Landmark SCOTUS Ruling On Affirmative Action

[homersapien 11,431]

14 hours ago, auburnatl1 said:

You have to wonder when the maga guys will connect the dots. 35-40% of an electorate, no matter how convicted and passionate, isn’t 51%.  It’s a math thing. (Desantis or the others, who knows). Biden may not be firing on all cylinders - but if the options are dementia or crazyland part 2, Dementia will win. Again. Imo by a bunch.

Gotta love our options. 

Well, it's not like you need an actual majority of the popular vote to become president in this country.

[homersapien 11,431]

12 hours ago, GoAU said:

Other than the handful of knuckleheads that entered the Capital, you don’t see large groups of conservatives disregarding the rule of law.  A far cry from the BLM “mostly peaceful” protests that spanned dozens of cities. 

Well, how do you defend Trump's positive polling numbers with Republicans after he was indicted for withholding classified information?  Do you think they'll change after he's indicted for fomenting Jan. 6?

I think not.  MAGAs are a cult.

[homersapien 11,431]

1 hour ago, aubaseball said:

I can counter your stupid argument with this stupid argument.   You and rest of left wing nut jobs I guess are for lawlessness and the right Chop type takeovers.   You also must agree that the burning of businesses and cities are just mostly peaceful protests.    Next thing you know, we will be France with thousands in the streets burning and rioting because someone was shot.   But hey, it’s mostly peaceful and it’s warranted because of racism and the systemic oppression of minorities.   The rule of law be damned.   
you listen to the fools, MGT, Trump and whatever knucklehead that talks a bunch of sh$t, and really believe that something is really going to happen that will change our country.   I don’t believe one word they say.  It’s all smoke just to get elected.   

Yeah right.  A riot instigated by police abuse of minorities is exactly the same as one that is instigated by a sitting POTUS refusing the outcome of an election. One in which the rioters broke into our capitol, and physically threatened legislatures and the vice president.

That's insane.

It's no wonder you don't think the U.S. is a democracy.

 

Edited July 3, 2023 by homersapien

[KansasTiger 3,254]

25 minutes ago, homersapien said:

Well, how do you defend Trump's positive polling numbers with Republicans after he was indicted for withholding classified information?  Do you think they'll change after he's indicted for fomenting Jan. 6?

I think not.  MAGAs are a cult.

This isn't seen as support for law breaking as much as Washington corruption willing to do anything to stop him from running. And if broken corrupt washington can agree they don't want Trump, it makes people who support 'reform' just want Trump more.

I'm not defending this view. I'm just explaining it. But Trump had his chance and nothing changed in Washington, and he isn't the only candidate capable of running on reform now. There is another!

Edited July 3, 2023 by KansasTiger

[jj3jordan 2,059]

14 minutes ago, homersapien said:

Yeah right.  A riot instigated by police abuse of minorities is exactly the same as one that is instigated by a sitting POTUS refusing the outcome of an election. One in which the rioters broke into our capitol, and physically threatened legislatures and the vice president.

That's insane.

It's no wonder you don't think the U.S. is a democracy.

 

It is a constitutional republic. Not really a “wonder”, just a fact.

[TexasTiger 13,005]

18 hours ago, I_M4_AU said:

I’m saying you can’t see conservatives and anything other than Trump supporters and that is sad. You and Homer are a pair.  I see you different than a  hard core leftist because of your stance on gender affirming care, but that’s just me. 

I actually do see conservatives as something other than Trump supporters. In fact, I don’t see Trump supporters as conservatives as all. I respect never Trump conservatives. Frum, Sykes, French, etc. Principled folks I don’t always agree with, but deeply respect.

[aubaseball 2,648]

41 minutes ago, homersapien said:

Yeah right.  A riot instigated by police abuse of minorities is exactly the same as one that is instigated by a sitting POTUS refusing the outcome of an election. One in which the rioters broke into our capitol, and physically threatened legislatures and the vice president.

That's insane.

It's no wonder you don't think the U.S. is a democracy.

 

Just like clockwork…. I knew the police abuse excuse was coming for the justification of criminal activity.   I see you from a mile away.     What’s insane is that you literally believe what was happening was justified because of the boogie man racism theory in the year 2020.   Any justification for criminal behavior is unwarranted in my book and I have said time and time again on here that Jan. 6 should be treated like any other criminal behavior.   It’s folks like you that throw out a reason for what took place back in 2020 and think it was warranted.  

