So you're grounded in reality and common sense? I hadn't noticed until you pointed it out. Is there anything else that you can claim about your own superiority to the rest of us that might not be obvious? Please, do go on.
What does where I choose to live have to do with any of this? Intellectual intelligence will only get you so far. I worked with a fellow right out of high school that could give you the square root of any number you would give him. He was the final test away from being an educator. He had the common sense and the emotional intelligence of a rock. I have many examples from this guy alone that would make your head spin. Give me a good mixture of all three of these things, intellectual intelligence, emotional intelligence and common sense and we'd have the perfect president. Trump, unfortunately, does not display all three of these together very well either.
Well you are the only one that claims to live in reality and have sense. That means the rest of don't? You're either superior to the rest of us or you're judging us as inferior. Which one is it?
I never said that I could chose my own ancestry. I said that YOU couldn't chose it for me. You don't get to decide what my ancestry is. That was the crux of the argument Republicans were trying to make.
Here is the exact sentence from your post on April 6th: "I have the right to decide my ancestry not anyone else."
Either way you slice this thing, Joe, your argument falls flat and goes against common sense and reality. So, you have a belief that most people would say is not realistic. I am not saying, nor have I said, that I am superior to you because of this. I might ask you to check your ego at the door and perhaps entertain the idea that you could be wrong.
If you could pick your ancestry, we could put an end to affirmative action. Would Joe be happy with that?
How does it fall apart and go against common sense and reality? You have to back up a statement with something. Nothing isn't something. How do you know what most people believe? You know what that logical fallacy is called right? Here, let me be clear why you just said exactly nothing here. In argumentation theory, an argumentum ad populum (Latin for "appeal to the people") is a fallacious argument that concludes that a proposition must be true because many or most people believe it, often concisely encapsulated as: "If many believe so, it is so". My argument, which you keep ignoring, is that YOU don't get to decide MY ancestry or anyone else's ancestry for that matter. How arrogant does one have to be to say that they get to determine someone else's ancestry? So who does have a claim to their own ancestry in your opinion? I'd like to hear how you decide who gets to be in my family tree.
Why is it always old white people that want to end affirmative action? And while I'm asking, why is it almost exclusively old white dudes driving just about any Corvette that you ever see? What is it with old white dudes and Corvettes?
Please point out where anybody in this forum called out that they get to determine your ancestry in any post. I used this example to point out my common sense and reality theory about you. To the normal person reading this thread and knowing the other post where this was first discussed, you are making a brilliant case.
Why is it that people for affirmative action (and a great many of my liberal friends) have this anti-white, anti-male (or masculinity?) sentiment? Is there something wrong with whites, males, or white males? Your statement is false. I’m mixed race, and I strongly oppose affirmative action. You shouldn’t get privilege for a skin color. That’s what happened during colonial times, and in my opinion, that sort of sentiment should be left in the 1600s.
This is something I have puzzled over and I finally resigned myself to this..... These self appointed progressive minded folks are living in a bygone era. However they wag their fingers at us that have moved way beyond the color barrier so they can make it appear as though we are the problem. It has all the shutzpah of two kids pointing the finger at one another blaming each other one for dropping moms fine china...... It doesn’t fit a liberal platform for folks of color to consider themselves the same as everyone else. Lots of votes would be lost if that were to happen. So the finger wagging goes on.
Historically, traditionally, institutionally, this country has long privileged the white male over every other demographic, and I am a white male and have benefited from this privilege. While white males aren't the only privileged members of this society, they are the 800 pound gorillas at the top of the heap. Who else would affirmative action impact or be aimed at as much as white males? No you shouldn't get privilege for your skin color but since there are plenty of advantages for simply being born a white male that are not extended to other demographics, the only way to compensate for this institutional, historical, and traditional injustice is to artificially advantage other demographic subgroups in targeted applications so that they can one day be so equal to white males that it wouldn't make any sense to advantage one skin color over another. We are nowhere near that point in our society yet. Not even close. I find it strange that I have to explain the basis for affirmative action in this day and age. All I can figure is that there must be some rock out there with noise cancelling headphones.
Sorry Joe, but all I can hear is granting racial privilege to a specific group. And since I am a VARIETY of those groups, where would I stand? This is contrary to MLK and Gandhi’s message of peace and equality. Dust of your portrait of a Spanish conquistador who thought that he was superior to the natives, D.F Malan who thought he was superior to coloreds, and George Wallace who pandered to Southern voters on a racial basis. If you’re such a fan of identity politics, why don’t you agree with me? I’m more diverse than you, so my opinion matters more! If that’s the case, don’t argue and be quiet. And, if you insist that blacks are so underprivileged, where would Oprah Winfrey, Lebron James, and a host of other, privileged, wealthy, famous individuals land who will be far more wealthy, privileged, and famous than I’ll ever be?
The bygone era was when blacks were living under Jim Crow. When blacks were not allowed at lunch counters. When segregation was the law of the land. When genocide of Native Americans we governmental policy. When discriminating against gays was legal, and of course still is legal. When interracial marriage was illegal. Yes, those things are mostly gone but the injustices deeply rooted in our institutional, societal, and cultural system remain. The people that created the earlier injustices previously mentioned are still benefiting from that system economically, culturally, and socially. Minorities have been in this country as long and longer than white males but for some reason, white males remain the "most equal" demographic after hundreds of years. That isn't an accident. It's intentional and it will take an intentional undoing for everyone to have a place at the table. Remember; The opposite of wealth isn't poverty, it's justice. Unless you understand that, you'll always be confused by your your own society and those trying to change it for the better.
A man standing on his own two feet and carving out his way in this world is all this boils down to. That is basic human nature. You shame him when you choose to make his path easier or more “equal”. You are drawing attention to the difference between you and him. On the other hand, I simply see another man. So I submit that my view lends more power to that other mans position. He does have all the same tools, hands and brains that I have and can accomplish everything that I can. I don’t see black, white, yellow or brown people. I simply see people..... Though my daughter says that I am peach....