  Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 6 Registered: 06-2006 Posted From: 24.210.96.119 |
What do you guys think about this? Wikipedia Entry: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M CRI Official Ballot Language: http://www.michigancivilrights .org/ballotlanguage.html (Message edited by thejesus on July 10, 2006) | ||
Warriorfan Member Username: Warriorfan Post Number: 439 Registered: 08-2005 Posted From: 68.43.81.191 |
It passed in California, arguably the most liberal state in the Union. My prediction is that it will pass, 60% in favor and 40% opposed. | ||
Livernoisyard Member Username: Livernoisyard Post Number: 1039 Registered: 10-2004 Posted From: 69.242.223.42 |
Ditto! Guaranteed winner. The opponents' reaction to it shows they're worried. | ||
Rrl Member Username: Rrl Post Number: 566 Registered: 12-2003 Posted From: 71.213.228.30 |
Wow, think of the effect it would have on City contractor hiring practices if they actually awarded contracts based on best proposal and qualified bid, rather than MBE/WBE standards. It might actually expand the pool of potential bidders, increase the competitive base and eventually lower costs; just have to do something about that pesky nepotism & cronyism though. I'm not so certain of it's passing at the polls however, it will be much closer than most folks think. BTW, what's up with the handle Thejesus? Got a god complex? At any rate, welcome. | ||
Tndetroiter Member Username: Tndetroiter Post Number: 92 Registered: 12-2005 Posted From: 149.149.5.24 |
It will be a glorious day when Michigan ends affirmitive action and I am glad that I will be back in Michigan in time to registar to vote and to vote "yes" to the MCRI. | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 8 Registered: 06-2006 Posted From: 68.62.6.138 |
"BTW, what's up with the handle Thejesus? Got a god complex? At any rate, welcome." Nah, it's a character from a Cohen brothers movie who I find amusing. It's been recognized by a few people on the board already and I've only been here a week or so. | ||
Tndetroiter Member Username: Tndetroiter Post Number: 102 Registered: 12-2005 Posted From: 149.149.5.24 |
so does that mean that you're a "petter-ass"? | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 9 Registered: 06-2006 Posted From: 68.62.6.138 |
Haha...not quite... I just thought he was funny...John Turturro is great... | ||
65memories Member Username: 65memories Post Number: 260 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 68.74.29.226 |
From the News: Affirmative action ban slips Voter poll: Less than half back proposal barring racial preferences Gary Heinlein / Detroit News Lansing Bureau May 16, 2006 LANSING A statewide ballot proposal to ban affirmative action in college admissions and government jobs may not be the slam dunk that its advocates had hoped. A new independent poll shows that when voters read the Michigan Civil Rights Initiative as it will appear on the ballot Nov. 7, less than half intend to vote for it. Earlier surveys had pointed to greater support but that was before the ballot language was finalized. A "yes" vote supports a ban on affirmative action; a "no" vote supports a continuation of affirmative action. Support has dropped from 64 percent in January 2004 to 46 percent now, and all because the words "to ban affirmative action programs" have been included in the proposal voters will see, according to pollster Steve Mitchell. The percentage of undecided voters grew from 14 to 26 percent. The margin of error is plus or minus 4 percentage points. The measure's advocates had proposed ballot language that did not include the words "affirmative action," but state elections officials added them to the final version of the proposition the board approved earlier this year. The question that Mitchell's poll takers presented to potential voters in 2004 did not include those words. "It's what causes a big drop in support," Mitchell said. "Under the old language, there's no doubt it would have passed. Under the new language, it's uncertain whether it will." West Bloomfield resident Brian Cybul, 45, finds it logical that the ballot language would be a factor in declining support for the proposal. He said it's a tough issue for most Michiganians to decide. "My inclination is to vote against banning affirmative action," added Cybul, an accountant. "I don't think TV advertising should decide these things. I think reasoned debate should decide them." Mitchell rates the constitutional amendment's November prospects at 5050. Both major political parties, Gov. Jennifer Granholm and challenger Dick DeVos, labor unions and major businesses are against it. "Opponents are going to spend a lot to defeat it," Mitchell said. "That means it's going to be very interesting." Language once was less of an issue than whether the proposal would get on the ballot at all. A civil rights group called By Any Means Necessary disrupted a Michigan elections board meeting and fought in court to block it, claiming minorities signed petitions because they were misled into thinking the proposal favors affirmative action. The state Court of Appeals ordered the measure onto the ballot, ruling supporters had turned in a sufficient number of valid registered voters' signatures. Mitchell also found: · More men than women favor the amendment. Men support it by a 4729 percent margin; women 37 percent26 percent. · Caucasians favor it 44 percent24 percent; African Americans oppose it 60 percent17 percent. · It’s favored by Republicans (55 percent13 percent) and independent voters (46 percent24 percent, but opposed by Democrats (45 percent28 percent). Salem Township resident Jim Kress wasn't among those polled, but he counts himself firmly among those ready to vote for the affirmative action ban. A retired computational scientist, Kress, 55, worked 14 years as an engineer and planning director at Ford Motor Co. and held managementlevel jobs at small companies during his career. "The country was founded on the concept that all people are equal under the law and no one person is more equal than others," he said. "Any justification for affirmative action and I never thought there was any lapsed a long time ago. Companies now go out of their way to make sure they do not discriminate." | ||
Livernoisyard Member Username: Livernoisyard Post Number: 1041 Registered: 10-2004 Posted From: 69.242.223.42 |
Polls on "politically-correct" issues tend to be false and misleading, even if conducted fairly and randomly. The only poll on this issue that matters will be this autumn. | ||
English Member Username: English Post Number: 512 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 75.7.133.24 |
I hope it passes. Frankly, I'm sick of hearing underqualified whites complain about affirmative action. | ||
Livedog2 Member Username: Livedog2 Post Number: 655 Registered: 03-2006 Posted From: 24.223.133.177 |
G-d, let's hope not! Livedog2 | ||
Ron Member Username: Ron Post Number: 208 Registered: 03-2006 Posted From: 66.174.79.240 |
I guarantee 100% the MCRI will fail. Furthermore, it's mere presence on the ballot virtually guarantees Granholm's re-election. Livernois is wishing in Wonderland that it will pass, but most people realize that Jennifer Gratz is merely a woman scorned, who had no "entitlement" to be admitted to UM, no matter what her GPA was. It is quite humorous (and quite hypocritical) that most Republicans rail against "entitlements", yet are in favor of white applicants being admitted to most public universities despite the fact that they have nothing to offer other than the fact that they are white. As most of us who have actually experienced a higher education realize, there is much more to be learned than simply what occurs in the classroom. We have to learn what it means to socialize and interact with those who don't look like us. We have to be able to be able to produce in a global environment. This simply cannot be done if all students in the classroom are of one complexion. If Republicans are really opposed to such entitlements, let's also oppose the "legacy" factors that most universities grant potential students. As the Word of God says, the Lord "spews out of his mouth" those lukewarm folks, i.e. those hypocrites (The GOP). | ||
Deputy_mayor_2026 Member Username: Deputy_mayor_2026 Post Number: 104 Registered: 04-2006 Posted From: 205.188.116.137 |
"Affirmative action forever!" Kwame, I don't think so... | ||
Livernoisyard Member Username: Livernoisyard Post Number: 1042 Registered: 10-2004 Posted From: 69.242.223.42 |
Once upon a midnight dreary, Ron--a knee-jerk Democrat candidate for the MI legislature--uttered: "If Republicans are really opposed to such entitlements, let's also oppose the "legacy" factors that most universities grant potential students. As the Word of God says, the Lord "spews out of his mouth" those lukewarm folks, i.e. those hypocrites (The GOP)." Hmm. Let's see... Those "legacy" provisions are usually attributed to the elitist UoM in the People's Republic of Ann Arbor, a rabid hotbed of Democrat thought. Is Ron implying that those Dems at the far left UoM are hypocritical? Does candidate Ron care to oppose the "legacy" provisions and formally speak his mind about them with the Regents at UoM? In case Ron forgot, they are: * David A. Brandon * Laurence B. Deitch * Olivia P.Maynard * Rebecca McGowan * Andrea Fischer Newman * Andrew C. Richner * S. Martin Taylor * Katherine E. White | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 12 Registered: 06-2006 Posted From: 24.169.224.43 |
Ron: If Jennifer Gratz didn't/doesn't/shouldn't have an entitlement to be admitted to U of M, then it's difficult for one to make any kind of valid argument whatsoever as to why anyone with lower numbers than her SHOULD have that entitlement(which is the case at the moment, and what Gratz v. Bollinger was based on). To me, the whole 'diversity' argument, which does have its merits, is easily trumped by the fact that, at the present time, hard-working, qualified applicants to Michigan's public universities are being denied admission over applicants with lower numbers for no other reason than they were born into a particular race. As Frank Beckman from the Detroit News puts it, "Affirmative action just moves different groups to the back of the bus." You can read his article at the link below. It was pretty much what turned myself, a working-class Democrat, into a supporter of of this ballot measure. "Affirmative action just moves different groups to the back of the bus" http://www.detnews.com/apps/pb cs.dll/article?AID=/20060616/O PINION01/606160311/1008 | ||
Oldredfordette Member Username: Oldredfordette Post Number: 106 Registered: 02-2004 Posted From: 68.60.177.56 |
The anti affirmative action group should have run an honest campaign. I think that what will (and righteously so) kill that ugly regressive bill. | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 14 Registered: 06-2006 Posted From: 24.169.224.43 |
They did run an honest campaign from what I’ve read…all the accusation about people being ‘duped’ into signing the petition didn’t seem to have any merit, and the state election officials agreed. Plus, anytime you try to get rid of affirmative action, you’re always going to have accusations like the ones that are out there from the group who has something to lose, so that’s to be expected. That ‘anti-affirmative action group’ as you call them submitted more than 508,000 signatures for certification, 450,000 of which were certified, which is far more than the 317,757 needed for certification...so anyone pretending like this ballot measure doesn’t deserve a vote because a bunch of yahoos claim they were ‘tricked’ somehow into signing it are kidding themselves. Regardless, anyone who signed the petition without actually reading what they were signing first and now regrets it will have the chance to vote against the ballot measure in November. In the end, the peoples’ voice will be heard, one way or the other. | ||
Andylinn Member Username: Andylinn Post Number: 121 Registered: 04-2006 Posted From: 64.141.144.2 |
Affirmitive action is not a reward for being a certain race, it is a supposed to be a societal leveler. Maybe you don't support RACE BASED admissions. (I don't 100% either) but the MCRI is a bill that bans ALL preferential measures. i.e. place of origin (detroit vs. grosse pointe.) Our schools funding system is awful. Rural and urban schools are F*****d, because of a lower tax base. Why should a kid RANDOMLY born into a wealthy family get better schooling? All kids deserve EQUAL SCHOOLING, but they don't receive this. Affirmative action was simply put in place to try to give some kids with SLIGHTLY lower test scores, but bright minds, a chance to succeed. Sure, there are problems with the program, and it NEEDS to be changed. I'm also sure that it doesn't succeed 100% of the time. I'm sure some slip through the cracks... HOWEVER, if we can elevate SOME or even a FEW, then there is some merit in affirmative action. Tell me... Who is a more deserving student? A white girl whos parents make 200,000 in combined income and goes to some school in Farmington Hills with a 3.5 grade average / 1250 SAT - OR an African American girl in a single parent family in brightmore who tried her best, lived accross from a drug house, but didn't lose her life to drugs, went to some shitty school on the west side, but STILL managed to get 3.3 and 1200 SAT... Vote no on the MCRI. | ||
Alsodave Member Username: Alsodave Post Number: 737 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 208.49.95.12 |
Amen... | ||
Rjlj Member Username: Rjlj Post Number: 88 Registered: 11-2003 Posted From: 63.171.81.130 |
Deserving of what? They seem to be pretty much equal with regards to intelligence. It comes down to who wants a higher education more and who can complete it. | ||
Eastsidedog Member Username: Eastsidedog Post Number: 626 Registered: 03-2006 Posted From: 12.47.224.8 |
Andylinn knows what he's talking about. Unfortunately most people in Michigan don't. I bet it will pass. | ||
Andylinn Member Username: Andylinn Post Number: 122 Registered: 04-2006 Posted From: 64.141.144.2 |
rjij - i guess my point is that in that scenario I made up, the white girl from farmington hills gets EVERYTHING and does marginially better than the african american girl who has few things going her way... if they were living in the same city, with the same social conditions, don't you think that the africa american girl would FAR out perform the white girl? think about it. I used to be a loud cynic of afirmative action... no longer. | ||
Warriorfan Member Username: Warriorfan Post Number: 440 Registered: 08-2005 Posted From: 68.43.81.191 |
You're right, but that's not how AA operates. It doesn't give a shit what your SES is, it's race-based. So the black kid who grew up in the burbs to wealthy parents and went to Cranbrook gets 20 points on his UofM admissions scale just for being black, while the white kid who grew up in the trailer park across from a meth lab, with an alcoholic mother and a non-existant father gets squat. Now is that fair? NOTHING in the MCRI language will ban SES-based affirmative action, but I get the feeling that most supporters of AA could give two shits about socioeconomic status and care ONLY about race. (Message edited by warriorfan on July 11, 2006) | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 15 Registered: 06-2006 Posted From: 24.169.224.43 |
Andylinn: I believe you are mistaken about the 'Detroit v. Gross Pointe' example...the bill would ban preferential treatment based on NATIONAL origin, i.e., an international student from China being admitted over a domestic applicant with higher test scores and similar credentials...the MCRI doesn't appear to say anything about place of origin within the United States Go here to read the official ballot language: http://www.michigancivilrights.org/ballotlanguage.html Also, your 'Farmington Hills v. Brightmore' example neglects to consider that not all white people come from privledged backgrounds, such as myself, who grew up in a single-parent home, worked full-time to pay for my undergraduate education, and will be starting classes in the fall at one of Michigan's public law schools, yet I had to work harder and get a higher score to gain admission than the minorities who were also admitted. Does that seem just to you? I have a friend who came from a similar background who was denied admission to the school I will be starting at next month who would have been an auto-admit if she were a minority. Surely you don't think this is fair to her, do you? (Message edited by thejesus on July 11, 2006) | ||
Andylinn Member Username: Andylinn Post Number: 123 Registered: 04-2006 Posted From: 64.141.144.2 |
warrior fan - i agree, you are correct... as i say in my post i'm not 100% happy with affirmative action by race... however MCRI blocks ALL preferential treatment... | ||
Irish_mafia Member Username: Irish_mafia Post Number: 558 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 75.9.255.242 |
Until they start handing out jobs and scholarships for descendants of Irish immigrants subjected to servitude under the repressive hand of the ruling elite..... Get rid of it! | ||
Moreta Member Username: Moreta Post Number: 228 Registered: 09-2004 Posted From: 69.133.83.137 |
Andylinn said: "Who is a more deserving student? A white girl whos parents make 200,000 in combined income and goes to some school in Farmington Hills with a 3.5 grade average / 1250 SAT - OR an African American girl in a single parent family in brightmore who tried her best, lived accross from a drug house, but didn't lose her life to drugs, went to some shitty school on the west side, but STILL managed to get 3.3 and 1200 SAT" I totally oppose race based affirmative action. I always have. I was a white girl in a single parent family in Brightmoor who tried her best, lived across from and next to and down the street from drug houses, didn't lose my life to drugs, went to some royally shitty schools until high school and then got assaulted regularly walking home from the bus stop. Forgive me, but it infuriates me that the girl that lived down the street from me with a poor but stable family that didn't get vile invective spewed at her on the city buses we rode (because she didn't happen to be white) could have been looked at as my equal in college admissions despite a lower GPA and lower test scores. That said, I'll vote no too. Accomodations should be made for those coming from a disadvantaged position, but it simply must be acknowledged that it is not a person's race, but their socioeconomic status and family stability that are the real hindrance to success. | ||
Andylinn Member Username: Andylinn Post Number: 124 Registered: 04-2006 Posted From: 64.141.144.2 |
very well said moreta - andy | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 16 Registered: 06-2006 Posted From: 24.169.224.43 |
Andylinn: "...however MCRI blocks ALL preferential treatment..." Wrong...MCRI is limited to preferential treatment based on race, gender, color, ethnicity or national origin, and it's only for PUBLIC education, employment, or contracting. It says nothing about socio-economic status, nor does it affect private employment or education (Message edited by thejesus on July 11, 2006) | ||
Livedog2 Member Username: Livedog2 Post Number: 660 Registered: 03-2006 Posted From: 24.223.133.177 |
Affirmative Action circumvents the natural order of things. If you want “it” whatever “it” is you have to fight for “it” enough to get “it.” Nature does not give things to anything in the creation so why do we think we know better than nature by giving out entitlements to people. Let natural selection work its wonders. So, scrap that schitt called affirmative action and move forward with the fittest. Livedog  | ||
Andylinn Member Username: Andylinn Post Number: 125 Registered: 04-2006 Posted From: 64.141.144.2 |
livedog2: by fittest, do you mean white, wealthy, and suburban highschoolers looking to further their education? | ||
Arc312 Member Username: Arc312 Post Number: 26 Registered: 01-2006 Posted From: 85.48.101.90 |
Affirmative Action - Equal Opportunity for Qualified Individuals. I don't have time to argue the MCRI and its affects on "Affirmative Action," which has a different in every city, county, university, state, and nation. What people don’t understand is that the phrase "preferential treatment" is very vague. The MCRI HAS THE POTENTIAL to take away public funding and support of programs that give "preferential treatment" like funding for battered women’s shelters (which gives "preferential treatment" to women), free prostate and breast cancer screenings (which give "preferential treatment" to men and women, respectively), not to mention hundreds of other programs (I’m pretty sure you figure out other ones). While nothing is written in stone, as we saw in 2004 when Proposition 2 passed, it ended up hurting heterosexual couples as well, something that if it was known by the voters of Michigan, it would have never passed. Lets look to the past to see what Michigan does after hot-button issues are voted on via referendum, things happen that were never expected…by voters. Oh...lets remember...Affirmative Action was created in order to promote the advancement of women in universities/workforce. Look at all the progress that has been made, and all the work that still needs to be done. Do we really want to set back the clock? Vote NO on the MCRI. http://oneunitedmichigan.org/ | ||