[TexasTiger 13,005]

I believe there is great value in having a diversity of viewpoints, experiences and backgrounds in both work & educational settings. I also think there’s a long history of racial discrimination that has disadvantaged racial minorities as a group as compared to white people as a group. The challenge with college admissions is that those decisions involve individuals and the disadvantages faced by individuals can vary widely and come from different causes. There are ways of achieving diversity that involve wholistic reviews and consider socioeconomic status. One can look at schools in economically depressed areas and take the top students even if their metrics don’t match every student in privileged areas. There’s other approaches as well. All that said, there’s ways to manage this issue even in light of this decision. The unexpected positive in this term of the Court are the voting rights decisions. Dems can hate on Kavanaugh all day long just for his abhorrent behavior during his confirmation hearing, but the fact is, next to Roberts, he’s the most reasonable conservative on the Court.

[auburnatl1 5,015]

Affirmative action imo was a noble intent to fix an historical unfairness and to encourage diversity. A societal repair job. However, it’s been in play for roughly 2 generations. And at its heart it reenforces tribalism  - indirectly pitting one race against the other. (It was never really intended to be permanent - the only question  was for how long would it help more than it screws up).

With a lot of reservations I agree it had run it’s course and needed to end.

[TexasTiger 13,005]

5 minutes ago, auburnatl1 said:

Affirmative action imo was a noble intent to fix an historical unfairness and to encourage diversity. A societal repair job. However, it’s been in play for roughly 2 generations. And at its heart it reenforces tribalism  - indirectly pitting one race against the other. (It was never really intended to be permanent - the only question  was for how long would it help more than it screws up).

With a lot of reservations I agree it had run it’s course and needed to end.

In the workplace the original theory was the need to expand the hiring pool. Folks tend to hire those in the same network. Affirmative action requires efforts to expand the pool- reach more networks, provide opportunity, have a process that’s not slanted toward maintaining the status quo. But it doesn’t require certain outcomes. That approach is still needed and has value. It’s more fair.

[auburnatl1 5,015]

1 minute ago, TexasTiger said:

In the workplace the original theory was the need to expand the hiring pool. Folks tend to hire those in the same network. Affirmative action requires efforts to expand the pool- reach more networks, provide opportunity, have a process that’s not slanted toward maintaining the status quo. But it doesn’t require certain outcomes. That approach is still needed and has value. It’s more fair.

I totally understand your point. But to make it, the requisite last word is always “fair”.  The gov has frantically used/tried busing, quotas, welfare, ect to achieve it. Massive, disruptive programs.  Admittedly I always get nervous when the gov (no matter how well intending) tries to makes society more fair because often it breaks more things than it fixes. At some point people have to pivot from an unfair mentality to personal accountability and work ethic.  Long term crutches are destructive imo.

I worked for a big 4 consulting firm for many years. Trust me - we would kill to hire diversity because the worse thing you could do to sell work was to look like a bunch of white guys. Anyway, it’s a very complex and grey area - and you may be right.

[cole256 17,084]

14 hours ago, jj3jordan said:

They also have a bunch of skinny white folk trying to get scholarships too and can’t.

Lol so typical. Did you even read what I replied to. As it usually go though when it's a discussion it goes to this. And skinny had what to do with anything? Are there not any fat white people at Auburn?

[cole256 17,084]

7 hours ago, DKW 86 said:

To be 100% truthful here, I worked for a community college, and many kids, white-black-whatever do not get schollies at Auburn. AU has the very enviable position of having far more applicants than places and that is why Auburn does not have to offer much in the way of schollies. UAT gives money away like candy. They apparently have to. My kids that went to AU had 27 ACTs and a good application for leadership, outside commitments, etc. I saw a few kids with 21-22s with multiple legacies get in as well. But I am talking mom-dad-sibling legacies all at the same time.

My UAT kids? They had ACT scores as low as (no lie) 15s and mediocre apps. My lowest UAT kid was a waitress at Hooters. Her career goal was to be an upper-tier manager at Hooters, ANYWAY, SHE COULD GET THERE. Was slow as a rock. When she announced that she was going to bama... I just had to bite my tongue. She was mid-pack at Community College. But she stayed very skimpily dressed and she had to interview in turdtown and was immediately accepted. She met with the interview panel Sat and knew by Tuesday she was accepted. They never asked any of her profs if she was really college material. None of us wrote recommendation letters. 

My point was that there isn't any shortage of African Americans that qualify for scholarships like someone suggested. There are brilliant students in Auburn's engineering program busting their butt while mentoring and tutoring others just to try to get $500 scholarship that for whatever reason these students couldn't get anything from Auburn so the leaf professor would go out and try to get businesses to donate money. 

Edited July 3, 2023 by cole256

[TexasTiger 13,005]

1 hour ago, auburnatl1 said:

I totally understand your point. But to make it, the requisite last word is always “fair”.  The gov has frantically used/tried busing, quotas, welfare, ect to achieve it. Massive, disruptive programs.  Admittedly I always get nervous when the gov (no matter how well intending) tries to makes society more fair because often it breaks more things than it fixes. At some point people have to pivot from an unfair mentality to personal accountability and work ethic.  Long term crutches are destructive imo.

