative remarks.

Turtledude said: ↑
There is no valid argument for affirmative racism theoretically and it is even less justifiable in the real world where all it does is give wealthy black kids who have no business getting into top schools, a huge advantage over far smarter or higher achieving white and Asian kids-who are often less financially fit than the black recipients

Turtledude said: ↑
quotaMayor might be eclipsed by
Turtledude said: ↑
Biden's affirmative action choice
<that is, Justice Ketanji Brown- Jackson>

 

1. It doesn't matter if other racists use a racially charged term to denigrate a black individual first. You don't have to do it as well.

2. You're still defending calling a black man a racial epithet to disparage their success.

Spare us the nonsense. You said it. You defend it. Do better and move on.

 

Again, I defended nothing. And you are wrong, once more, in characterizing me as merely following suit, behind someone else using a racial epithet-- which would be wrong. However, even if one doesn't like that a football team is named the Redskins, if that is their name, and you want to refer to them, you may need to use the term, yourself. Of course, in that analogy, the person could just call them "Washington." But I did not have that alternate option, in referring to a second installment of an "Uncle Clarence" thread.

 

We cannot ever achieve a colorblind society while willfully segregating ourselves by color.

 

Some may do trump, trump, trump.
Then many others do but, black, black, black.

 

Where does it say "blacks only" ?

 

People can read your posts and determine for themselves what they mean. Calling someone an Uncle Tom is effectively saying they're a sellout to their race. And then in response to someone saying that calling Thomas an Uncle Tom was racist, you said, "IN TRUTH, THAT WAS PRECISELY THE ROLE THAT THOMAS CHOSE TO CLIMB THE LADDER TO POWER."

There is no truth to that. And, it's racist.

 

Try reading the article. They have been doing it for years

 

FoxHastings said: ↑
Where does it say "blacks only" ?

 

Do you have anything to say on the actual topic or just some bloviation to try to deflect from it?

It sounds like you need to go have a conversation with turtle dude.

Or would you rather pretend that I said those things and then try to argue them with me?

 

You feel like I'm responsible for the words of other posters on the right because they said it you feel like I hold that position.

Several of your colleagues on the left around here are very fond of using that racial slur so if I'm going to use your own standards against you that must mean that you also hold that position.

Or I'm only irresponsible for the words of other posters and you are excluded from such a standard?