Livedog2 Member Username: Livedog2 Post Number: 661 Registered: 03-2006 Posted From: 24.223.133.177 |
By fittest, I mean fittest whatever that means. I say let the results speak for themselves and I'll let the naysayers and do-gooders attach judgments to them afterwards. Livedog2 | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 17 Registered: 06-2006 Posted From: 24.169.224.43 |
Andylinn: I don't know anyone that supports MCRI and has a problem with qualified minorites being given the same opportunities as qualified non-minorities, which seems to be what you are implying. In fact, I would even go so far as to say if there is a tie in a test score, then give the job/university seat to the one who is a member of an underrepresented minority...it's just when you start bumping people to the front of the line when there are others more deserving that have earned it, it's unjust, plain and simple. btw, I'm still waiting for you to acknowledge that MCRI does not affect preferential treatment based on socio-economic status or place of origin within the United States. I'm not trying to be a pest, but I don't think you should be making factually incorrect statements about this ballot measure...people might get the wrong idea about what it really is. | ||
Kova Member Username: Kova Post Number: 38 Registered: 12-2003 Posted From: 63.77.247.130 |
In response to Arc312 http://www.michigancivilrights .org/freep_letters_4_18_06.htm l (Message edited by KOVA on July 11, 2006) | ||
Southwestmap Member Username: Southwestmap Post Number: 515 Registered: 01-2005 Posted From: 70.229.231.102 |
Did women in California lose breast cancer screening? How are married couples hurt by Propsition 2? These sorts of assertions, which seem a little hysterical and fear-mongering, make me want to vote for the proposal. | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 18 Registered: 06-2006 Posted From: 24.169.224.43 |
Arc312: That is nonsense...ABSOLUTE NONSENSE!!! MCRI affects public EMPLOYMENT, EDUCATION, AND CONTRACTING ONLY... Also, the amendment would contain the following language: "Nothing in this section shall be interpreted as prohibiting bona fide qualifications based on sex that are reasonably necessary to the normal operation of public employment, public education, or public contracting." I can't believe all the misinformation people spew about this when they feel they have something to lose. (Message edited by thejesus on July 11, 2006) | ||
321brian Member Username: 321brian Post Number: 162 Registered: 02-2006 Posted From: 68.62.6.147 |
"That said, I'll vote no too. Accomodations should be made for those coming from a disadvantaged position, but it simply must be acknowledged that it is not a person's race, but their socioeconomic status and family stability that are the real hindrance to success." WHAT??? So why wouldn't you (Moreta) be voting yes? You entire argument was against RACE based preferental treatment and FOR people coming from disadvantaged positions. | ||
Warriorfan Member Username: Warriorfan Post Number: 441 Registered: 08-2005 Posted From: 68.43.81.191 |
It seems most people in this thread who oppose the MCRI are grossly ignorant as to what it would actually do. There's quite a lot of misinformation being spewed here. If you oppose the MCRI, that's fine, just use some factual arguments to back up your argument instead of making false claims that the MCRI will cut off funds to women's shelters or prevent SES-based affirmative action, neither of which is true. | ||
Detroiternthemist Member Username: Detroiternthemist Post Number: 71 Registered: 01-2006 Posted From: 64.118.149.50 |
If I were born today according to a lot of post here I would assume that racism and prejudices are no longer a problem. That the playing fields are finally level. That everyone is treated equally fair. That the human factor as far as preferential treatment is gone. Assuming all this is true I would gladly vote yes on MCRI today. Everyone always argues the obvious "the most qualified person" but the good ole boy network has been around way longer than nepotism or cronyism. | ||
The_aram Member Username: The_aram Post Number: 4961 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 68.41.124.8 |
I think what's most surprised me is that the anti-MCRI people have done absolutely nothing to convince me that I shouldn't vote for it. As far as I'm concerned, it's long overdue, and until someone does a reasonable job of convincing me otherwise, I will be voting for it. | ||
Ilovedetroit Member Username: Ilovedetroit Post Number: 2365 Registered: 02-2005 Posted From: 69.246.54.234 |
so says the rich kid at U of M...figures. | ||
321brian Member Username: 321brian Post Number: 163 Registered: 02-2006 Posted From: 68.62.6.147 |
Warriorfan, I'll make it easy for you. I will vote yes because I am a white male. | ||
The_aram Member Username: The_aram Post Number: 4962 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 68.41.124.8 |
OK, explain it to me, then. Why should I vote no on the MCRI? And how do you know I'm rich? I don't think I've ever disclosed my financial situation. | ||
Livedog2 Member Username: Livedog2 Post Number: 664 Registered: 03-2006 Posted From: 24.223.133.177 |
The_aram, don't waste your time with Ilovedetroit. He got bored with jerking-off so now he thought he'd come over and stir the pot a little out of boredom. Livedog2 | ||
Eastsidedog Member Username: Eastsidedog Post Number: 628 Registered: 03-2006 Posted From: 12.47.224.8 |
Detroiternthemist gets it too. It's important to note that UofM already argued and won it's AA case in the Supreme Court by arguing that it's not about socioeconomics at all. UofM said that it wanted cultural diversity in the classroom. And it wanted to use AA to acheive that goal. Poor white kids and rich white kids in classrooms is diversity but it's not cultural diversity which UofM claimed was the goal of their AA policies. To this day UofM is not even close to being representative of the diversity in Michigan. After the AA case diversity even slipped at UofM when minorities thought they had a worse chance at getting in and as a result those that were "on the line" didn't apply. Oh, And I agree with Detroiternthemist that should this pass (and it probably will) the "good ole boys" would likely be more than happy to help their poor white brethren "up by the bootstraps" so to speak. | ||
Arc312 Member Username: Arc312 Post Number: 27 Registered: 01-2006 Posted From: 62.14.91.232 |
Why the MCRI is not what Michigan needs: http://oneunitedmichigan.org/m ediaclips/hillegondsJune26Free p.pdf ------------------------------ ------------------------------ ------------------------------ ----------------- Proposition 209 (CA, and what our MCRI is based on): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P roposition_209 ------------------------------ ------------------------------ ------------------------------ ----------------- List of Organizations that DO NOT SUPPORT THE MCRI http://www.oneunitedmichigan.o rg/Press/CampaignCo-Chairs.pdf AARP/Michigan AFT Michigan ACLU of Michigan ACCESS Affirmations Lesbian and Gay Community Center A. Philip Randolph Institute American Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee American Arab Chamber of Commerce American Association for Affirmative Action American Association of University Women of Michigan American Friends Service Committee – LGBT Issues Program American Jewish Committee Arab American and Chaldean Council Asian American Center for Justice/American Citizens for Justice Asian Pacific American Labor Alliance – Michigan Asian Pacific American Student Organization - Michigan State University Associated Students of Michigan State University Association of Food Dealers of Michigan Clean Water Action Coalition of Labor Union Women Commission on Church and Society and World Mission (CCSWM) of the Michigan Conference of the United Church of Christ Council of Baptist Pastors of Detroit and Vicinity Council of Organizations of Asian Indians of Michigan Council on American-Islamic Relations D. Augustus Straker Bar Association Delta Sigma Theta, Inc. Michigan Detroit Alliance for Fair Banking Detroit Catholic Pastoral Alliance Detroit Democratic Socialists of America Detroit Federation of Teachers Detroit Regional Chamber Detroit Renaissance Detroit Urban League Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, SE Michigan Synod Families With Children From China - Metro Detroit - Board of Directors Gray Panthers of Huron Valley Gray Panthers of Metro Detroit Grosse Pointe Democratic Club Ingham County Equal Opportunity Committee Ingham County Women’s Commission Ingham County Women’s Foundation Jewish Community Council of Metro Detroit Lansing Association for Human Rights Latin Americans for Social and Economic Development League of Women Voters of Michigan Metro Detroit Coalition of Black Trade Unions Michigan AFSCME Council 25 Michigan Asian Pacific American Bar Association Michigan Federation of Business & Professional Women’s Clubs, Inc. Michigan Coalition for Human Rights Michigan Catholic Conference Michigan Chapter - National Association of Social Workers Michigan Chapter of Pride At Work, AFL-CIO Michigan Council of YWCAs Michigan Democratic Party Michigan Education Association Michigan Environmental Council Michigan Equality Michigan Jewish Conference Michigan League for Human Services Michigan Legislative Black Caucus Michigan National Organization for Women Michigan Non-Profit Association Michigan Pay Equity Network Michigan Peaceworks Michigan Pride at Work Michigan Spanish-Speaking Democrats Michigan State AFL-CIO Michigan State University Residence Halls Association NAACP, Detroit Branch NAACP, Michigan State Conference National Association of Social Workers – Michigan National Association of Women Business Owners – Greater Detroit National Conference For Community and Justice National Council of Jewish Women, Greater Detroit Section National Council of Negro Women, Inc., Metro Detroit Section National Women's Political Caucus New Detroit, Inc. Organization of Black Alumni, Wayne State University Peace Education Center of Lansing Planned Parenthood Advocates of Michigan Presidents Council, State Universities of Michigan Prosecuting Attorneys Association of Michigan Race Relations & Diversity Task Force Birmingham Bloomfield Area SEIU State Council SER Metro Detroit Students Supporting Affirmative Action - University of Michigan Triangle Foundation United Auto Workers Veterans For Peace of Michigan Women Centers of America Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom, Greater Lansing Branch Tina Abbott, Secretary-Treasurer, Michigan State AFL-CIO Dr. Charles G. Adams, Hartford Memorial Baptist Church Ishmael Ahmed, Executive Director, ACCESS Barbara Allushuski, Managing Principal and Worldwide Partner, Mercer Human Resource Consulting Inc Reverend Wendell Anthony, President, Detroit Branch NAACP Dennis W. Archer, Chairman, Dickinson Wright PPLC Ralph Babb, Chairman and CEO, Comerica Inc. Dave Bing, Chairman and CEO, The Bing Group Richard E. Blouse, Jr., President and CEO, Detroit Regional Chamber David E. Bonior, Professor, Wayne State University Mike Boulus, Executive Director, Presidents Council, State Universities of Michigan John Bourbeau, CEO, Right Management Consultants Marcie Brogan, CEO, Brogan & Partners Communications Joseph Buttigieg, III, Vice Chairman, Comerica Incorporated Victoria Collins, President, UFCW 876 Pat Devlin, Secretary-Treasurer, Michigan Building Trades Anthony Earley, Jr., Chairman and CEO, DTE Energy Company Fern Ettinger, Chair of State Public Affairs, NCJW Dr. Haifa Fakhouri, President, Arab American and Chaldean Council Fred Filiciano, Hispanic Business Alliance Frank Fountain, Senior Vice President, External Affairs/Public Policy, Daimler Chrysler Corporation Mark Gaffney, President, Michigan State AFL-CIO Jane Garcia Al Garrett, President, Michigan AFSCME Janna Garrison, President, Detroit Federation of Teachers Eva Garza Dewaelsche Ron Gettleffinger, President, United Auto Workers Alfred R. Glancy III, Chairman of the Board, Unico Investment Company Thomas Gottschalk, Executive Vice President, Public Policy and General Counsel, General Motors Corporation Henry Grix Imad Hamad, Regional Director, ADC David Hecker, President, American Federation of Teachers - Michigan Florence Herman, Chair of State Public Affairs, NCJW Barbara A. Hill, President, Michigan Women's Foundation James P. Hoffa, General President, International Brotherhood of Teamsters Steve Horn Susan Horowitz, Publisher, PrideSource Howard Israel Llenda Jackson-Leslie, President, National Women's Political Caucus Mary Kamidoi, Asian American Center for Justice I don’t know about you, but I trust these groups…you should too | ||
Arc312 Member Username: Arc312 Post Number: 28 Registered: 01-2006 Posted From: 62.14.91.232 |
Stolen from: http://www.michigancivilrights .org/media/MCRI_Myths.pdf MYTH: Race preferences are needed because of the disparities in public schools. FACT: Race preferences only serve as a band-aid and do nothing to help failing public schools. In order to solve the real disparity in our socio-economic system is through improving the school system. Racial preferences do nothing to solve this long-term problem. While this is 100% true, talk anyone who does not support the MCRI and they will agree with you, taking off the band-aid before any replacement idea is not a good idea. I hate Affirmative Action, but as long as there are inequalities along racial and gender lines, we need some policy that counteracts this. I mean, has anyone came up with a better solution that Affirmative Action to fix inequalities? That’s what I thought. | ||
Moreta Member Username: Moreta Post Number: 230 Registered: 09-2004 Posted From: 69.133.83.137 |
Eastsidedog said, "Oh, And I agree with Detroiternthemist that should this pass (and it probably will) the "good ole boys" would likely be more than happy to help their poor white brethren "up by the bootstraps" so to speak." If you really believe this, you are fools. 321brian, you are correct. I was mistaken in my understanding of the proposal. I have read it now (more the fool am I for posting without doing so previously) and am reconsidering my position. | ||
Irish_mafia Member Username: Irish_mafia Post Number: 560 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 75.9.255.242 |
Gosh, I'd hate to go up against the wise thinkers in the Michigan State University Residence Halls Association! Instead of giving us a list of every organization that either receives advantage through the racist system that exists today or feels compelled to support it for politically expedient purposes... try to justify your unjustifiable position with a valid argument. | ||
Irish_mafia Member Username: Irish_mafia Post Number: 561 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 75.9.255.242 |
"I hate Affirmative Action, but as long as there are inequalities along racial and gender lines, we need some policy that counteracts this. I mean, has anyone came up with a better solution that Affirmative Action to fix inequalities? That’s what I thought." ______________________________ ___________________ Ok, what are the inequalities that a minority has getting into college? 1) Are they less smart than, say, a white male...of course not 2) Have they had less proper education? Not the minority students that I know that went to private schools or the premiere public schools, ie. CASS (Mayor excepted). 3) Have they suffered from an environment that doesn't allow them to properly meet their potential? Not the minorities that I know who had working parents that shared their goals and their dreams with their kids. So how the hell do you look at someone and say that because you are (pick your choice), black, mexican, female, blah, blah, blah... you deserve special treatment?... you can't. No, it is neither "the best available solution" nor is it an accetable solution. If you want to help someone that is: 1) Learning disabled 2) Challenged because of their circumstances at home do so. Do it without prejudice regarding race or gender and make it fare. With regards to students that come from a crappy school system...perhaps they would be better served through school choice vs. supporting a failed system (oops new thread). | ||
Eastsidedog Member Username: Eastsidedog Post Number: 629 Registered: 03-2006 Posted From: 12.47.224.8 |
So what are you implying Moreta? | ||
Swingline Member Username: Swingline Post Number: 532 Registered: 11-2003 Posted From: 172.148.96.203 |
The entitlement mentality of white folks when it comes to a university education is amazing. What is so fucking magic about a grade point average. "WHAAAA, I studied sooo hard and stayed up almost all night to finish two of my terms papers when I was a junior in high school. I and my grade inflation wracked 4.8 GPA DESERVE a spot at Ann Arbor because I worked sooo hard." Oh bullshit. Those underachieving black kids don't deserve to get admitted over all those kids who tried so hard. Right? They didn't earn it. But, who said the admission had to be earned largely through a standards such as a GPA and test scores? So what if a rational argument can be made that those "good" students deserve admission more. I think that a rational argument can be made that an institution of higher learning need not be populated only by students whose academic performance peaked when they were age 16-17 and a junior in high school. Again I say, who decided that those with the highest grades have to be the ones admitted. Why are they so deserving? Policy should have a place in admissions. All kinds of government actions are a balancing of policy goals. For example, who decided that homeowners deserve a mortgage interest tax deduction? Here's an idea. How about earmarking an amount of money equivalent to the mortgage interest deduction for education grants to families with household incomes of $40K or less. Would that fly? Is that a good idea? My point is that these issues are properly considered as policy decisions. The admission question shouldn't begin and end with somebody's almighty GPA. Affirmative action in college admissions is a reasonable response and remedy to the virulent disease of racism in this country. Deal with it. U of M shouldn't have to admit 50% of graduating seniors from the Bloomfield, Birmingham, Northville and W. Bloomfield school districts just because all of those smarty pants kids get good grades and score well on the SAT. Deal with it. Until African Americans achieve higher levels of representation in boardrooms, legislative chambers, and other important venues of business and political decisionmaking, we should continue to practice affirmative action. Think of it as a charitable gift. It'll pay off at the gates of heaven. Vote no on the MCRI | ||
Arc312 Member Username: Arc312 Post Number: 29 Registered: 01-2006 Posted From: 62.14.91.232 |
Swingline- 1) I might not have ovaries, but can I have your children? 2) I happened to be one of those overachieving kids from Bloomfield, and I support any policy that helps me make sure that I don't have to spend the rest of my life only interacting with people like me. 3) GO GREEN! 4) Vote NO on the MCRI | ||
Warriorfan Member Username: Warriorfan Post Number: 442 Registered: 08-2005 Posted From: 68.43.81.191 |
Does "racial" diversity automatically equate to "cultural" diversity? If UofM is so concerned about "diversity" you'd think they would be recruiting students from Africa, South America, Eastern Europe, Asia, and other places. You know, people who are actually from other cultures instead of just a different part of America. And Wayne State is extremely diverse, but that doesn't mean that students get an education in other cultures. Walk through the student center at WSU sometime and tell me what you see. You'll see a table full of black students sitting together and a table full of Arabic/Chaldean students sitting together and a table full of white students sitting together. They segregate themselves into groups that they feel more comfortable with, and the minority students are just as guilty as the white students of seeking out this racial familiarity. | ||
Arc312 Member Username: Arc312 Post Number: 30 Registered: 01-2006 Posted From: 62.14.91.232 |
yeah, but at least they're in the same room together, thats the first step. | ||
Moreta Member Username: Moreta Post Number: 231 Registered: 09-2004 Posted From: 209.131.7.68 |
Eastside, I'm not implying anything sinister. I just think that if you really believe that wealthy white folks (in general) have an interest in the success of their impoverished white bretheren (in general), you are sadly mistaken. Yes, the 'good ol' boys' will help their kids, their cousins' kids and their dentists' kids, but they won't be the least bit interested in helping the poor white kid that grew up at Fenkell and Bentler. People (in general) look after their own, but the boundaries of 'their own' are drawn as much with socioeconomic status as with race. | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 19 Registered: 06-2006 Posted From: 68.62.6.138 |