I worked for a big 4 consulting firm for many years. Trust me - we would kill to hire diversity because the worse thing you could do to sell work was to look like a bunch of white guys. Anyway, it’s a very complex and grey area - and you may be right.

You’re not responding to what I said. Making an effort to attract a diverse pool and then hiring the best person is hardly a crutch. It’s fair.

[LPTiger 5,173]

As of 2021, 37% of black children were being raised in households with both of their parents present ("intact" households) and 67% of white kids were being raised in intact households.   The Institute for Family Services published data that year that show the drastically better outcomes in the areas of poverty, education and incarceration for children raised in intact homes.   The data doesn't lie.   Children from single parent households, whether black or white, are fighting with the odds stacked against them.   If we want to make America a better place for our children as a whole, the best place to start is figuring out how to keep families together. 

[Gowebb11 9,362]

17 hours ago, cole256 said:

Every year Auburn has a bunch of African Americans trying to get scholarships and can't get a penny

A school situated so close to cities like Atlanta, Birmingham, Mobile, and Montgomery (not to mention small towns) with high African American populations should have a much higher AA population than 5%. We need to do better in my opinion. 

Edited July 3, 2023 by Gowebb11

[arein0 977]

10 minutes ago, LPTiger said:

As of 2021, 37% of black children were being raised in households with both of their parents present ("intact" households) and 67% of white kids were being raised in intact households.   The Institute for Family Services published data that year that show the drastically better outcomes in the areas of poverty, education and incarceration for children raised in intact homes.   The data doesn't lie.   Children from single parent households, whether black or white, are fighting with the odds stacked against them.   If we want to make America a better place for our children as a whole, the best place to start is figuring out how to keep families together. 

 

[cole256 17,084]

31 minutes ago, LPTiger said:

As of 2021, 37% of black children were being raised in households with both of their parents present ("intact" households) and 67% of white kids were being raised in intact households.   The Institute for Family Services published data that year that show the drastically better outcomes in the areas of poverty, education and incarceration for children raised in intact homes.   The data doesn't lie.   Children from single parent households, whether black or white, are fighting with the odds stacked against them.   If we want to make America a better place for our children as a whole, the best place to start is figuring out how to keep families together. 

Money/poverty is number 1 reason for divorces and stress in relationships in general.

It's also number 1 reason for crime. If you really want America to be a better place it's trying to figure all the poverty out, which goes back to the circle of education and the best schools costing so much money and so on and so forth.

 

This is also a big reason why slavery is much more of an impact than just saying well there's no more slavery. Or even the travesties such as the dismantling of black Wall Street. Or actually segregation in school and residential zoning. It impacted things up to generations now. 

[auburnatl1 5,015]

1 hour ago, LPTiger said:

As of 2021, 37% of black children were being raised in households with both of their parents present ("intact" households) and 67% of white kids were being raised in intact households.   

Johnson started the “Great Society” programs in the 60’s, driven by the civil rights movement. This when busing and quota programs began being aggressively rolled out.  The intent then was to remake society along the lines people are still debating today. Ironically,  2 parent households in the black community  have eroded ever since. No one knows if there’s any correlation or other factors. But I agree, the cycle primarily begins and ends with the family unit.

https://theblackwallsttimes.com/2017/07/20/black-family-structure-in-decline-since-the-1960s-the-home-effect/

[LPTiger 5,173]

55 minutes ago, cole256 said:

Money/poverty is number 1 reason for divorces and stress in relationships in general.

It's also number 1 reason for crime. If you really want America to be a better place it's trying to figure all the poverty out, which goes back to the circle of education and the best schools costing so much money and so on and so forth.

 

This is also a big reason why slavery is much more of an impact than just saying well there's no more slavery. Or even the travesties such as the dismantling of black Wall Street. Or actually segregation in school and residential zoning. It impacted things up to generations now. 

Cole, I agree 100% on poverty but poverty is a result of single parent households.   Even among high school dropouts, intact households have more prosperity than single parent households.

[LPTiger 5,173]

21 minutes ago, auburnatl1 said:

Johnson started the “Great Society” programs in the 60’s, driven by the civil rights movement. This when busing and quota programs began being aggressively rolled out.  The intent then was to remake society along the lines people are still debating today. Ironically,  2 parent households in the black community  have eroded ever since. No one knows if there’s any correlation or other factors. But I agree, the cycle primarily begins and ends with the family unit.

https://theblackwallsttimes.com/2017/07/20/black-family-structure-in-decline-since-the-1960s-the-home-effect/

The "man in the house" rules of Johnson's welfare program coincided with the abrupt change in the % of married black women.   Before the 60's, a higher percentage of black women were married than white women. 