Arc312: I can't believe you're actually still posting in this thread after that nonsense you were caught spewing about the MCRI somehow preventing funding for breast cancer screenings and battered womens' shelters...kind of surprising from an 'overachieving kid from Bloomfield' Can you at least admit you were wrong? | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 20 Registered: 06-2006 Posted From: 68.62.6.138 |
Why do you people keep talking about AA's effects on wealthy white kids? This has nothing to do with them...this has to do with working-class and poor white kids...they are the ones hurt by affirmative action...they are the ones being discriminated against solely because of their race...not the wealthy ones...the wealthy ones still get by, get top quality k-12 education, get into the top universities and get the high paying jobs...forget them...this isn't about them, so stop acting like it is (Message edited by thejesus on July 11, 2006) | ||
Jenniferl Member Username: Jenniferl Post Number: 292 Registered: 03-2004 Posted From: 4.229.42.91 |
I went from a 99 percent white suburban high school to the melting pot that is Wayne State University. Overall, I feel that being in such a mixed environment was a good experience for me. However, it's hard to get close to anybody there. What typically happens is you sit next to a group of people in class, you sort-of get to know each other, you might work together on a group project, but then the semester ends and you never see those people again. It's not like high school or some smaller colleges, where everybody knows everybody. The people sitting at the racially segregated tables at the Student Center probably met each other outside of WSU. For example, many of my early undergrad classes were filled with recent Cass Tech graduates who all knew each other. I also had some classes with a couple of Armenian teenagers who had just graduated from the same private school. Back to the MCRI... I have some problems with affirmative action as it exists today. But it does help lift some people out of poverty and into the world of higher education. I'd like to see a better system than the one we've got. But I have more problems with the MCRI, so I plan to vote against it. | ||
Jenniferl Member Username: Jenniferl Post Number: 293 Registered: 03-2004 Posted From: 4.229.42.91 |
Moreta is right about how rich white people don't give a damn about poor whites. There's A LOT of class warfare among white people that slips under the public radar because the focus is almost always on race and racism. Old-money whites look down on nouveu-riche whites who look down on middle-class whites who look down on working-class whites who look down on poor whites. It's a myth that white people look out for each other, for feel any solidarity toward one another as a race. | ||
Mcp001 Member Username: Mcp001 Post Number: 2271 Registered: 11-2003 Posted From: 69.14.135.95 |
"anti affirmative action group", is that those wild and wacky kids from BAMN? Just waiting for them to overturn the tables on the Sunday talking head shows just to "make their point". BTW, why didn't the cowards from One Michigan United include this core group in their little support clique? It seems odd that their most vocal supporters are now left out in the cold. | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 21 Registered: 06-2006 Posted From: 68.62.6.138 |
Jenniferl: I agree that a diverse student body has it's merits, but not at the cost denying non-minorities who have good but not stellar academic credentials admission to a university simply because of their race, even when those credentials are superior to those of minorities who were granted admission. It's just wrong, plain and simple. What other problems do you have with MCRI? | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 22 Registered: 06-2006 Posted From: 68.62.6.138 |
Most of the discussion thus far has been based on university admissions, but no one has touched on AA in public employment or public contracting, which are the other two areas that MCRI addresses. The argument from the pro AA people has mostly been about students benefiting from a diverse environment, but what arguments, if any, do you guys make in support of AA in public employment and public contracting? | ||
Ilovedetroit Member Username: Ilovedetroit Post Number: 2368 Registered: 02-2005 Posted From: 69.246.54.234 |
Aram - Diveristy is the key to our future. Without diversity this country would be run by white men (even more than it is now)with little to no representation by anyone else. We "dumb" ourselves down as a culture by not associating with people different from ourselves. There are too many people in this country that would not give a qualified african american, hispanic, or asian american or american indian a chance to move forward. This country was founded by segmenting women and african americans as inferior out of our voting system. It is important that we continue to give minorities and women a chance to get a head of those racist individuals who would hold them back and continue segregationist practices. A few weeks ago I was visiting one of my suppliers and I was shocked that there were hardly any women and absolutely no persons of color. It was a visit to this place that made me realize that change still needs to continue and by going back we will see less diversity in the workplace and more places like this company, which by the way is a failing supplier to my company. Why do I know you are a white rich kid? Because no person of color would ever (unless they are brainwashed by the Republican party) make a statement in favor of voting for this stupid piece of legislations. Maybe you are not rich but your attitude has always been elitist. | ||
Ilovedetroit Member Username: Ilovedetroit Post Number: 2369 Registered: 02-2005 Posted From: 69.246.54.234 |
Also I have noticed that the typically conservative group on here are in support of scrapping it...no shock there. | ||
Mcp001 Member Username: Mcp001 Post Number: 2274 Registered: 11-2003 Posted From: 69.14.135.95 |
Good luck finding anyone to touch this issue, Thejesus. College admissions is the only argument, albeit a very poor one, that the racists against the MCRI have in their repertoire. | ||
Lmichigan Member Username: Lmichigan Post Number: 3982 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 71.197.17.144 |
I have a feeling it will not pass, and has actually rallied a group of people that had probably not even planned on voting this election having felt spurned by the Democratic Party. Michigan may have been tired of Granholm, and even may have been willing to give DeVos a shot, but I think the conservative right, in this state, have pused too much, too soon, which really jeporadized DeVos already slim chance of winning. They may have bitten off more than they could chew, but time will tell. | ||
Jenniferl Member Username: Jenniferl Post Number: 294 Registered: 03-2004 Posted From: 4.229.42.91 |
One big problem I have with MCRI is that it has the words "civil rights" in its name. Given what the term "civil rights" means to black people in this country, it's plain-out wrong to use this same term for a proposal that will deny many of them their only opportunity for higher education. Which brings me to another major problem I have with MCRI... It is taking something away from disadvantaged minorities without doing anything to level the existing playing field. Yes, there are disadvantaged whites in this state and they need help too. But I don't see how the MCRI will accomplish this. If the MCRI passes, the winners will be rich and upper-middle class kids who attend quality high schools and come from families that give them the advantages they need to prepare themselves for college. These kids are the ones who will get those university slots that used to go to minorities. The poor whites will be stuck in the same place as always, only now the poor minorities will be stuck with them. | ||
Kova Member Username: Kova Post Number: 39 Registered: 12-2003 Posted From: 68.255.246.21 |
First, end any form of legacy programs. This I think most people can agree on. Second, in terms of seeking racial, cultural, socio-economic diversity, this is a thing that, in my mind, cannot be artificially stimulated, if it is to be honestly achieved in the hearts and minds of individuals. AA may help, but as some of the posts have alluded, throwing a bunch of black,white and Asian kids into the mix at a school guarantees nothing at all. By and large groups stick to their own at U of M. This is not to say that there isn't mixing, growth and learning amongst groups there, I could name some groups (clubs) that I think do honestly achieve this. However on the whole I think the success of AA in this regard is almost laughable. I will be the first one to tell you that yes cultural diversity is a good thing and yes racial diversity is a good thing. I learn this living on the east side of Dearborn and on the border of Detroit. You learn alot about race, class and economics living in these situations and hopefully you grow. (some do and some don’t). However, my appreciation for such things was not the results of the catholic schools letting in the blacks or Latinos because they had some AA policy, its was/is a reality of how one lives in these areas. You can't learn about race, class and economics unless you really lived through the daily problems in some capacity, this is something I think professors fail to see sometimes. And for this reason I don’t think AA really has any impact on the way people think and learn about race, etc. Yes, what a great opportunity for people who never had such experiences to learn them, but looking at the situation at UofM now, I doubt they really take much from it. Or at least in my mind they don’t. Some crazy liberal kid will think, “ Ya what injustice! Shame on whites” But has this kid really learned anything? I don’t. I think the question is what determines a "qualified" student and why? I don't think I can give you a definitive answer, but I don't see how playing up an emphasis of race works. Perhaps some sort of socio-economic AA is needed. I can understand fears that the MCRI leaves no system in place, this is a legitimate fear. However, from my perspective I do feel the MCRI is a starting place for a change that will benefit all people. I believe that America's true problems come down to issues of class, and not necessarily race ( although obviously this is a very big issue). I’ve thought long and hard about this MCRI issue, and I can see the validity in both sides arguments (putting the diatribes aside) however I feel that passing the MCRI is the best step forward. And I hope that I’m right. (Message edited by KOVA on July 11, 2006) | ||
Livedog2 Member Username: Livedog2 Post Number: 667 Registered: 03-2006 Posted From: 24.223.133.177 |
It has all to do with class and very little to do with race. And, the ones with control of the delete buttons keep us at each other's throats. It's the old divide and conqueror theory. Livedog2  | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 23 Registered: 06-2006 Posted From: 68.62.6.138 |
Jenniferl: I agree with you that they should have called it something else, however, to me, my disagreeing with the legislation's name isn't going to cause me to vote against it when I agree with its underlying principles...besides, MCRI is just what that group of people call it and isn't an official name...on the ballot, you won't see the term MCRI anywhere And I disagree with you that it will be upper-class whites that benefit from this, as they aren't really affected by affirmative action programs...upper-class whites still get top quality K-12 education, get into the best universities, and get most of the coveted jobs, which is why the top universites and the business world are still overwhelmingly white...rather, it's the middle-class and poor white kids (the ones that come from similar backgrounds as many minorites) that get hurt the most and left behind by affirmative action, and it is they who will benefit from being able to compete on a level playing field. | ||
Ron Member Username: Ron Post Number: 210 Registered: 03-2006 Posted From: 66.174.93.98 |
Some of the factors used by UM undergraduate admissions in determining who to admit (from Gratz v. Bollinger): high school grades, standardized test scores, high school quality, curriculum strength, geography, alumni relationships, leadership, and race. UM lost the Gratz case simply because it allotted a numerical point value to race, rather than the more fluid "one factor among many standard" of the Law School case. If you want to eliminate "preferences," then only use GPA and SATs in making an admission decision. That means no more consideration for being captain of the footbal team or cheerleading squad, MUN membership, year book editors, class presidents, graduating from a great high school, what classes you took, what alumni you know, etc. Get rid of those preferences as well, and only use GPA (and weight them the same no matter what school you go to) and SAT/ACT scores. Let's cut the BS here. Conservatives are against AA because of the effect it has on them personally. Moderates and liberals are in favor of it because we recognize that it is not always about ME, but about US. Again, the primary difference between the right and left wingers are that right wingers are concerned about ME, and left wingers are concerned about US. Let's also not misunderstand the legal rationale for affirmative action, and how it does not offend the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment. Public policies that single people out based on "suspect classifications" i.e. race, gender, etc., must be "narrowly tailored to further a compelling government interest." The Supreme Court has ruled that the government does, in fact, have a compelling government interest in promoting racial, gender, etc. diversity in public classrooms. They also ruled that the UM system is sufficiently narrow to not offend the Constitution. Now, since little Jenny Gratz didn't get her way (the total abolition of equal access), she wants to try and steal equal access. (or maybe she was just looking for a job like Ward Connerly?) Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned!!! | ||
Ron Member Username: Ron Post Number: 211 Registered: 03-2006 Posted From: 66.174.93.98 |
Oh, and I like how the word "spew" caught on!  | ||
Detroitteacher Member Username: Detroitteacher Post Number: 127 Registered: 06-2006 Posted From: 152.163.100.8 |
I poted this on another thread, but I think it fits here. ------------------------------ ------------------------------ -------------------- I have helped MANY students obtain scholarships and grants (money that doesn't have to be paid back). Students must remember that having a well rounded high school experience will also help with admissions to college. As a teacher, I see kids rejected by universities and accepted to universities. What needs to happen is to give kids an equal education (ie funding) across the state and country. So many of DPS students are not equipped to go off to college and compete with other students. It's a sad reality. While we do have some exceptional students, many don't have the GPA and extra curriculars that are needed to go to a major university. Should they be given an opportunity above all others, maybe. They didn't have a great chance, otherwise. I also think we need to help students become more aware of what they need to do to prepare themselves for college admissions from Kindergarten on up. I always tell my students to not rely on anyone or anything other than their own hard work and merits to help them succeed. Hopefully, by my talking to them from the time they enter into my class, they will realize what is required of each applicant. I'm all for affirmative action, but it shouldn't be a crutch. | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 25 Registered: 06-2006 Posted From: 68.62.6.138 |
Ron: Your characterization that conservatives are against AA simply because of how it affects them personally doesn't address the fact that many conservatives wouldn't mind losing a spot to someone who was better qualified than they were and beat them out for the position. They have a problem with being beating out by people less qualified, who are less intelligent and didn't work as hard. It always sucks if you lose, but if you are beaten by someone who is better than you, at least it was a fair competition. AA on the other hand, is like losing a game of football when the score is 21-0 in the opposing team's favor before the game even starts. It isn't right. | ||
Ron Member Username: Ron Post Number: 213 Registered: 03-2006 Posted From: 66.174.93.99 |
Yeah Jesus: 21 White People, 0 Black/Hispanic/Women/etc. You're correct, it ISN'T right. Your characterization that we all SHOULD start from the same place highlights where we are trying to get with AA. It is not about what advantages you have, it is about the historical disadvantages the majority have forced on the minority. Remember: 4,743 people were lynched in the United States between 1882 and 1968 (3500 of whom were Black men)(most were not recorded) (The last RECORDED lynching was in 1968, LESS THAN 40 YEARS AGO) (Yeah, we've really come a long way, haven't we?!)(and it has NOTHING to do with whether you personally have ever lynched someone, or discriminated against someone, or consider yourself racist). To apply a physiological analogy to a societal malady (damn I sound like Jesse), it is like trying to lose weight when you weigh 300 pounds v. trying to lose weight when you weigh 200 pounds. The 300 lb. person has a little more work to do than the 200 lb. person. My interpretation of conservative v. liberal ideology is based upon the whole of the conservative agenda, not simply the AA plank. | ||
The_aram Member Username: The_aram Post Number: 4963 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 68.41.124.8 |
So how do you measure when this debt will be repaid? Or should we continue to give minority students an unfair advantage through AA for the rest of recorded time? Remember, not all white people in America today had ancestors here when the injustices you are describing occured. My ancestors were slaves in Russia for centuries when the first African-American slaves were brought to the New World. And my other ancestors were getting marched across the Syrian desert by the Turks while Marcus Garvey was gaining prominence in America. Where's my affirmative action for my ancestor's suffering? What makes minorities think they are the only ones entitled to reduced standards and free handouts? Every race and culture has had to overcome obstacles and injustices over the course of their development. I am failing to understand why any affirmative action program based on race, gender, etc. even begins to fairly address this. Period. | ||
Lmichigan Member Username: Lmichigan Post Number: 3983 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 71.197.17.144 |
Jenniferl, I completely agree with you, on your second paragraph. To me, calling for the abolishment of AA without having a backup plan to help the truly disenfrancized is completely unconscionable, and shows the character of those working for the passing on the MCRI. I also with your first paragraph. It again shows the character of those that support the passing of the MCRI to be bold and arrogant enough to try and twist around civil rights, and even more audaciously, to twist Martin Luther King, Junior's words (as they have done), to try and make a case that he would support the MCRI. Again, it's about pushing too hard and too fast, and without a social conscience. They really could have slid this through if they wouldn't have been so foolish about it. They've also had the audacity to deceptively catch a sizable group of Black church-goers by simply saying sign this petition for Civil Rights, and they've been called on it by Michigan Civil Rights Department. I agree with Kova, than I'd love nothing more than to see all legacy programs done away with. It's also because of that that I oppose MCRI. If you're going to get of AA, than get rid of getting points for having alumni parents (something that heavily favors White Americans), among many other legacy programs. To just attack the race-based part of it deservedly causes many in both the minority and majority communities to question to motives of the MCRI. People may hate to hear this, but AA is insurance until something better can be found to level the playing field. To pretend as if AA is a malicious program to discriminate against Whites is ridiculous considering how they are favored in SO many other aspects of life conciously of unconciously. | ||
Kova Member Username: Kova Post Number: 40 Registered: 12-2003 Posted From: 68.255.246.21 |
Statistically speaking, I suppose you could link almost anyone to having sort suppressed minority. Aram brings up a good point I think, where do we draw the line of who is deserving and isn¡¦t deserving of reparations? Now I¡¦ll ask this, why were Japanese Americans during WWII given direct reparations ? Lets open the can a little more ƒº | ||
Kova Member Username: Kova Post Number: 41 Registered: 12-2003 Posted From: 68.255.246.21 |
Lmich, Im glad you agree with me on the legacy ideas. However, I must disagree with you on your last point.