[icanthearyou 4,463]

47 minutes ago, auburnatl1 said:

Johnson started the “Great Society” programs in the 60’s, driven by the civil rights movement. This when busing and quota programs began being aggressively rolled out.  The intent then was to remake society along the lines people are still debating today. Ironically,  2 parent households in the black community  have eroded ever since. No one knows if there’s any correlation or other factors. But I agree, the cycle primarily begins and ends with the family unit.

https://theblackwallsttimes.com/2017/07/20/black-family-structure-in-decline-since-the-1960s-the-home-effect/

The "Great Society" was DOA.  It has nothing to do with it.  It would be more accurate to say the right wing push back against the New Deal, the Civil Rights Movement, the Feminist movement, the unions, democracy and, even the expanding middle class are at the heart of policy designed to consolidate power and, move that power to the right, to the capital class.  Read the Powell memo.

[auburnatl1 5,015]

1 minute ago, icanthearyou said:

The "Great Society" was DOA.  It has nothing to do with it.  It would be more accurate to say the right wing push back against the New Deal, the Civil Rights Movement, the Feminist movement, the unions, democracy and, even the expanding middle class are at the heart of policy designed to consolidate power and, move that power to the right, to the capital class.  Read the Powell memo.

I appreciate your perspective and you have some fair it points.  Again, I’m not correlating. What I am implying is the quest for fair takes more than a magical government program. Been tried. And tried.  And will be forever tried. To actually work it has to go both ways.  Individuals and communities have to also accept responsibility on improvement and drive - or it’s just more parasitical whining and blaming about failure.  

This isn’t Atlas Shrugged  stuff. Imo both sides are partially right. Conservatives have a point on personal accountability/ consequences and liberals have a point on “fairness” - trying to level the playing field.

[homersapien 11,431]

7 hours ago, aubaseball said:

Just like clockwork…. I knew the police abuse excuse was coming for the justification of criminal activity.   I see you from a mile away.     What’s insane is that you literally believe what was happening was justified because of the boogie man racism theory in the year 2020.   Any justification for criminal behavior is unwarranted in my book and I have said time and time again on here that Jan. 6 should be treated like any other criminal behavior.   It’s folks like you that throw out a reason for what took place back in 2020 and think it was warranted.  

But that is what sparked the riots - the George Floyd murder.

And I didn't say it justified anything. I didn't approve of the violence or rioting.  I understand and supported the peaceful protests - of which there were literally thousands, but the violence and rioting were not only not justified, they were counterproductive.  

And you were the one who brought them up.  Typical MAGA irrational nonsense to make such a parallel.  It didn't surprise me.

Nevertheless those peaceful protests - as well as the violent as riots - were about racism.  Jan 6 was about overturning our country's election. 

That's fact.  You can't alter facts that no matter how you spin it.

And sedition is not just "any" criminal behavior, which should be obvious to any thinking person.

 

Edited July 3, 2023 by homersapien

[icanthearyou 4,463]

1 minute ago, auburnatl1 said:

I appreciate your perspective and you have some fair it points.  Again, I’m not correlating. What I am implying is the quest for fair takes more than a magical government program. Been tried. And tried.  And will be forever tried. To actually work it has to go both ways.  Individuals and communities have to also accept responsibility on improvement and drive - or it’s just more parasitical whining and blaming about failure.  

This isn’t Atlas Shrugged  stuff. Imo both sides are partially right. Conservatives have a point on personal accountability/ consequences and liberals have a point on “fairness” - trying to level the playing field.

Perhaps, but just like a bad economist, you are forgetting about the significance of power.  And, like a bad political scientist, you are forgetting the true political concerns, society and capital.

I would also dismiss you idea that government has tried and tried to produce a better country, a better society.  At times it has, at others, just the opposite.  The one thing that is constant throughout history,,, relative equality is vital to a prosperous, peaceful, civil society.  Whether by indifference or design, moving more people to the margins of society is unsustainable. 

Our problem is inequality.  More specifically, accelerating inequality. 

You analysis is highly flawed because, you are blaming people for their condition.  That is reasonable in the micro.  However, when the problem is macro, you have to realize that societies are driven from the top, not the bottom.  Power resides at the top, not the bottom.  You have to look at the radical shift that is a push back to old liberalism, beginning in the 1970s.  You have to understand that this shift was in fact, orchestrated and, highly "successful".

I don't mean to sound as critical as I do.  It does come through that you realize being always on the political right or, the political left is foolish.  For that,,, I commend you.