This is an intellectual idea that I really have come to reject. The more I investigate this issue, it appears to me that class, not race, is the overriding player. Unlike what writers like Tim Wise would have you believe, All whites are not "white like me" as the same could be said for blacks. The concept of whiteness might be true in some limited sense but at this time I think most of its ideas are a bunch of bull. This isn't to say that I'm not closed to changing my mind, as I think people on both sides are, but right now I just can't accept such a general statement. | ||
Lmichigan Member Username: Lmichigan Post Number: 3984 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 71.197.17.144 |
Kova, I witnessed with my own eyes White Privilege and institutionalized racism, which many big business have had to admit in their practices when called on it. Perhaps you haven't, and that is why we could argue all day about this. At the end of the day, I could not, in good faith conscience, vote for the passing of the MCRI if it did not include the abolishion of all legacy programs, and I hope many will compromise on that issue and realize that as much as they may agree with AA, the alternative is much worse. I also hope that those that may not necessarily like or understand AA will come up with a more comprehensive plan to ban all legacy programs, and shun the MCRI which has weaseled its way onto the ballot often through out-right lies and deception, which IMO should invalidate that movement with any free-thinking and socially-concious individual. One can definitely make a compelling argument against AA. The MCRI hasn't, and in fact have shown their true colors by ONLY targeting race-base AA, and using lies and deception, at that, to achieve a measurable amount of their signatures to get on the ballot. I hope that the socially-concious in the anti-AA crowd (or which there are many) had more of a voice, and that the whole movement could do the right thing by society instead of resorting to tricks that deception, which makes a fairly open-minded person as myself seriously question their motives. | ||
Ron Member Username: Ron Post Number: 214 Registered: 03-2006 Posted From: 66.174.79.234 |
Aram, Go to Russia, the country that presumably sanctioned the slavery of your ancestors, if you wish to seek some sort of reparations. Like I said, it is not about YOU or your personal ancestors/family; it is about what the GOVERNMENT of this COUNTRY sanctioned and allowed to occur to a segment of the population based on the color of their skin. The whole point is that it is not an unfair advantage; it is a system designed to rectify the 400 PLUS YEARS of unfair advantages THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA PERPETRATED ON one particular group. If you do not like the actions that must be taken now to correct a wrong that we, as a nation, have perpetrated, return to your country of origin and seek your "fairness" there. I'm sure that there is much more opportunity there for someone who seeks the equitable treatment you so desire. | ||
Ilovedetroit Member Username: Ilovedetroit Post Number: 2370 Registered: 02-2005 Posted From: 69.246.54.234 |
Thank you Ron and well said...Aram is all about "me, me"... | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 26 Registered: 06-2006 Posted From: 24.169.224.43 |
oh so now we're talking about reparations and lynchings, huh? Enough of this nonsense...this is about affirmative action, period. I am a white guy who comes from the same socio-economic background as 90% of black people in Detroit, yet I have to work harder and get higher test scores than the blacks I grew up with to ge the same opportunities, for no other reason than my race...it's bullsh*t...there's NO WAY you can justify it, and you know it...it's wrong If you find a way to fix the social injustices in society without discriminating against middle-class and poor white people, then great...until then, this AA nonsense has got to go...it's long overdue...gone...bye bye...see ya | ||
Danny Member Username: Danny Post Number: 4530 Registered: 02-2004 Posted From: 141.217.84.91 |
So you all saying that The MCRI (Michigan Civil Rights Initiative) seeks to abolish preferential treatment to any individual or group on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin in the operation of public employment, education, or contracting ect... It has been certified for the 2006 ballot. It is based on the 1964 Civil Rights Act and was further inspired by the "Equal Protection" clause of the 14th Amendment that forbids the United States or any state from denying "equal protection of the law" to any citizen. In good terms BAN AFFIRITIVE ACTION policies period.. Good, VOTE YES!!!! | ||
Danny Member Username: Danny Post Number: 4531 Registered: 02-2004 Posted From: 141.217.84.91 |
Arc312, You quote that what people don’t understand is that the phrase "preferential treatment" is very vague. The MCRI HAS THE POTENTIAL to take away public funding and support of programs that give "preferential treatment" like funding for battered women’s shelters (which gives "preferential treatment" to women), free prostate and breast cancer screenings (which give "preferential treatment" to men and women, respectively), not to mention hundreds of other programs (I’m pretty sure you figure out other ones). WELL! SACRIFICES HAVE TO BE MADE IN THE NAME OF DEMOCRACY. I'M PRETTY SURE THAT THERE ARE SOME OTHER CHARITABLE ORGANIZATIONS THAT WOULD HELP BATTERED AND ABUSED WOMEN GET THE TREATMENT THEY DESERVE. REMEBER THIS, WE THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES ARE THE RULERS OF THE LAND NOT THE PRESIDENT, CONGRESS, STATE SENATE OR REPRESENTATIVES. Oh...lets remember...Affirmative Action was created in order to promote the advancement of women in universities/workforce. Look at all the progress that has been made, and all the work that still needs to be done. Do we really want to set back the clock? WHAT!!! SO YOU ARE WRITING THAT WOMEN WOULD BE THE MAJORITY OF HUMAN BEINGS IN THE AMERICAN WORKFORCE. I DON'T THINK SO!!! AFFIRMITIVE ACTION NOT JUST TO PROMOTE EVERY WOMAN IN THE WORKFORCE BUT IT WENT TO EXTREMES TO PROMOTE RACE, EXPERIENCE AND NON EXPERIENCE PEOPLE IN WORKFORCE, TOO. AND ITS A LOUSY POLICY THAT CAN PROMOTE INVISIBLE SEGREGATION AND DISCRIMINATION IN AMERICA. AFFIRMITIVE ACTION POLICIES MUST BE DESTROYED IMMEDIATELY! So vote YES on MCRI!!! | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 27 Registered: 06-2006 Posted From: 24.169.224.43 |
Danny: Sacrifices don't have to be made because Arc312 was intentionally misrepresenting what MCRI will do...the truth is, MCRI would have NO EFFECT WHATSOEVER on breast cancer screenings and battered womens' shelters... MCRI affects public EMPLOYMENT, EDUCATION, AND CONTRACTING ONLY... The amendment would also contain the following language: "Nothing in this section shall be interpreted as prohibiting bona fide qualifications based on sex that are reasonably necessary to the normal operation of public employment, public education, or public contracting." (Message edited by thejesus on July 12, 2006) | ||
Danny Member Username: Danny Post Number: 4534 Registered: 02-2004 Posted From: 141.217.84.91 |
That's right Thejesus, MCRI would take AFFIRMATIVE ACTION of the EMPLOYMENT, EDUCATION, AND CONTRACTING list. And that include by means of race. | ||
Irish_mafia Member Username: Irish_mafia Post Number: 566 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 75.9.255.242 |
"Those underachieving black kids don't deserve to get admitted over all those kids who tried so hard. Right? They didn't earn it. But, who said the admission had to be earned largely through a standards such as a GPA and test scores?" ______________________________ ___________________ Good point Swingline, let's make college admissions based on how well you can burp the aphabet...what a completely moronic argument. No Those underachieving black kids don't deserve to get admitted. Too bad. and to state the obvious for the rather obtuse politically correct crowd that jumps into this argument: Those underachieving (pick your choice: white, mexican, korean, russian, female) kids don't deserve to get admitted either. If you want to go to college study. If you're to stupid to get the grades, then do something else. If you're too lazy to study, then do something else. You don't need to go to college. There are McDonald's all over this country looking for kids that chose a different path than studying and working hard. If you take the stupid kids out of the equation, these kids are the slackers of the world. They don't deserve anything. They are LAZY. | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 28 Registered: 06-2006 Posted From: 24.169.224.43 |
Yeah, what in the world is Swingline talking about? Why in the world would you not base admissions largely on GPA and test scores? That's how we get the best people to become doctors, lawyers and engineers. How can you even ask that question with a straight face (assuming it was)? What would you base admissions on? Random names drawn out of a hat? While we're at it, why don't we also prohibit NFL teams from drafting players based on their performance at the collegiate level? Maybe they should consider soft factors instead? Come on. What the hell kind of sense would that make? If you don't base admissions on hard factors (GPA, test scores), how in the world is someone supposed to work hard to get what they want? How are they supposed to earn their dreams if you take away their ability to be able to work for it? | ||
Trainman Member Username: Trainman Post Number: 107 Registered: 04-2006 Posted From: 152.163.100.8 |
This law will do no good. The Livonia Opt Out of the Wayne County Transit Auhority is against our Civil Rights as protected by Federal Laws. Only a NO vote next August 8, 2006 to DEFEAT the SMART property tax renewal can or will stop the illegal DARTA agreement to REPLACE state money. So, let's change Michigan's laws to make DARTA legal? For your information, DARTA is not dead as stated by those who don't know the facts. Look closer to DARTA and you will know. | ||
Lmichigan Member Username: Lmichigan Post Number: 3985 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 71.197.17.144 |
Trainman, I really didn't think any could destroy the discussion anymore than it already had been, but you somehow manage to do this every single post you make. Seriously, you get an "A" for effort. lol And, again, for all those that want to ban AA for its "unfairness" why aren't you all crowing about the abolition of ALL equally-ridiculous (if you believe AA is ridiculous) legacy programs? Why should I not be suspicious of people that only support the abolition of AA but make not a sound about all of the other unfair legacy points given? You bitch about inner-city minority children getting this one program to help level the playing field, but you don't bitch about all of the many other legacy programs that obviously give White's preferential treatment (i.e. the alumni parents points). Fact is, for every White student "blocked" from getting into one university, countless other minorities are locked out for all of the legacy points. You could, or should, be able to see why I hold a very high suspicion of the supporter of MCRI, who I believe if born at an earlier time would be the same people supporting segregation, and even earlier, slavery and discrimination of other minorities of the time (i.e. Blacks, Irish, Italian...) It's the same old WASPish attitude, but in a time where they have to be more sneaky about the power-grabs and suppression of the working class. It would be foolish for anyone to deny this translation down through the decades. (Message edited by lmichigan on July 12, 2006) | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 30 Registered: 06-2006 Posted From: 68.62.6.138 |
While legacy programs are pretty much a thing of the past, I would vote for a proposal that prohibits public universities from giving preferential treatment to legacies, and I would push just as hard to support it. They should still be able to consider legacy just as they should be able to consider the race of an underrepresented minority (i.e. two students with identitcal numbers as a tie-breaking vote), but awarding legacies an automatic 20 points or whatever is, in my eyes, equally unjust as awarding someone 20 points for their race. | ||
Lmichigan Member Username: Lmichigan Post Number: 3987 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 71.197.17.144 |
I can agree with that, which is why I don't see why the Michigan Civil Rights Initiative didn't include the other programs in their ballot initiative. The whole movement, for me, comes off very dubiously and suspect simply because of that, and is why I can't get behind it. If they wanted to sneak putting an end to AA through, they could have much more easily done it by getting rid of all legacy programs, right? Wait... | ||
Jenniferl Member Username: Jenniferl Post Number: 295 Registered: 03-2004 Posted From: 4.229.42.227 |
I would have no problem with basing college admissions solely on GPA and test scores if every student in this state had equal educational opportunities. But they don't. The college admissions people know full well that a 3.5 GPA from Birmingham Groves or Grosse Pointe North is "better" than a 3.5 from Highland Park High School or Detroit Northern or Lincoln High School in south Warren. My sister has a job where she trains high school kids. She's met teenagers from every part of the Detroit area and she's heard numerous stories about the various high schools they attend. 12th grade at most Detroit public high schools is about the educational equivalent of 9th grade in Royal Oak's public high schools. Meanwhile, the 9th graders in Royal Oak are taking the same courses that Birmingham, Bloomfield, and elite private school kids take in junior high. Again, the college admissions people know this. They rank the high schools accordingly. Hopefully, the new high school graduation requirements will lessen some of these disparities, especially in math and science. As far as extracurricular activities go, I agree that in most cases it's silly to consider these when determining a teenager's fitness for college. There are some exceptions-- it makes sense for a college of music to admit a kid who played in the school orchestra for four years over an applicant who has no musical background at all. But being class president doesn't mean that that same kid is going to excel in a political science program, and who cares if Tiffany the would-be geology major used to be captain of the pom-pom squad? | ||
Ron Member Username: Ron Post Number: 215 Registered: 03-2006 Posted From: 66.174.79.231 |
No Jesus, legacy programs are not a thing of the past. If that is what you need to tell yourself in order to make yourself feel better, so be it; but that is not the case. Since you feel the need to speak out so loudly against one preferential program over another, don't be a hypocrite and only speak out against one. C'mon and be real, speak out against all PREFERENCES, not only those that don't PREFER YOU!!!!! | ||
Livernoisyard Member Username: Livernoisyard Post Number: 1052 Registered: 10-2004 Posted From: 69.242.223.42 |
So is candidate Ron-Dem implying that the far-left (his political bent, BTW) are using "legacy" provisions at, mostly, UoM? It sure seems that way. Well, do something about it now during your election attempt. Or, might that ruffle some feathers on the birds of your feather? | ||
Compn Member Username: Compn Post Number: 66 Registered: 04-2004 Posted From: 65.29.121.215 |
wasnt there a study on how SAT / standardized tests were biased 'against' non-white students? /for affirmative action. /white kid from livonia with good grades. /done good on his ACT. dont promote the SAT's here in michigan! | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 31 Registered: 06-2006 Posted From: 24.169.224.43 |
Ron: You've obviusly got some issues dood. Did you not read my whole post? I did speak out against legacy programs...I said I would give a proposal to ban legacy programs every bit of support that I give MCRI...why don't you quit running your mouth, get off your a** and get one placed on the 2010 ballot since you have such a problem with it and I will be sure to vote for it. And quit making assumptions. I am not a legacy. First in my family to go to college, yet I had to work harder for it and get higher test scores than minorities who are the first in their family to go to college, though I'm sure that in your warped universe that's perfectly fair. | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 32 Registered: 06-2006 Posted From: 24.169.224.43 |
LMichigan: You seem pretty level-headed, and I'm with you when you say that certain aspects of the MCRI campaign don't sit well with you, such as adopting the term 'civil rights'...and I suspect that I don't share some of the motivations of the people running the campaign..but you know what they say: the enemy of my enemy is my friend, and in this case, AA is my enemy, so I'm supporting this proposal for my own reasons, which may or may not be the same reasons that Jennifer Gratz and Ward Connerly support it. As far as them not including a ban on legacy programs in the proposal...most (if not all) pro-AA people who intend to vote against MCRI would not be voting for it even if it did include a ban on legacy programs...that's just an excuse not to vote for this proposal, becuase people who benefit from AA know that if the playing field is leveled, they can't compete...they are against this proposal whether it bans legacy programs or not..granted, the problem of social inequalities and poor K-12 education is a big source of the reason they can't compete, so that is something well have to fix...and once AA is gone, there will be even more of a reason to get on with fixing it A ban on legacy programs would likely have to be (and probably should be) a separate proposal altogether (Message edited by thejesus on July 13, 2006) | ||
Detroitteacher Member Username: Detroitteacher Post Number: 140 Registered: 06-2006 Posted From: 152.163.100.8 |
Quote: 12th grade at most Detroit public high schools is about the educational equivalent of 9th grade in Royal Oak's public high schools. Meanwhile, the 9th graders in Royal Oak are taking the same courses that Birmingham, Bloomfield, and elite private school kids take in junior high. I so agree with that statement and it is very true! Things DPS wants me to teach my juniors and seniors are the same things their peers in ore affluent districts are learning their 9th grade years! We need to change curriculum and make it standard at the state level (not just requirements) in order for everyone to have equal standing at the start. Benchmarks are statewide but the curriculum isn't. It's a complex problem that needs to be addressed before anyone can have equal education. Those making the rules are too far removed from the kids and the classroom to understand this... | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 33 Registered: 06-2006 Posted From: 24.169.224.43 |
Detroitteacher: I agree 100% with you that things need fixing...however, as long as AA is around, I suspect that you're going to have trouble motivating either the state and the ones benefiting from AA to do anything about it. Many people see AA as the solution to a problem, so why lift a finger to fix the things you're talking about? But the fact is that AA breeds other problems, such as poor minorites going through life less educated and not being taken seriously in the workforce (Message edited by thejesus on July 13, 2006) | ||
Danny Member Username: Danny Post Number: 4547 Registered: 02-2004 Posted From: 141.217.173.162 |
Trainman, You quote that: This law will do no good. OH! YES IT WILL. IT'S TIME FOR THE FOLKS IN THE STATE OF MICHIGAN TO WAKE UP AND SMELL REALITY FOR WE ARE LIVING IN THE OWN PERSONAL WORLD OF FAIRY TALES. AFFIRMITIVE ACTION MUST BE STOPPED, INVISIBLE SEGREGATION MUST BE ELIMINATED. The Livonia Opt Out of the Wayne County Transit Auhority is against our Civil Rights as protected by Federal Laws. IT SURE IS!!! THOSE FOLKS IN HITLERLAND MUST PAY UP IN THEIR TAXES TO KEEP SMART BUS RUNNING AND KEEP THE MICHIGAN ECOMONY FLOWING. THOSE FOLKS IN HITLERLAND DON'T HAVE THE MONEY TO START THEIR OWN PUBLIC TRANSIT SYSTEM OR HAVE DARTA IN THEIR SIDE. DARTA REMAINS DEAD!!! Only a NO vote next August 8, 2006 to DEFEAT the SMART property tax renewal can or will stop the illegal DARTA agreement to REPLACE state money. THAT'S A ABSOLUTE LIE!!! VOTE YES ON THE SMART MILLAGE! THAT WOULD KEEP THE SMART BUSSES ROLLING WITH EXTRA STATE FUNDS AND THE TAX PAYERS WOULD GET A DEDUCTION OF WHATEVER THE PRECENTAGE THAT THE CITY WHERE THEY ARE LIVING IN. A NO VOTE COULD BRING THE SMART BUS SYSTEM IN WHATEVER COUNTY INTO HINDERANCE RESULTING A OVER THOUSANDS OF JOBS IN ANY TRI-COUNTY AREA TO BE LOST. PEOPLE WHO ARE LIVING IN THE DETROIT SUBURBAN CITIES WOULD GOING TO SUFFER. RESULTING TO HIGHER CRIME, AND INCREASE UNEMPLOYMENT PRESENTAGE. AS FOR RIGHT NOW THE SMART BUS SYSTEM IS DOING A EXCELLENT JOB REGAINING A SUDDEN INCREASE OF RIDERSHIP DUE TO PEOPLE NOT DRIVING THEIR CARS DUE TO HIGHER GAS PRICES. So, let's change Michigan's laws to make DARTA legal? HELL NO!!! IT'S LIKE CHANGING THE CIVIL RIGHTS AMENDENT FOR CITY BUSES WHICH ARE NOT LIVING BEINGS. For your information, DARTA is not dead as stated by those who don't know the facts. FOR THOSE WHO WANT TO START DARTA SHOULD GET THE ACT TOGETHER, PLAN, SCHEDULE, DEVELOP. THAT'S HOW YOU RUN THINS IN A DEMOCRACY TO ENSURE THAT TRUST OF THE PEOPLE IN THE UNITED STATES. TALKING AND BICKERING ABOUT IT WON'T DO. Look closer to DARTA and you will know. I'VE ALREADY LOOK INTO IT. AND IT DOESN'T LOOK PRETTY FOR DARTA. THE TRI-COUNTY AREA DOESN'T NEED DARTA UNTIL OUR LEADERS SCHEDULE, PLAN AND CONSTRUCT. THAT'S IT. | ||
Detroitteacher Member Username: Detroitteacher Post Number: 141 Registered: 06-2006 Posted From: 152.163.100.8 |
Jesus: I agree! (do I have a choice to not agree with jesus??) If people want equal then the playing field has to be equal to start with. Those students in poor districts need to be given every chance at the same curriculum. These are NOT stupid kids....many are very bright but we, as teachers, parents and those at the state and national levels must expect excellence from them and not dummy down the curriculum. I teach my kids what they need to know to succeeed in college or the workfoce (whichever THEY choose). I expect excellence and rarely abide by DPS curriculum (I follow curriculum from some of the more affluent districts but don't tell DPS that..shhhhh). MANY of my students are accepted to better universities not because they are black but because their personal essays for the admissions process explain of the woes they dealt with in the educational system and how they overcame those obstacles. I've said it before, I tell my students to rely on their own merits and not any type of handout to succeed in life. The only thing you can rely on is yourself. | ||
Southwestmap Member Username: Southwestmap Post Number: 518 Registered: 01-2005 Posted From: 70.229.231.102 |
In the discussion of curriculums in Grosse Pointe versus Detroit - how does this issue affect whether two students with the same grade point avarages get chosen for admission? Different levels of preparation will affect college graduation (success) rates. Intuitively, the graduation rates for the student with the poorer preparation will be smaller. But, test results aside, the relative value of the GPA will not affect admission. Are admissions officers giving "extra points" to Detroit students with (for example) 3.5 gpa's over Grosse Pointe students with 3.5's? How would that help anything? On paper they are on a level playing field. In reality, the kids who get helped in will fail more often. Using this anecdotal story, it seems to me that the admissions officers should be more wary of bringing in kids who have the less valued (as they say) gpa's than the kids who have the better ones because they are setting the Detrooit kids up for failure. Or maybe the college curriculum should be changed for those kids. | ||
K_solomon Member Username: K_solomon Post Number: 2 Registered: 07-2006 Posted From: 199.178.223.4 |
I don't think most people see AA as a permenant solution to the problem. I would like to think most people view it as a temporary solution to the problem until the playing fields have somewhat leveled.
To make this generalization you have to agree that most benefactors of AA GRADUATE from college less prepared for the workforce than thier white counterparts. I am familiar with the studies that suggest that minorities have higher college drop out rates than than thier white counterparts, but I am not familiar with any study that suggests that once they graduate they are any less competent than thier colleagues. | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 34 Registered: 06-2006 Posted From: 24.169.224.43 |
K_solomon: "There will be affirmative action here today,there will be affirmative action here tomorrow and there will be affirmative action in our state forever." --Mayor Kilpatrick, May 2006 I know he's just one guy, but I fear that a lot of people share his view and understanding of AA. Maybe not a majority, but a large group. Also, in saying that many minorities go though life less educated, I wasn't refering to those that went to and completed college. Rather, I was refering to those who either never go to college or those that get in through an AA program then end up dropping out. Despite AA, the percentage of minorites on college campuses is still less than that of the general population. Much of this has to do with the lower quality of K-12 education that many minorities are exposed to, yet as long as AA is around, it's going to be difficult to get anyone (either the state or those benefiting from AA) to want to take the necessary steps to fix the problems. Instead, they'll just say, "yeah, there's a gap in the quality of education, but we have AA to make up for that" just as they always have. As far the competence and preparedness of minority graduates in the workforce you mentioned, I'm not suggesting that minorities who graduate college are any less competent or prepared. Rather, I'm refering to peer assessment. It would be foolish not to acknowledge that, many times, when we encounter a minority in a successful position in the workforce, it's automatically assumed by some (including myself, I will admit) that this person wouldn't have been able to succeed without AA and that they lacked the qualifications that a non-minority would have needed to get to the same place. This is not always a correct assumption, but those minorities who would have succeeded without AA still get this label placed on them given how prevelant AA has become in our society. | ||
Detroitteacher Member Username: Detroitteacher Post Number: 142 Registered: 06-2006 Posted From: 205.188.116.137 |
Let's not dumb down college for kids! That isn't the answer. Sending kids off to college INFORMED about decisions they will make, how to study, write and read, and how to organize their time and GO TO CLASS will help our kids. Many fail out because they simply don't go to class (much like high school). We need to teach our kids to rely on their own merits and not anything else. We also need to raise expectations for them in high school. I know, as a teacher, I have extrememly high expectations compared to my colleagues in my building. Kids, at first, don't want me because I am "too hard" but they end up thanking me for it later...when they come to see me after their first year at college. DPS kids are not stupid, they are very smart but need to be given a chance to show it. Raise expectations and kids will rise to meet them! PERIOD! | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 35 Registered: 06-2006 Posted From: 24.169.224.43 |
here's a thought... AA programs need to be eliminated in my mind...you all know that and we don't need to go back over the reasons why... However, I will acknowledge that the immediate effects will be harsh as many people have become dependant on AA programs for college admissions and jobs post-graduation... So my thought is, would there be a way to pass a law banning affirmative action but make it so that it doesn't actually go into effect for a period of time...say 4 or 5 years after said law gets passed...this would give the state time to make some adjustments to curriculums and funding and it would also give students, such as those entering High School, a fair chance to tailor their High School careers towards the change in policy. It may be too late to do this for the Michigan proposal (which still might not even pass), but this is something that could be considered in other places that seek to eliminate affirmative action programs...and there will likely be more of them down the road. Any thoughts? (Message edited by thejesus on July 13, 2006) | ||
K_solomon Member Username: K_solomon Post Number: 3 Registered: 07-2006 Posted From: 199.178.223.4 |
Detroitteacher: I agree that when you raise exepections for the kids that they will do better. However, all the expections in the world are worthless if the student is not given the tools to succeed. I don't believe that students from lower income school district will ever be on the same level as students coming from upper class district simply because the dont have the access/exposure to the same things. I don't totally agree with AA. I believe that preference should be base on a students socioeconomic status, NOT thier race. AA for me is a compromise just because the majority of the students on the lower end of the socioeconomic scale are minorities. | ||
Detroit_stylin Member Username: Detroit_stylin Post Number: 2771 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 67.38.3.10 |
not True K Solo.. In fact the BIGGEST benificiaries of Affirmative Action is the oppressed MAJORITY. In other words WOMEN | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 36 Registered: 06-2006 Posted From: 24.169.224.43 |
K_solomon: I agree with what you said about socio-economic status, and I predeict that the emergence of AA programs based on SES will be the natural result of banning AA programs as they exist today. Since the MCRI doesn't say anything about SES, and since schools will still have an interest to create a diverse student body but will no longer be able to do it based on race, this appears to be the logical result of MCRI's passage. | ||
K_solomon Member Username: K_solomon Post Number: 4 Registered: 07-2006 Posted From: 199.178.223.4 |
Detroit_stylin:
Im sure this is true in regards to the employment sector, I am not so sure this is the case in regards to public education. Jesus: It's possible, but why do you think that it has not been proposed? | ||
Sarge Member Username: Sarge Post Number: 243 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 204.57.109.226 |
TheJ, We beat this one to death a while back...feel free to check it out: https://www.atdetroit.net/forum/mes sages/36206/35682.html | ||
Arc312 Member Username: Arc312 Post Number: 31 Registered: 01-2006 Posted From: 62.14.91.232 |
While it seems that Socio-economic status should reign over race that would do nothing to combat white privilege. Think about it. If we were to look at the whole NUMBER of students at the national level that could be considered socio-economically underprivileged, a majority of those people would be WHITE. That policy would help alot of poor whites, which isn't a bad thing, but it would still ignore the other, much larger issue Therefore, without some race based admission policies, the real number of minority students would decrease because of that majority. For the 400 years that institutionalized racism has existed, Affirmative Action policies have been proven to be the best way to level the playing field for qualified individuals. It has only been around for 40 years, and women-men enrollments are almost on par. That's pretty good. It's all about access. Vote NO on the MCRI. (Message edited by arc312 on July 13, 2006) | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 37 Registered: 06-2006 Posted From: 24.169.224.43 |
Sarge: Thanks for the link. Looking at it now. | ||
Livedog2 Member Username: Livedog2 Post Number: 682 Registered: 03-2006 Posted From: 24.223.133.177 |
I still hope not! Livedog2 | ||
Kova Member Username: Kova Post Number: 43 Registered: 12-2003 Posted From: 63.77.247.130 |
DUH arc321, last time i looked whites do outnumber blacks ( in sheer numbers)... And of course very FEW blacks would enjoy benefits of SE AA... And thats right! Poor whites ALREADY enjoy white privilege. right???? Everyone loves to use the term white privilege, but so few really investigate where it does and does not apply or even if it truely exists | ||
Detroitteacher Member Username: Detroitteacher Post Number: 144 Registered: 06-2006 Posted From: 205.188.116.137 |
Quote: all the expections in the world are worthless if the student is not given the tools to succeed. I don't believe that students from lower income school district will ever be on the same level as students coming from upper class district simply because the dont have the access/exposure to the same things. I so agree with you and have said this in previous posts. I was really referencing someone's statement of changing college requiremens/curriculum for the kids. We need to change the curriculum in the K-12 schools and put everyone on the same curriculum across the nation. If Hamlet is to be read in 10th grade by some, it should be read in 10th grade by all. I can say that it really needs to begin at home when kids are infants. On average, my students read at a 5th grade level (really, and they've been tested). More reading at home and more exposure to books at an early age may raise this level. If any program really wants to help, they should provide for equal amounts of training to parents in reading to children and provide for more books and opportunities in the home (museums, artwork, books, computers, etc). Just my lowly thoughts. Won't work for everyone unless it's utilized. Don't know where funding will come from but we need to stress equal opportunities and experiences for everyone. Many of my students have never been to a museum (not even the AAH). Many don't have the experiences of having a diverse selection of friends...so as to learn about other cultures. I had all of those experiences growing up and I would wish that for each of my students. I think it made me a better person and certainly made me a better student! | ||
Lmichigan Member Username: Lmichigan Post Number: 3989 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 24.11.208.227 |
I still haven't got an answer to how taking away AA without doing away with other legacy programs is somehow fair and equal. If you're going to take away the programs that help minorities and women, and don't take away those legacy programs (i.e. again, and again, the program of giving points to alumni paranets) which heavily favor Majority/White individuals, why am I not supposed to be suspicious of what I see as dubious and disenginuous motives and angles? Why take away one precieved preferential treatement, and leave all others that actually end up heavily favoring White individuals? How are you going to honestly explain to me that this is somehow fair and "leveling" the playing field. People seem to think that the Civil Rights movement should have ended in the 60's, and that all that was to gain was gained. You WISH that were true. The 60's only ended up twisting the arms of the Majority behind their backs to force to get them to give minorities and women (those that wanted it) a fair shake in the system. I've said it before, and I'll say it again, until the majority in this country is willing address public education at the primary level, then there will always be a need for AA, unfortunately. If you don't like AA, than come to the table to save public education, first, and leave these obvioulsy racist-based "initiatives" behind. | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 38 Registered: 06-2006 Posted From: 24.169.224.43 |
Detroitteacher: "We need to change the curriculum in the K-12 schools and put everyone on the same curriculum across the nation." As a supporter of MCRI, I agree with this and am all for state funding being used to make the amount of money school districts in the state receive more even than they are currently...doing this will help to ensure that all individuals receive an adequate K-12 education which will allow colleges to mine the talent of a larger pool of individuals... One hurdle though would seem to be that teachers can take teaching positions wherever the chose and schools districts in poorer areas tend not to be the first choice of teachers...any ideas on how to remedy this? (Message edited by thejesus on July 13, 2006) | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 39 Registered: 06-2006 Posted From: 24.169.224.43 |
Lmichigan: I responded to your question about legacy programs above. | ||
Detroitteacher Member Username: Detroitteacher Post Number: 150 Registered: 06-2006 Posted From: 205.188.116.137 |
Not really sure. When I began teaching Detroit was my first and only CHOICE. I grew up in Detroit and I knew the students needed me. I guess if Detroit and the poorer districts were to level the playing field for teachers (suburbs give teachers an allowance with which to buy supplies, etc), provide materials that students need (books) in all districts and stop all the red tape mumbo jumbo that Detroit and the poorer districts have that might help. Safety of schools also has much to do with it. I LOVE my job, the students and parents. HOWEVER, I HATE all the BS I have to go through just to get supplies, my paycheck (I've gone months without getting paid because of computer snafu, so they say), safe classrooms (tiles are coming off the floor in my room and a huge hole is in the back wall). Not sure how to answer that. It was my choice to go to DPS, it wasn't because I couldn't find another job in the suburbs, I didn't even try. | ||
Livernoisyard Member Username: Livernoisyard Post Number: 1056 Registered: 10-2004 Posted From: 69.242.223.42 |
Any perceived lack of funding is not the issue in education, especially in MI, whose teachers are at the top of the food chain salary-wise and produce only dismal results compared to most other states. The truth (facts) is out there. Research this for yourselves. | ||
Detroitteacher Member Username: Detroitteacher Post Number: 151 Registered: 06-2006 Posted From: 152.163.100.8 |
OK, I'll buy that. BUT, Detroit just bought brand spanking new toilet paper dispensers but failed to buy the toilet paper (there is none, the news reports are correct). We also haven't had new books in the 11 years I've been there. Low performing districts need to get priorities straight. It's not how much you pay the teachers (and I can make more in a suburban disctrict, btw), it's how you spend your cash. To attract GOOD teachers, you need to pay them. Michigan has the highest rates for gas/electric etc. Teachers have to live, too. I say get rid of the crappy teachers and keep the ones who make a difference with the kids. The kids will tell you right away what teachers teach and what teachers don't. That's a start. You can hire more teachers by getting rid of those who NEED to reture because they are doing nothing in the classroom. We have alot of veteran teachers who do wonderful jobs, but more often than not, they just plain need to get out of teaching. Stop laying off new teachers each year. That causes many of them to go elsewhere. | ||
Lmichigan Member Username: Lmichigan Post Number: 3991 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 24.11.208.227 |
Thejesus (where'd you come up with that one, BTW?), I read your post, and the answer did not satisfy my question. AA is a compromise until primary public education is truly leveled, which it is not. It would be unconscionable and irresponsible to support a movement to ban ONLY AA, without also creating a movement to address and resolve, fully and honest, the disparities at the primary education level. It's like calling for border security without including immigration reform. All are connected at the hip, and ignoring that fact does this country no good whatsoever and causes us to take a step back into much darker days. | ||
Livernoisyard Member Username: Livernoisyard Post Number: 1057 Registered: 10-2004 Posted From: 69.242.223.42 |
Any problems with DPS elementary education lie principally in the laps of absentee parents and also are abetted with self-destructive peer pressure from "students." No amount of money or AA will ever counteract those two prevalent attitudes in Detroit. Quit blaming society for self-inflicted abuse. | ||
Trainman Member Username: Trainman Post Number: 112 Registered: 04-2006 Posted From: 152.163.100.8 |
Danny, Top state and regional leaders came right into Livonia Hall and said very clear that the passage of the SMART property tax means NO state money for any operating costs. They wanted us to opt out because then we pay and not them. This is a fact that I can prove and do on my website. A NO vote means that not one single bus driver or passenger will lose bus service because the state must pay by means of force. The public is mis-informed on this. So, read the fine print on the voting ballot. You will see that there is NO state funds and what is in writing is what you get period. http://savethefueltax.tripod.c om/smart.pdf | ||
Lmichigan Member Username: Lmichigan Post Number: 3992 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 24.11.208.227 |
And, that's where we will have to agree to disagree. My observation is that it's equal parts personal responsibility, and social responsibility. Many (most) of our inner-city and rural public schools are in crisis, and being attacked from both sides, not just one. Stripping away the few social safety nets this country has does nothing to strengthen it. This sick ideology of social darwinism, more fit for lesser animals than any human being, will not work in a country, epsecially one as egalitarian as our Constitution claims it to be. It's more than time enough to quit kicking the victim in the teeth. Even if individuals shirk their responsibility does not obligate or free us to shirk our social responsibility which TOO many have done. It's time to stop this rollback to darker times. We're only as strong as our weakest, and it does us much damage, socially and economically, to continue to wage war against weakest amongst us. (Message edited by lmichigan on July 13, 2006) | ||
Detroitteacher Member Username: Detroitteacher Post Number: 157 Registered: 06-2006 Posted From: 152.163.100.8 |
Livernois: I agree. We do need to have parents become involved in the early years. As I said before, they need to make sure their kids are reading at home AND demand excellence in their children in school. Attendance is also an issue (even at the K-6 levels). Parents need to make sure their kids are in school and not "accompanying" them to the doctor, court, store, whatever. Too many excuses, not enough action. | ||
The_aram Member Username: The_aram Post Number: 4965 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 68.41.124.8 |
Because no one fucks with him? 8 year olds, Dude. 8 year olds. | ||
Livernoisyard Member Username: Livernoisyard Post Number: 1059 Registered: 10-2004 Posted From: 69.242.223.42 |
News bulletin July 13, 2006 By DAWSON BELL FREE PRESS STAFF WRITER Supreme Court won't throw affirmative action ban off ballot The Michigan Supreme Court closed the door Thursday on a challenge to the Michigan Civil Rights Initiative, denying a request to rehear a decision to place the issue before voters in November because of alleged irregularities in the collection of petition signatures. In a five-page order, Justice Stephen Markman said the allegations, even if true, would not justify removing the issue from the ballot. A citizen “cannot blame others when he signs a petition without knowing what it says,” Markman wrote. “It is not to excuse misrepresentations, when they occur, to recognize nonetheless that is the citizen’s duty to inform himself about the substance of the petition before signing it.” Opponents of the ballot proposal, which would ban government affirmative action programs that use race or gender preferences in hiring, contracting and university admissions, claimed that petition signers had been lied to about the effect of the amendment. The state Civil Rights Commission also asked the court to reconsider an earlier decision that placed the issue on the November ballot. Dissenting from Thursday’s orders were Justices Michael Cavanagh and Marilyn Kelly. Kelly wrote that the “allegations of fraud seem credible” and that state elections officials appeared to have the authority to act upon them. A separate, federal court, challenge to MCRI is pending. | ||
Brian Member Username: Brian Post Number: 3323 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 68.252.6.152 |
Where does racial preference appear in any law? The following is what I received in the mail today;
| ||
Livernoisyard Member Username: Livernoisyard Post Number: 1061 Registered: 10-2004 Posted From: 69.242.223.42 |
Apparently, the Michigan Supreme Court tossed Brian's arguments into the legal dumpster. | ||
Lmichigan Member Username: Lmichigan Post Number: 3994 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 24.11.208.227 |
It's rather sad that the courts would allow an initiative on the ballot wrought so full of deception and illegalities, it would make a Chicago election officials blush. I still believe that this initiative has an uphill battle, and has faced more opposition than it ever expected it would. | ||
Jenniferl Member Username: Jenniferl Post Number: 296 Registered: 03-2004 Posted From: 4.229.156.91 |
Southwestmap: "In the discussion of curriculums in Grosse Pointe versus Detroit - how does this issue affect whether two students with the same grade point avarages get chosen for admission?" Some colleges-- including U of M-- use a point system in determining which applicants are admitted. Under affirmative action, minority applicants received bonus points because of their race. But applicants who graduated from elite high schools also receive extra points. The various high schools are ranked and given a point value. Also, most high schools in poorer districts simply do not offer the challenging, college prep courses that kids in affluent districts sign up for almost automatically. For example, a poor high school might offer only one year of a foreign language, whereas in affluent districts the kids can take four years of a foreign language in high school (not to mention that their middle schools and even elementary schools probably also include foreign language courses). In poor high schools, AP courses are few and far between. If you want to study math beyond basic algebra or science beyond biology, you're out of luck. In a senior-level English class, you read the same books that the honors students in Birmingham read when they were in the seventh grade. So no, the Detroit graduate with the 3.5 or even the 4.0 GPA is not considered equal to the Grosse Pointe or even the St. Clair Shores graduate with the same GPA. | ||
Lmichigan Member Username: Lmichigan Post Number: 3997 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 24.11.208.227 |
Jennifer, I think that most people understand that. Those that still support MCRI in the face of these kind of facts will offer you this: "It's not my problem." They've totally dropped the social ball, which is part of their responsibility to society. | ||
Jenniferl Member Username: Jenniferl Post Number: 297 Registered: 03-2004 Posted From: 4.229.156.91 |
In regards to white privilege, generally speaking I agree that it exists. I've heard far too many "driving while black", "shopping while black", "applying for a job while black", and "walking through a white suburb while black" stories from black friends and acquaintances to believe that there's no such thing as white privilege. However, I don't think a white kid in an inner city school has any advantages over his or her black classmates. According to http://www.schools.publicschoo lsreport.com, there are 6 white students at Highland Park High School, 8 white students at Mumford High School, 25 white students at both Cooley and Denby High Schools, 26 whites at Osborn, 38 at Northern, 81 at Cody, 217 at Southwestern, 222 at Chadsey, and a whopping 241 white students at Western High School. These numbers are small compared to the number of black students at most of these same schools, but that still ads up to a lot of white kids in the Detroit public high schools. And I didn't even look up all of the high schools in the city. Should these white kids be eligible for some sort of affirmative action? I believe so. However, voting yes on the MCRI won't give it to them. BTW, I also looked up some of the elite suburban schools. Of the 948 students at Bloomfield Hills Andover High School, 42 are black. Of the 1042 students at Bloomfield Hills Lahser, 103 are black. Farmington High School has 105 black students. There are 92 black students at Royal Oak's Kimball High School, 71 at Royal Oak's Dondero High School, 57 at both Troy High School and Troy Athens, only 12 at Birmingham Seaholm, and just 4 black students at Rochester Adams High School. West Bloomfield High School had a surprising 339 out of 1930 students. Do I think the black students at these good, upper-class and upper-middle class schools "need" affirmative action? With the exception of the poor black kids from Pontiac who are benefitting from the Schools of Choice program, I'd say no. The kids at these affluent schools have an advantage over other kids throughout the state and they should sink or swim on their own merits. No affirmative action. No legacies. If the MCRI does not pass, will the black kids from these schools benefit from affirmative action? Yes. Is it fair? No. But overall, I would rather keep affirmative action and tweak it than dump it altogether. The bottom line is, I feel that it is in society's best interest for more inner city kids (of all races and ethnicities) to get a college education. Yes, affirmative action excludes some kids based on their skin color. But as I said before, passing the MCRI won't help those white kids. And affirmative action does help a lot of kids who wouldn't normally get to go to college. It isn't the best system, but it's what we've got. Until someone comes up with a better solution, I say we keep affirmative action. | ||
Detroitteacher Member Username: Detroitteacher Post Number: 160 Registered: 06-2006 Posted From: 64.12.116.204 |
Quote: 25 white students at both Cooley I teach at Cooley. There are NOT 25 white kids there. Maybe, at one time, we have 3 and those are foster kids (in the 10 years I've been there, I've had ONE white student and the rest were black). We do have Cooley North which is the special school for cognitively impaired kids and there are more white kids(only a handful) there BUT they won't be attending college since Cooley North doesn't offer diplomas but offers Certificates of Completion. These are not considered valid for colleges. Wherever you got your figures, they are wrong. (Message edited by detroitteacher on July 14, 2006) | ||
Detroitteacher Member Username: Detroitteacher Post Number: 162 Registered: 06-2006 Posted From: 64.12.116.204 |
That website has SUCH WRONG info on it it isn't even funny. I just took a look. I'd like to know who the Asian and Alaskan kids are. We don't have any. We also haven't offered 7th grade for about 5 years. That number of students and teachers is also very wrong. Students total about 1500. Teachers and staff total about 88 (not all teachers...some are secretaries, custodians, etc.) Student teacher ratio is also way wrong. It's more like 40+ kids in a class. Not disputing what you are saying, just the figures you use to back it up. Even the DPS website has old info on it. The schools with the most whites in DPS are Rennaisance, Cass, MLK, and CMA. Those are the elite schools, if you will. Jennifer, what you are saying makes alot of sense. I do agree that maybe affirmative action for college admissions should be based on the level of education you received in HS, regardless of race. The white kids who come through our building probably have it much worse because 99% of them are in foster care and are moved from place to place frequently throughout the school year with no stability. NOTE: That is just my experience at Cooley and is not an indicator of all DPS. There is really no way to be fair in education. Some win, some loose. It's all how you play the game and the game is about which area and what schools you attend prior to college. I wish it were different. If I could wish for one thing, it would be that my students got the same perks that kids from affluent districts get, right down to the experiences and parental involvement (out of 200 kids, I saw 3 parents at parent teacher conferences last year...total, not just one conference). | ||
K_solomon Member Username: K_solomon Post Number: 5 Registered: 07-2006 Posted From: 199.178.223.4 |
Jenniferl: You have pretty much sumed up for me in your last post. 100% agreed. | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 42 Registered: 06-2006 Posted From: 24.169.224.43 |
Jenniferl: You keep asking for a solution and we keep giving it to you, yet you don't seem to be listening. The solution is the emergence AA programs based on SES instead of race, which are the obvious natural result of MCRI's passage. Once MCRI passes, schools are still going to have an interest in creating a diverse student body, and since they will no longer be allowed to award or deduct points based on a person's race, the logical result will be to instead begin to award points based on lower SES. Not only will this still allow them to admit underprivledged minorities, but it will also prevent them from leaving behind the underprivledged non-minorities since it would be a violation of MCRI to give preferential treatment based on race. Problem solved. | ||
Irish_mafia Member Username: Irish_mafia Post Number: 571 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 75.9.255.242 |
Amen Jesus! | ||
Lmichigan Member Username: Lmichigan Post Number: 3999 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 24.11.208.227 |
How is the "problem solved" when minority enrollment drops significantly everywhere where AA has been struck down? | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 43 Registered: 06-2006 Posted From: 68.62.6.138 |
Of course it's going to drop. When you outlaw AA based on race, non-minorities with a low SES no longer get left behind as they do now. Right now the white boy growing up across the street from the crack house in Detroit doesn't get awarded any extra points but his black friend next door does. Once you fix that, the white boy gets the same oportunity his buddy does. We need to start classifying people buy SES instead of race in order to really give the underprivledged the opporunities we want to give them. And when AA based on race is gone, the state can no longer just ignore the problems of the school systems that have a high percentage of underprivledged minorities. Right now, they'll acknowledge the gap in educational quality between Detroit and Birmingham, but instead of fixing it, they just figure that we have AA to make up for it so why bother, which is why nothing is being done at present time. | ||
Lmichigan Member Username: Lmichigan Post Number: 4000 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 24.11.208.227 |
There are two parts, here. You can solve the problem in helping the disenfrancized/disadvantaged by leaving in place a program that helps most of those that are while a solution is sought, or you can take away the programs that help most of those that are disenfrancized/disadvantaged, and have faith that the country will seek a solution to the problem. I don't have enough faith in society as a whole to do what is right, which is why I think taking away AA would be taking a step backwards. And, even still and again, I'm confused how dismantling AA, ALONE, will "level the playing field" and make things "fair" when for every AA program you have 2 other legacy programs that heavily favor a large portion of the white college-abled crowd. Assaulting and dismantling AA, by itself/alone, is not leveling the playing field, nor does it make the situation fair. In fact, the assault against it does the complete opposite. Why are so many not only so willing, but so ready and chomping at the bit, to do away with AA while completely ignoringing all other unfair programs still in use in college admission? (Message edited by lmichigan on July 14, 2006) | ||
Ron Member Username: Ron Post Number: 217 Registered: 03-2006 Posted From: 66.174.79.228 |
TheJ (Sorry, I really cannot take calling you the name of MY Lord and Savior) So why not simply create another category using SES (as we have with gender), rather than eliminate race as a category all together? Then, we could address more of the issues of poverty. To me, that would address your concern. Or is it the simple fact that a black student has an opportunity that makes you upset? (Not trying to be sarcastic, just want to know). I was a white kid who grew up behind a crack house, and I turned out OK (you may disagree). Granted, my mother worked three jobs to put my sister and I through private school, but now we're both lawyers. | ||
Livernoisyard Member Username: Livernoisyard Post Number: 1067 Registered: 10-2004 Posted From: 69.242.223.42 |
What Ron is trying to say is: "By hook or crook, I got mine. Tough luck, kid, if you're white and male..." | ||
Lmichigan Member Username: Lmichigan Post Number: 4001 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 24.11.208.227 |
Would you get off his dick for just one second, Livernoisyard? You've done nothing but made this ridiculously personal with Ron, instead of arguing the issue. Is that all you are, a complete and total antagonist? | ||
Angry_dad Member Username: Angry_dad Post Number: 74 Registered: 02-2006 Posted From: 64.12.116.204 |
If this stays on the ballot it passes, then the courts go around in circles. Nobody here would chose a doctor that was given a break because of heritage, heck nobody wants to buy a car because of heritage either. So why should anybody get a break in school or on the job? AA is just like inhertitance taxes. If it doesn't work for you, bitch like crazy. | ||
Ron Member Username: Ron Post Number: 219 Registered: 03-2006 Posted From: 66.174.79.239 |
No Livernois, What I am saying is that I realize that I have been tremendously blessed to have a mother who cared enough for me to sacrifice like she did to ensure a better life for my sister and I. I also recognize that not everyone does. But the "disadvantages" (which I don't believe being in the lower middle-class necessarily is; I had a VERY rich childhood) I faced pale in comparison to what some people have to face every single day they wake up. Why can't we, as a society, try to make things better if we can? And thanks Lmich, his personal attacks merely let me know that (1) I am a threat to him and his beliefs, (2)he either respects or hates me for running for office to actually DO something to implement what I believe rather than sit around and talk about it, and (3) he has too much time on his hands. It is curious to me that "conservatives" want to sit around and talk about how people of color should excel in the face of historical adversity, yet they rail against any perceived "adversity" against themselves and about how "unfair" AA is to them. Another example of the hypocritical nature of the GOP. Quite laughable, actually. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =cPf8kXqJVS4 | ||
Ron Member Username: Ron Post Number: 220 Registered: 03-2006 Posted From: 66.174.79.239 |
Angry_dad, Nobody is getting "breaks" once admitted. Once in, everyone proves themselves the same way. Again, a little point that you seem to forget. | ||
Ron Member Username: Ron Post Number: 222 Registered: 03-2006 Posted From: 66.174.79.239 |
Additionally, it is not an issue of sheer intelligence. It is an issue of how that intelligence has been nurtured. Just like natural athletes; if that talent is not nurtured (i.e being taught the rules of the game you are playing), then they will be terrible players in a particular sport. Quite frankly, it is amazing the strides that have been made by Black Americans since they were DENIED EQUAL EDUCATIONS until a mere fifty years ago. Can we all say we would have come so far in such a short period? I also hate to sound like I am a rabid far-left Democrat (as Livernois likes to think), but this discussion seems to bring out my socially liberal philosophies. I mean, c'mon, who isn't for lower taxes? | ||
Livernoisyard Member Username: Livernoisyard Post Number: 1069 Registered: 10-2004 Posted From: 69.242.223.42 |
Ron, I buy the beer for you to cry in on or after 7 November. | ||
321brian Member Username: 321brian Post Number: 164 Registered: 02-2006 Posted From: 68.62.6.147 |
What everyone is forgetting is that A.A. is discriminitation. It discriminates against white males of any background. The rich white kid from Grosse Pointe that everybody hates and the poor kid from wherever that everyone forgot about. I hate it when everyone calls it reverse-discrimination because that assumes that everyone else is being held back in some way by white men. Be honest with yourself. It is discrimination. There needs to be something better. A program based on economic need. Guess what? It won't happen because every business, politician, and group that is against the MCRI is scared of the media and minority groups attacking them for backing it. The key is to make sure that every business and college is and remains an EQUAL opportunity employer or institution. | ||
321brian Member Username: 321brian Post Number: 165 Registered: 02-2006 Posted From: 68.62.6.147 |
Jenniferl said, "In regards to white privilege, generally speaking I agree that it exists. I've heard far too many "driving while black", "shopping while black", "applying for a job while black", and "walking through a white suburb while black" stories from black friends and acquaintances to believe that there's no such thing as white privilege." Jennifer let me tell you a story about applying for a job while a white man. You know that the company is not looking for people like you. Qualified, over-qualified, under-qualified it does not matter. Once you check the ethnicity box you go to the bottom of the pile. A.A. in it's current form sucks!! Yes on the MCRI!!! Anyone for it is for discrimination. | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 44 Registered: 06-2006 Posted From: 68.62.6.138 |
Ron: Don't worry about it. My screen name is not a reference to your lord and savior anyway. Something else entirely. The reason you don't simply create another category while leaving what's currently in place untouched is that it only fixes half the problem. Disadvantaged minorities would still be favored over disadvantaged non-minorities, and that isn't right. The goal here is to give anyone, no matter what their race, the same opportunities when they come from similar backgrounds. How upset would the pro-AA people be if we started awarding disadvantaged non-minorities twice the points as disadvantaged minorities on college applications? Why can't we just even things out for them when they come from the same place? And I know it's convenient for pro-AA people to paint anyone who is against AA as a racist, and sometimes you're right, but not always. Pro-AA peoples' worst fear is for level-headed non-racist people like myself to be opposed to AA for practical, logical, legitimate reasons. I'm also a Democrat...scary, huh? P.S. So you're an attorney? Got any advice for OL starting classes next month? (Message edited by thejesus on July 14, 2006) | ||
Compn Member Username: Compn Post Number: 67 Registered: 04-2004 Posted From: 65.29.121.215 |
"Despite AA, the percentage of minorites on college campuses is still less than that of the general population." more than it wsa before AA. more than it will be if you ban AA. whats your point? to get rid of minorities on college campuses? white males will be the minority soon in the united states. | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 45 Registered: 06-2006 Posted From: 68.62.6.138 |
Compn: The point immediately follows the block of text that you quoted. There is a reason that, despite AA, the percentage of minorities on college campuses is still less than that in the general population. Haven't you ever wondered why this is? How could this be when certain minority groups are virtually guaranteed admission to quality higher learning institutiuons? Read the rest of my post that you quoted for the answer to your question. | ||
Compn Member Username: Compn Post Number: 69 Registered: 04-2004 Posted From: 65.29.121.215 |
er i'm sorry... must have missed that the first time around. " Instead, they'll just say, "yeah, there's a gap in the quality of education, but we have AA to make up for that" just as they always have." kind of a big wager... if AA is banned, a better system will spring up. what if it doesnt? do we get AA back? how about we suspend AA for 5 years until something better comes along, and if nothing does, we all get AA back? | ||
Lmichigan Member Username: Lmichigan Post Number: 4002 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 24.11.208.227 |
Remember, that's not their problem. Their ideology doesn't allow them to form "Plan B" because Plan A is always supposed to work. If Plan A doesn't work, "Oh Well." (Message edited by lmichigan on July 14, 2006) | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 46 Registered: 06-2006 Posted From: 68.62.6.138 |
Compn: It's the people who are going to vote on MCRI in November, and if it passes, the people have the option to repeal it later. 5 years may not be enough time to realize the effects of banning racial preferences, but after a period of time, if the people feel something isn't working, laws can be changed. I, for one, thoug, have a hard time believing that we're incapable of coming up with a better system than the one we have now. Rather than fixing the problem, the current system just pretends that there isn't one while letting too many people slip though the cracks. | ||
Lmichigan Member Username: Lmichigan Post Number: 4003 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 24.11.208.227 |
This is like the repealing of the SBT tax. You want to have something in place before you through your support to abolish it. I don't get why there is a group on this state that is somehow incapable of putting together a "Plan B" BEFORE the fact instead of after, or blindly faithful enough to believe that "everything will work out for the good." Why are so many of this opinion that somehow things will just workout, or that eliminating these programs forces something to workout. It just isn't the case. Or, why does the other side simple despise putting in place a "Plan B" before the fact? I haven't seen such opposition to common sense since, well, I don't know. Excuse me for getting heated, but we ALL know damn well that many supporters of the MCRI don't care about a solution, and most certainly will not volunteer after the abolition of AA to look for one. Really, let's get real. Both sides know it. If Black Americans would have waited for the majority to "come around" on Civil Rights, we'd still have a Jim Crow South, today. (Message edited by lmichigan on July 15, 2006) | ||
Brian Member Username: Brian Post Number: 3325 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 68.252.6.152 |
That is the wrong conclusion. First, there are no such things as Affirmative Action programs based on race. That has always been a spin by some in the republican party to disguise their hate speech. MCRI's iniative is based on preference only. It does not matter what the preference is. To specify a preference like Race, sex or age and only include those preferences would not make it past Michigan's laws and the constition. Thus all preference is going to be 'banned'. This means that the Michigan minotiry programs are gone. Headstart programs which target minority communities are gone or will be able to be located in non-minority non-poor communities. Million dollars babies will get their free government lunch. Its even arguable that preference for programs that target low income could be eliminated. Ford and GM will still be able to set aside contracts for women business owners. BUT there could be a serious challenge for Ford setting aside contracts AND receiving government tax dollars such as tax credits. Since there isn't any law in Michigan that says 'Affirmative Action' and because no where in this term does it imply race, religion, sex or other denomination, all programs that can be shown to offer preference will be affected. Those Black folks in California are a bit ignorant because they watched the measure pass and then afterwards allowed other preference programs to continue without fighting for their own. Black folks here in Detroit will show you how its done. I am betting this measure never makes it to the ballot. | ||
Brian Member Username: Brian Post Number: 3326 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 68.252.6.152 |
That is the wrong conclusion. First, there are no such things as Affirmative Action programs based on race. That has always been a spin by some in the republican party to disguise their hate speech. MCRI's iniative is based on preference only. It does not matter what the preference is. To specify a preference like Race, sex or age and only include those preferences would not make it past Michigan's laws and the constition. Thus all preference is going to be 'banned'. This means that the Michigan minotiry programs are gone. Headstart programs which target minority communities are gone or will be able to be located in non-minority non-poor communities. Million dollars babies will get their free government lunch. Its even arguable that preference for programs that target low income could be eliminated. Ford and GM will still be able to set aside contracts for women business owners. BUT there could be a serious challenge for Ford setting aside contracts AND receiving government tax dollars such as tax credits. Since there isn't any law in Michigan that says 'Affirmative Action' and because no where in this term does it imply race, religion, sex or other denomination, all programs that can be shown to offer preference will be affected. Those Black folks in California are a bit ignorant because they watched the measure pass and then afterwards allowed other preference programs to continue without fighting for their own. Black folks here in Detroit will show you how its done. I am betting this measure never makes it to the ballot. | ||
Lmichigan Member Username: Lmichigan Post Number: 4004 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 24.11.208.227 |
Brian, the Michigan Supreme Court will make sure this gets on the ballot, trust me. Engler got something done in his long reign over Michigan: packing the state supreme court. I hope to God they actually look, and judge accordingly, at the widescale fraud, deception, and other assorteted illegal acts taken to get the signatures they did, but I'm not sure they will. (Message edited by lmichigan on July 15, 2006) | ||
Jenniferl Member Username: Jenniferl Post Number: 298 Registered: 03-2004 Posted From: 4.229.42.227 |
In theory, I would favor an affirmative action program that favors low SES students of all races. But I don't think we'll see anything like that if the MCRI passes. The conservatives who are pushing the MCRI will savor their victory and then go along their merry way. Meanwhile, the pro-minority political action groups will probably file a lawsuit or do whatever else they can to reinstate the version of AA that we have today. In the meantime, the whites who are most likely to benefit from the MCRI's passage are the second-tier students from the elite high schools, the class vice-presidents with the 3.3 and 3.4 GPAs who only took three years of French and who got a C in calculus. Why? Because these "Vice-President" white kids, with their 3.3 averages are still considered higher-up on the educational food chain than the poor and working-class white kids from high-poverty schools. MCRI is not going to raise their boats or give them better bootstraps to pull themselves up with. | ||
Lmichigan Member Username: Lmichigan Post Number: 4005 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 24.11.208.227 |
That really is the fact of the matter, Jennifer. This phoney ploy by the supporters of MRCI that conservatives will come to the table is either that, a ploy, or a wish. We all know there are conservative groups in this state whose ONLY objective is to rollback civil rights, or roll things back to the pre-60's "status quo," you know, when everything was fair, everyone lived as equals amongst eachother...oh, wait...lol | ||
Jenniferl Member Username: Jenniferl Post Number: 299 Registered: 03-2004 Posted From: 4.229.42.227 |
Detroitteacher, I don't know why the stats on that website are so out of whack. I generally go to greatschools.net when I want to look up school statistics, but this time I picked that other site because it had the actual numbers of students of each race per school, not just percentages. The DPS website used to have statistics on the student bodies of each school, but I couldn't find them this time around. I think they were taken down. Anyhow, greatschools.net lists Cooley High as 99 percent black and less than 1 percent white. According to the site, these stats come from the State Department of Education and are for the 2004-2005 school year. The "whitest" Detroit high schools are Chadsey (20% white), Southwestern (14% white) and Western (11% white). These same three schools also have the highest percentages of Hispanic students. There are no other Detroit public high schools that are more than 4% white. Cass Tech and Renaissance are both 2% white. I was surprised to see that Northern is 5% Asian. I guess these must be the Bangladeshi kids who live around the Hamtramck border? Anyhow, if you want to check out these stats for yourself, here they are, all on one page: http://www.greatschools.net/cg i-bin/cs_compare/mi/?level=h&a rea=d&district=346&sortby=name &tab=ethnic&begin=0&showall=1 | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 47 Registered: 06-2006 Posted From: 68.62.6.138 |
Brian: "Since there isn't any law in Michigan that says 'Affirmative Action' and because no where in this term does it imply race, religion, sex or other denomination, all programs that can be shown to offer preference will be affected. " This might be true if the text of the MCRI law stated that it bans Affirmative Action. However, that's not the case. The text that would be added to the Michigan constitution doesn't even contain the words Affirmative Action. What it does contain is very specific language that isn't open to much interpretation... "shall not discriminate against, or grant preferential treatment to, any individual or group on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin in the operation of public employment, public education, or public contracting." There is absolutley nothing in this language that would bar AA prgrams based on SES. I know you probably wish there were since it would help your case a little...but these are the facts. | ||
Ron Member Username: Ron Post Number: 224 Registered: 03-2006 Posted From: 66.174.93.98 |
The J, Actually, the initiative does contain the words "TO BAN AA," which was a victory for those who are opposed to the initiative. That way, the fraudulent practices of those who got the Initiative placed on the ballot do not translate to the fraudulent passage of the Initiative by voters who do not realize what is actually occurring. And to correct Brian, affirmative action is a remedial solution crafted by the government that has been subject to the "strict scrutiny" analysis by the US Supreme Court. The strict scrutiny analysis mandates that the government have a "compelling government interest" for those programs that single out programs that favor one race or another (a suspect classification, according to Constitutional jurisprudence), and that those programs be as "narrowly tailored" as possible to rectify that compelling government interest. TheJ, the best advice I can give to a 1L is the following: (1) read the case law (basically your texbooks) and get an early start on your outlines (you have to understand the formulation of case opinions, i.e issue, rule, analysis, conclusion; IRAC, you will learn it), (2) obtain good "hornbooks" for all of your classes, (3) read the hornbooks first, as they give a very concise breakdown of what the law is, and then apply that information to your caselaw analysis, and (4) be prepared for class. I recommend reading the hornbooks because it allows you the opportunity to understand the "big picture," because when in law school, you will study each element of something individually, and then you must put it all together. For instance, in Torts, you will study, the intentional torts, then negligence, then causation. You must understand that causation is an element of both the intentional torts and negligence, but because causation is such an important comcept, you study it in isolation of the other concepts. Remember, understand the big picture first, and work your way down to the specifics. (But then again, I am a big picture kind of guy). I recommend the "Understanding" series and the "Examples and Explanations" series, as well as traditional "hornbooks" published by West. DO NOT GET GILBERT'S, OR ANY OTHER TYPE OF "CANNED OUTLINE!!!" The benefit you receive from outlines is in crafting them yourself. Understand how everything fits together. Any help I can provide, I am more than willing to give. Just let me know. Ron | ||
Detroitteacher Member Username: Detroitteacher Post Number: 165 Registered: 06-2006 Posted From: 205.188.116.137 |
Jennifer: Those percentages seem more in par with the reality. Like I always tell my students, it's a good idea to check facts from several different sources. I just didn't want people reading these threads to think that the numbers are greater than they really are. | ||
Themax Member Username: Themax Post Number: 102 Registered: 09-2005 Posted From: 69.246.123.118 |
Something I wrote last year. Last spring perhaps you were approached by someone with a petition telling a tale of someone's "deserving" child being denied admission to a university because of reverse discrimination. I would counter them by saying that even with their petitions there would still be discrimination in college admissions just not racial discrimination. Most deans would still be able to give extra points to friends. Students would still be preferred because of the part of the country they lived in. In fact there is no way of knowing who "bumped" someone from a particular freshman class. It could be a music major with less than sterling math grades or an athlete with only average grades overall. Universities admit a universe of students so that there will be an atmosphere of diversity and creativity on campus. That is the meaning of university. "Women are the most frequent beneficiaries of and will lose most if affirmative action is lost." remarked Jennifer Shoub of the Michigan Council of YWCAs at the 2004 Women's Equality Day meeting of women's organizations in Lansing. Mary Pollock of One United Michigan reported that following the passage of Prop. 209, California courts were defining the law very strictly. Programs at risk included nutrition programs, women's shelters, and apprenticeship programs for women and minorities. She called for a liaison from every chapter to work to oppose the ballot initiative in Michigan. Connerly who is funded by wealthy conservative foundations, has since introduced a second initiative in California which shows the larger plan of his backers. This would stop the collection of all race and ethnicity based data by the state. Foundations like the Bradley, Scaife and Olin foundations that have backed Connerly to the tune of over $2.1 million just since 2002 would then step in to gather the data for a hefty price and to report it in their own fashion. "If it passes, it will hide racial differences in health care, education and disease, making it harder to file discrimination complaints and to hold discriminating organizations and institutions responsible for their deeds," opined Julian Bond at an NAACP conference . Fortunately, the second proposition did not pass. In a May 30,2002 article for The Nation, Patricia J. Williams said of this second initiative, " It is actually about privatizing racially-biased behavior. And privatized racism has been a dream of the far right since the first whites-only private schools sprang up " [following Brown v. Bd. of Ed. Topeka]. | ||
Angry_dad Member Username: Angry_dad Post Number: 75 Registered: 02-2006 Posted From: 71.227.48.51 |
This issue is not just about schooling or admission. And by the way, in way too many cases, just getting in changes the height of the bar. What really stinks about this issue is that rather than allow the majority to decide, or individuals to make thier own choice, the battle will be in the courts based upon the abilty for the state to vote on it. If support and need are so strong, let it go. | ||
Danny Member Username: Danny Post Number: 4563 Registered: 02-2004 Posted From: 141.217.173.164 |
Brian, You quote that, First, there are no such things as Affirmative Action programs based on race. That has always been a spin by some in the republican party to disguise their hate speech. TECHNICALLY NOT TRUE!! AFFIRMANTIVE ACTION PROGRAMS AND POLICIES ITSELF DOES DISCRIMINATE RACE, BY MEANS OF GENDER, SEX, AND EXPERIENCE. IT SETS A SEGREGATED CAP FOR THOSE WHO WANT TO ACHIEVE THE AMERICAN DREAM. IT'S A FOOLISH POLICY MET TO PROMOTE WHITE PRIVILEGE INTO THIS NATION WHEN THE WHITE-FOLKS CLAIMED THAT THEIR RACE IN THE LABOR AND LIVING FORCE IS ON THE BRINK TO EXTICTION BY BLACKS, WOMEN, HISPANICS AND MINORTIES. THIS POLICY IS CHIP OUT THE JIM CROW LAWS IT MUST BE ELIMINATED. SO VOTE YES ON MRCI. MCRI's iniative is based on preference only. It does not matter what the preference is. To specify a preference like Race, sex or age and only include those preferences would not make it past Michigan's laws and the constition. Thus all preference is going to be 'banned'. This means that the Michigan minotiry programs are gone. Headstart programs which target minority communities are gone or will be able to be located in non-minority non-poor communities. Million dollars babies will get their free government lunch. Its even arguable that preference for programs that target low income could be eliminated. SO LET IT BE. LET THOSE PREFERCES FAIL THERE WILL BE NO ROVOLVING DOOR TO EDUCATION FOR THE POOR. WHILE LIVING POOR, GOD GIVE THEM A BRAIN " THINK, PROBLEMSOLVE AND TAKE INTIATIVE JUST LIKE THE IMMIGRANTS WHO CAME INTO THIS NATION WORKING DIRT POOR UNTIL THEY CAN GET THE THINGS THEY WANT. SOUNDS PRE-SOCIALIST, BUT IT WORKS. LET THE RICH COLLAPSE UNDER THE WEIGHT OF THE FREE PROGRAMS FOR THE PROLETARIANS BEARING TALENTS OF SOCIALIST LABOR CAUSE WILL BE ABLE TO CONQUER THE CORRUPT LEADERS OF THE GOVERNMENT. YES LOW-INCOME PROGRAMS WILL BE ELIMINATED, BUT THE PROLETARIAN SOCIALISTS WILL RESTORE IT TO THE POINT OF EQUAL SHARING ALONG WITH THE MASSES. Since there isn't any law in Michigan that says 'Affirmative Action' and because no where in this term does it imply race, religion, sex or other denomination, all programs that can be shown to offer preference will be affected. YES IT'S TRUE! BUT THE PREFENCE PROGRAMS FROM THE PEOPLE WILL EXIST. NO STATE LAW CAN'T TOUCH IT. Those Black folks in California are a bit ignorant because they watched the measure pass and then afterwards allowed other preference programs to continue without fighting for their own. LET IT BE! BLACK-FOLKS IN CALIFORNIA CAN PROBLEM SOLVE. THEY STILL HAVE THE PRIVILEGE. THEY JUST WANT TO CRY WAH WAH!!! TO THE GOV. "TERMINATOR" FOR PREFERNCE HELP. DON'T DEPEND ON YOUR LEADERS ALL THE TIME. YOU ARE THE GOVERNMENT. | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 48 Registered: 06-2006 Posted From: 68.62.6.138 |
Ron: Thanks for the advice. And while the ballot language does say "a proposal to ban affirmative action programs that give preferential treatment based on race, gender, etc.", the text of the actual amendment doesn't contain the words 'Affirmative Action. And it wasn't really that much of a victory since the MCRI people consider this lanuage to be perfectly fair. The language that the amendment will contain is very specific. It refers to preferntial treatment being given to people based on of few very specific criteria. There's nothing in it that would ban AA based on SES. | ||
Lmichigan Member Username: Lmichigan Post Number: 4008 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 71.197.28.99 |
Themax, THANK YOU for that post. This is not just about AA in college adminissions and such. It's part of a much more comprehensive and deeper plan to purge ALL instances of race in everything from research all the way to college admissions. The plan is to deny all racial/ethnic/gender differences. It goes back to the majority wanting a "color-blind" society where everything has been made magically "fair" with the wave of a wand and everything is instantly made "equal," instead of a more realistic multi-cultural society that recognizes and celebrates or differences within the context of a greater America. | ||
Jenniferl Member Username: Jenniferl Post Number: 302 Registered: 03-2004 Posted From: 4.229.60.194 |
I read somewhere that in some European nations (I don't remember which ones), you are not allowed to collect or publish data based on race or ethnicity. I believe the reasoning behind it is that the powers-that-be are afraid some of the data (such as crime statistics) will stir up trouble between the white Euros and nonwhite immigrants. | ||
Lmichigan Member Username: Lmichigan Post Number: 4010 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 71.197.28.99 |
And, it's exactly because of those fears and ignoring and denying cultural differences that France was literally burning for weeks just last year, and why the Netherlands is in the shape it's in. | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 50 Registered: 06-2006 Posted From: 68.62.6.138 |
Here's something that the anti-legacy crowd might find interesitng... I was doing some reading today, and it turns out that two state university systems, both Georgia's and California's, VOLUNTARILY dropped their legacy programs after they were forced to abandon the practice of race-baced AA. In Georgia, a court ruling between 2001-2003 found that the school's admissions system unfaily favored minorities and males (yes, males, for all the consipracy buffs out there ;) ) And in California, an law nearly identical to MCRI was passed in 1996. Now does that mean that UofM, MSU, and WSU will voluntarily do the same? No. But the likelihood is that they will given how liberal the administrations of these schools are. And if they don't, Michigan voters have the option to pass a law that forces them to abandon the practice. (Message edited by thejesus on July 16, 2006) | ||
Livernoisyard Member Username: Livernoisyard Post Number: 1082 Registered: 10-2004 Posted From: 69.242.223.42 |
It's UoM's legacy grant 1 or 2 points versus 20 for AA? If so, that's relative peanuts. | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 51 Registered: 06-2006 Posted From: 68.62.6.138 |
Livernoisyard: I don't know if 1 or 2 points is accurate, but regardless, there's no legitimate reason to keep legacy programs around, especially if we're getting rid of race-based AA. The death of both are long overdue. | ||
Themax Member Username: Themax Post Number: 105 Registered: 09-2005 Posted From: 69.246.123.118 |
The City of Jackson has approved a resolution opposing the proposed constitutional amendment to end affirmative action for women and minorities. The council says that banning affirmative action will hurt the region’s economy. “At a time when Southeastern Michigan is facing increasing challenges to remain competitive in the global marketplace, companies located here need the most productive and most creative workforce possible,” the resolution says. www.oneunitedmichigan.org | ||
Lmichigan Member Username: Lmichigan Post Number: 4012 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 71.206.101.125 |
As has Lansing, Detroit...quite a few other cities in Michigan, actually. It's more ceremonial and symbolic than anything else. | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 52 Registered: 06-2006 Posted From: 68.62.6.138 |
So eliminating racial preferences in public employment and public education are going to somehow hurt the economy now? You don't think anyone's actually going to buy that crap, do you? | ||
Detroitteacher Member Username: Detroitteacher Post Number: 178 Registered: 06-2006 Posted From: 205.188.116.137 |
What economy?? Everyone is losing jobs, look at the local houses for sale due to foreclosures. Losing a job has nothing to do with race...last one in first one out. Companies closing down and moving overseas means everyone loses. It's almost better to get a labor intense job (plumber, mechanic, heating and air). Can't contract those overseas. | ||
Lmichigan Member Username: Lmichigan Post Number: 4013 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 71.206.101.125 |
Detroitteacher, while there are things bigger than race in losing a job, in fact, many larger circumstances, do you really want to make such an unequivical statement that it never, and doesn't, happen? Really, a side issue, but I'd like to call you on that one. | ||
Detroitteacher Member Username: Detroitteacher Post Number: 181 Registered: 06-2006 Posted From: 152.163.100.8 |
No, not at all. That wasn't the jist of my post. I was just saying that with the economy the way it is, NO ONE is certain of having a job... white, black or purple. It was more in reference to the hurting the economy comment mentioned earlier up. The economy is in a nosedive and is practically non existent (as is evident by the number of home foreclosures). I wasn't saying that it never and doesn't happen, quite the contrary. I was merely saying (and perhaps didn't say it clearly enough) that with so many companies going overseas, job security isn't a sure thing for anyone anymore regardless of race. It wasn't really a reference to AA at all. White black and purple are all losing jobs and it has nothing to do with race (it has to do with money and companies going elsewhere to find cheap labor). That is what I was trying to say. In today's economy right here, I don't think that the major job losses are about race at all...(in the large picture but it does happen) | ||
Lmichigan Member Username: Lmichigan Post Number: 4015 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 71.206.101.125 |
Thanks for the clarification. | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 53 Registered: 06-2006 Posted From: 24.169.224.43 |
Anyways, does anyone actually agree with the post by Themax? I'm curous. My guess is 'no', but you never know. | ||
Jt1 Member Username: Jt1 Post Number: 7540 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 198.208.251.24 |
Can everyone agree to fight against any preferences for extracurriculars. These are often unattainable for the poor and just add a benefit to the wealthier. It may have been addressed but I have only seen the legacy issue. Anything that gives a preference has the potential to be biased due to socio-economic factors and we want to ensure that everyone has a 'level' playing field. Let's abolosh the racial preference and give a preference based upon socio-economic factors and under-represented schools. Why do I assume that many would find fault in that because it would still favor more minorities than whites. | ||
Lmichigan Member Username: Lmichigan Post Number: 4016 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 67.185.217.226 |
And the MCRI continues to lose support: Affirmative action proposal loses support http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs .dll/article?AID=2006607180304 | ||
Ron Member Username: Ron Post Number: 231 Registered: 03-2006 Posted From: 70.212.78.183 |
I just wanted to add that this discussion is indicative of exactly the type of public debate that is necessary in order for a Democracy to survive and flourish. Whether we agree or disagree with each other, it is certainly healthy for us to be discussing it at all. While I am not naive enough to believe that anyone's minds have been changed, it is certainly instructive to at least understand everyone's position. Props, Lowell, for providing us a forum to air out our differences. | ||
Detroitteacher Member Username: Detroitteacher Post Number: 206 Registered: 06-2006 Posted From: 205.188.116.137 |
The few white students that I have had contact with in DPS have just as many issues regarding college admissions as the rest of my students. Maybe even a double edged sword because the majority of THOSE WITH WHOM I HAVE HAD CONTACT are in foster care or a group home. Even though they are white, they are just as disadvantaged, for the lack of a better term, than my black students. Low SES, lack of resources, lack of experiences are all the same. On the other side, I have also seen black students who are more qualified for acceptance than some of the white students from the elite schools. I don't think there is a simple solution to all of this. I want to see all of my students succeed and have opportunities available to them. With nothing being certain in this world other than death and taxes, I tell them to work hard and rely on only themselves and their accomplishments because they can't rely on a helping hand. Isn't adding extra points for whatever reason called a "handicap", as it is in bowling? That doesn't sound like something I would want. I want to be known and respected for what I can do without any help. That's only me, though. | ||
Danny Member Username: Danny Post Number: 4595 Registered: 02-2004 Posted From: 141.217.174.229 |
That's the reason why that the MCRI must pass. Affirmative Action policies are being abused by means of adding race into the agenda. | ||
Danny Member Username: Danny Post Number: 4596 Registered: 02-2004 Posted From: 141.217.174.229 |
THE MRCI BALLOT QUOTE THAT In its entirety, here's the Michigan Civil Rights Initiative as it will appear on the ballot: A PROPOSAL TO AMEND THE STATE CONSTITUTION TO BAN AFFIRMATIVE ACTION PROGRAMS THAT GIVE PREFERENTIAL TREATMENT TO GROUPS OR INDIVIDUALS BASED ON THEIR RACE, GENDER, COLOR, ETHNICITY OR NATIONAL ORIGIN FOR PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT, EDUCATION OR CONTRACTING PURPOSES. The proposed constitutional amendment would: Ban public institutions from using affirmative action programs that give preferential treatment to groups or individuals based on their race, gender, color, ethnicity or national origin for public employment, education or contracting purposes. Public institutions affected by the proposal include state government, local governments, public colleges and universities, community colleges and school districts. Prohibit public institutions from discriminating against groups or individuals due to their gender, ethnicity, race, color or national origin. (A separate provision of the state constitution already prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color or national origin.) Should this proposal be adopted? Yes No I SAY FOR HEAVEN SAKES YES!!! However most people in Michigan are beginning to misunderstood the racial abuse of Affirmative Action policies. They think that AA policies is designed to set demarcated limits of all races, sex, and religion and disablilities. And that's TOTALLY WRONG! AND UNJUST. AA policies is the trigger mechanism for cultural clash of RACIAL PRIVILEGES in this state. A NO vote make AA policies by means of race to continue for a long time resulting into a more class action lawsuits from various universities and the corporate workforce. AA policies is an ethic and ethnical NUCLEAR BOMB waiting to explode. And a YES vote would defuse it. | ||
Lmichigan Member Username: Lmichigan Post Number: 4019 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 24.11.208.6 |
How are most Michiganders "beginning to misunderstood the racial abuse of Affirmative Action policies," when it is quite clear the MCRI is continuing to lose support? It sounds like Michiganders are making up their minds that AA hasn't quite overstayed its welcome. It would be different if it wasn't losing support, but it is, so I'm completely baffled, Danny, how you see a win in this, thus far. Regardless of what you or I think about MCRI, it's clear it's been losing support since it was introduced. | ||
Danny Member Username: Danny Post Number: 4615 Registered: 02-2004 Posted From: 198.111.165.50 |
Those folks who are for AA policies don't know what they doing to this society. They are actually chosing to accept JIM CROW and put it into college admissions and other corporate workeforce. Keeping Affirmative Action will close the golden door on those who really want a good job or going to college. Last time AA policies on grade acceptance admissions was abused in the Unversity of Michigan in 2004. This AA policy prohibits mostly whites and all women to be accepted into that campus ans accept more blacks males. The Bush Administration had to step in and put an end to the abusive AA policies in UorM Campus and it did. We need to vote yes on the MCRI to prevent this AA bomb from exploding in Michigan. Don't sell your souls to the Devil for your life. | ||
Lmichigan Member Username: Lmichigan Post Number: 4020 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 24.11.208.6 |
Actually, what this looks like is more people being educated on the issue than ever before, and it looks like they are making their choice. I don't see how you're going to chalk up 30% drop in approval for the MCRI as people being misinformed. Again, regardless of what you or I think of the issue, and I really don't care which side you're on, (though you must always make it known and with such hyperbole it makes me sick). The numbers are speaking for themselves. The more people here in Michigan hear both sides of the debate, the more they are choosing a support of AA, if even reluctantly so. (Message edited by lmichigan on July 20, 2006) | ||
Compn Member Username: Compn Post Number: 70 Registered: 04-2004 Posted From: 65.29.121.215 |
so no reply on a 'plan b' if there is no fix when MCRI bans aa? MRCI should have included the text to change it to an SES rule. if it had really been about being fair to all students. anybody who goes along in life without alternative plans is doomed to failure. | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 58 Registered: 06-2006 Posted From: 24.169.224.43 |
Why would they need to change it to an SES rule? The absence of a rule banning AA based on SES essentially allows it. That's like suggesting a law that allows people to dye their hair blonde. If there's nothing preventing them from doing so, why make it law? The whole idea is to allow the public schools to admit students on whatever criteria they want...they just can't leave certain people behind any longer on account of their race, which is something they can't control. They will have to treat poor non-minorites the same as they treat poor minorities...same with wealthy minorities and non-minorities. | ||
Andylinn Member Username: Andylinn Post Number: 150 Registered: 04-2006 Posted From: 64.141.144.2 |
doesn't it seem weird to you that in all my classes at U-M... aka AFFIRMATIVE ACTION UNIVERSITY... there were typically 1-2 non-white students in a 20-30 person section... healthy? i think no. i guarantee that it would be worse at some other schools... hillsdale anyone? | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 63 Registered: 06-2006 Posted From: 24.169.224.43 |
Andylinn: That doesn't sound weird to me at all. | ||
The_aram Member Username: The_aram Post Number: 4980 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 68.41.124.8 |
So, Andy, what is your preferred quota? | ||
Ron Member Username: Ron Post Number: 236 Registered: 03-2006 Posted From: 66.174.79.236 |
Now, Aram, don't try and trick Andy into stating a "quota." Those are illegal, which I'm sure you are aware. The acceptable practice of AA as practiced by UM Law is that race is one factor among many taken into account when deciding when to admit a particular student. It seems quite odd to me that most folks who are opposed to AA always talk about lesser qualified "minority" students taking their place. That would mean, by definition, that no "lesser qualified" non-minority students were admitted in their place. Why don't you go talk to the non-minority kid on the football scholarship who graduated from high school with a 3.0 about why HE took your place? Maybe because you like for UM to win at football? I believe that most people who are opposed to AA programs really simply don't have enough confidence in their abilities to compete when everyone enjoys the same types of advantages as the majority enjoys. Rather than bit** about your disadvantages, practice what you preach, and "overcome your disadvantages!" (i.e. your perceived disadvantage being AA policies). Isn't that what you are telling the "minority" students to do? | ||
The_aram Member Username: The_aram Post Number: 4981 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 68.41.124.8 |
I'm asking Andy that question because he seems alarmed that there were only 1-2 "non-white" students in his discussion sections. I want to know what that number would need to be for him to be satisfied that things were "healthy." 5? 10? 20? What's it gonna be? I'm of the opinion that skin color has no impact whatsoever on your academic ability, nor does it have any impact whatsoever on your ability to be a responsible student in the context of the classroom. So I'm interested as to why it would make such a difference to Andy here. | ||
Kova Member Username: Kova Post Number: 49 Registered: 12-2003 Posted From: 68.255.239.182 |
and Ron, what about the other portion of the people who don't support the current AA who don't fit the category of your " most people" ? | ||
Livernoisyard Member Username: Livernoisyard Post Number: 1137 Registered: 10-2004 Posted From: 69.242.223.42 |
Ron: How can you counter an commonly-held prevailing attitude that if you're white (or, say, Asian), poor, and male, you're currently screwed under AA? How can AA ever help them or not put them at or near the very end of the line? Just asking... | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 65 Registered: 06-2006 Posted From: 68.62.6.138 |
Ron: Extracurriculars are not the problem, and you'd have trouble finding anyone of sound mind who feels that extracurriculars shouldn't be considered. The problem is that the minority student on the football team not only gets points for succeeding as an athlete, but he also gets points for being born a into a certain race while the non-minority student only gets one of those. And you say you think that people opposed to AA don't have enough confidence in their own abilites when in reality (and you know this) this is more of a characteristic of many (not all, but many) of the pro AA people. | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 168 Registered: 06-2006 Posted From: 68.62.6.138 |
Just something I thought was interesting... I signed up on the MCRI website last month to receive email updates on the ballot initiative... Ever since then, I have been getting emails from Michigan Republican party and from the Dick DeVos campaign, neither of which I signed up for and from which I've never received emails prior... I find this interesting since both the Michigan GOP and Dick DeVos have publicly announced their opposition to the MCRI...if they are using email lists from the MCRI, it gives the appearance that this opposition might be nothing more than just a political maneuver in a heavily Democratic state...which it might be...either way, it doesn't look good for them (Message edited by thejesus on August 09, 2006) | ||
Lmichigan Member Username: Lmichigan Post Number: 4110 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 67.177.81.18 |
I don't mean to be rude, but it took you this long to figure that out? | ||
Oldredfordette Member Username: Oldredfordette Post Number: 216 Registered: 02-2004 Posted From: 68.60.181.41 |
*falls over laughing* Yeah, them Republicans sure are opposed to white privilige. | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 169 Registered: 06-2006 Posted From: 68.62.6.138 |
You people are asses...you don't find it at all interesting that they're using email lists from a group they've publicly denounced? | ||
Oldredfordette Member Username: Oldredfordette Post Number: 217 Registered: 02-2004 Posted From: 68.60.181.41 |
Are you seriously surprised? I don't find it interesting, it happens every single day. And you are actually surprised that the Republican Party would say one thing and do another? Are you unconscious? | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 170 Registered: 06-2006 Posted From: 68.62.6.138 |
I didn't say I found it surprising dipsh*t. I said I found it interesting that they were using the email list from a group they've publicly denounced. Read slower next time. | ||
Lmichigan Member Username: Lmichigan Post Number: 4112 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 67.177.81.18 |
Interesting usually means learning something you didn't know before. In that way, it was not at all interesting, to me. And, it's just not Republicans. I've signed up for email lists in the past on certain issues and have gotten emails from the DNC. Hell, if some of our major phone companies are selling our records to the government, what makes you think email lists aren't being sold? Interesting? Only if you've lived under a proverbial rock. | ||
Solarflare Member Username: Solarflare Post Number: 501 Registered: 11-2003 Posted From: 65.112.56.3 |
I see the level of discourse around here is about the same. | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 171 Registered: 06-2006 Posted From: 68.62.6.138 |
LMichigan: The MI GOP an DeVos campaign could have just as easily NOT obtained the email lists from a group they've publicly denounced. In fact, they probably shouldn't have. It's only a matter of time before the press picks up on this. I've gotten random emails from the DNC too, but if you got them all of the sudden after signing up for a left-wing terrorist group like Greenpeace, THAT would certainly be interesting since the DCN has publicly denounced their tactics. It's just proof of hypocrisy. I don't understand why you have to be such an ass all the time. Learn to have a friggin conversation...you'll get further in life. | ||
Lmichigan Member Username: Lmichigan Post Number: 4118 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 67.177.81.18 |
Wha?! Specifically the end of the first paragraph. I signed up to get regular emails my senators a few years ago. Are you just trying to be an ass by trying to imply I signed up with Greenpeace, and then by association calling me a terrorist? Very mature. | ||
Rossco Member Username: Rossco Post Number: 19 Registered: 07-2006 Posted From: 69.210.30.48 |
White men can't jump. | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 177 Registered: 06-2006 Posted From: 68.62.6.138 |
LMichigan: I was drawing a parallel...using an analogy. I figured that much was obvious. I was not implying that you are a terrorist. Stop being so damn sensitive. | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 178 Registered: 06-2006 Posted From: 68.62.6.138 |
Black men can't skate. | ||
Lmichigan Member Username: Lmichigan Post Number: 4121 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 67.177.81.18 |
Tell that to Shani Davis. lol Rossco was obviously joking. Stop being so damn sensitive. | ||
Lmichigan Member Username: Lmichigan Post Number: 4125 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 67.177.81.18 |
It looks like Grand Rapids is the latest Michigan city to come out publicly in opposition to the MCRI joining cities like Detroit and Lansing: City Commission takes strong stance against Civil Rights Initiative Updated: Aug 10, 2006 01:58 PM EDT GRAND RAPIDS -- The Grand Rapids City Commission is taking a strong and united stance against the Michigan Civil Rights Initiative, an issue that will appear on the November ballot. Six of the Commission's seven members, plus Mayor George Heartwell, signed a "statement in opposition" against the ballot proposal. The Initiative language puts an end to affirmative action programs in public education, public employment and public contracting. Commissioner Rick Tormala did not sign the statement. He is firmly opposed to the Michigan Civil Rights Initiative, but feels the "statement is not strong enough." Tormala is pushing for a resolution that would unequivocally state the city of Grand Rapids' opposition to the ballot initiative. 24 Hour News 8 will continue to follow this story. http://www.woodtv.com/Global/s tory.asp?S=5263101&nav=menu44_ 2 | ||
Danny Member Username: Danny Post Number: 4776 Registered: 02-2004 Posted From: 141.217.174.229 |
HAH!! Those folks in Grand Rapids don't know what they are doing. They are actually supporting JIM CROW AA policies rather than defeating it. Just a while ago, the Ghettoman and his STREET PROPHETS went a disclosed ethic convention to persuade the public that AA is a form of reverse discrimation by means of any race that he said in this argument: "Affirmative action is probably the most misunderstood civil rights issue of our time. Opponents believe that it is misguided social engineering that uses quotas and preferences to replace qualified white males with unqualified Ethnic minorities and women." He also argued that AA is future version of " JIM CROW" Keep whites out and bring in blacks and other minorities in. Imagine a white male or female who supports AA will one day be left out in the American workforce. The Ghettoman forsaw a preview of the perils of the high experienced mostly diversed union custodians who worked for all Garden City Public School District were being excluded by the Garden City School Board and replaced by an all black contracted janitorial service. Now the folks in Garden City want to recall the whole Garden City School Board for a their ill janitorial contract proposal and to bring back the originial janitors. The Ghettoman also argued that AA policies can backfire on high experienced blacks, Asians, Hispanics to be replaced by low experience whites or other race. He does want all AA policies to be used to control the ethic demographics in the American workfore by means of experience and not by race. Until the proposal works, The Ghettoman, ME and the rest of the STREET PROPHETS want it abolished. The Ghettoman also said about AA's and QUOTAS: "Perhaps the most controversial issue about affirmative action is whether it uses "quotas". Affirmative action programs should: a) verify that inequities exist, b) set goals to eliminate the inequities, c) set timetables to meet the goals, d) disband the program after the goals are met. Opponents of affirmative action argue that setting a goal is the same thing as instituting a quota, meaning that a specific outcome is mandated rather than highly desirable. For example, if an employer knows that it has a large disparity between the proportion of Hispanics in its workforce versus the general population, it might use affirmative action to target its recruiting efforts toward the Hispanic population in hopes of increasing Hispanic new hires. It should identify a goal of how many Hispanics it wants to hire, at what levels, and in what timeframe. If the employer mandates that a specific job must go to a Hispanic, or that a specific number of Hispanics must be hired, that is a quota." IT HAPPEN JUST 2 YEARS AGO IN UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN CAMPUS THEIR BOARD OF GOVERNORS ACTUALLY USED THAT QUOTA TO PROMOTE MORE BLACKS INTO THEIR CAMPUS RATHER THAN WHITES AND WOMAN. THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION INTERVENED TO SHUT DOWN THAT AA QUOTA AND PROMOTE ALL RACES WHO HAD A HIGH OR LOW SCORES IN THEIR CULTURAL BIASED STANDARIZED TESTS. I'M GLAD THAT MY FRIEND WHO JUST GRADUATE FROM WSU CLASSICS PROGRAM GOT ACCEPTED TO U OF M'S EXCELLENT GRADUATE CLASSICS PROGRAM FOR IF THE BOARD OF GOVERNORS DIDN'T ACCEPT HIM HE GOES SOMEPLACE ELSE. The Ghettoman also argued that If affirmative action were just about quotas, you would find that: a) a significant percentage of hires and promotions would go to under-qualified Ethnic minorities, b) the goals of all affirmative action programs would be met, and within the set timetables, and c) they would be sunsetted. While there are instances in which a more-qualified non-Ethnic minority is passed over for a less-qualified or even under-qualified Ethnic minority, these cases are few and far between for one simple reason: to institute such a policy makes no business sense whatsoever. The main reason is that the punishment for not meeting the goals and timetables does not justify promoting a lesser-skilled workforce. Employers and agencies can typically comply with affirmative action programs through their efforts more so than their results. That is why although progress continues to be made, most affirmative action programs fail to meet their goals and timetables, and end up continuing rather than being sunsetted. HE'S RIGHT THOUGH!! AA PROGRAMS ARE SHIFTING FROM RACE OF OVERQUALIFIED PEOPLE TO A RACE OF UNDERQUALIFIED PEOPLE; REFFERING BACK TO THE GARDEN CITY PUBLIC SCHOOL JANITORIAL PROBLEM, IF YOU FOLKS VOTE NO ON MCRI YOU ARE PROMOTING THE RACE PROBLEM RATHER THAT SOLVING IT. ITS JUST LIKE THE BIBLE," FOR THOSE WHO DO RIGHT, AND THEY KNOW IF THEY DON'T DO IT TO HIM IT IS SIN". So I asking all of you in this forum, get the truth straight and don't accept the lies from other people. | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 180 Registered: 06-2006 Posted From: 68.62.6.138 |
So eight guys in Grand Rapids came out against the MCRI? Big deal...their vote in November doesn't count any more than anyone else's. That said, I expect that the ballot measure will fail something like 45%-55% | ||
Ilovedetroit Member Username: Ilovedetroit Post Number: 2395 Registered: 02-2005 Posted From: 69.246.54.234 |
I hope not. It will make us look like a bunch of backward hicks. | ||
Lmichigan Member Username: Lmichigan Post Number: 4126 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 67.177.81.18 |
No, the passing of the MCRI would do that if you're one of its detractors. Voting for the MCRI is voting against the continuation of AA in university and state settings. People should probably actually read the proposal. lol | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 182 Registered: 06-2006 Posted From: 68.62.6.138 |
Ilovedetroit: I dunno...California is the most progressive state in the Union (as opposed to a bunch of backwards hicks) and they passed a law identitcal to MCRI in 1996...Washington, another blue state, also passed a similar law a few years ago. Lmichigan: I haven't met anyone who is confused about what this law is, but if there are any out there, the ballot language should alleviate any confusion for them. | ||
Ilovedetroit Member Username: Ilovedetroit Post Number: 2396 Registered: 02-2005 Posted From: 69.246.54.234 |
I agree the ballot language is confusing. I think Massachusetts is probably the most progressive state in the union or NY possbily WA and Wisconsin more so than California, which has a lot of conservatives outside the major cities. | ||
Livernoisyard Member Username: Livernoisyard Post Number: 1245 Registered: 10-2004 Posted From: 69.242.223.42 |
Wisconsin is so "progressive" that it abolished welfare in 1997 and replaced its former welfare department with the Department of Job Development. IOW, if you refuse to work, all you may get is $10/month--in food stamps... | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 186 Registered: 06-2006 Posted From: 68.62.6.138 |
Livernoisyard: I said Washington was a blue state, not progressive, though that's interesting about the welfare. That actually sounds pretty progressive to me. I need to read up on that. Maybe we need something like that here. Ilovedetroit: The ballot language is NOT confusing in any way whatsoever. I posted it above somewhere. I can post it again if you'd like. But it's perhaps the most straightforward ballot language that you wil ever see. | ||
Oldredfordette Member Username: Oldredfordette Post Number: 240 Registered: 02-2004 Posted From: 68.60.181.41 |
Only because of the suit filed. The initial language made it sound like you were voting to keep affirmative action when you were in fact voting against it. I'm sure it was just a mistake by the Connerlyites! | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 187 Registered: 06-2006 Posted From: 68.62.6.138 |
Oldredfordette: It only sounded like it was meant to keep AA if you are a total f*cking ignoramus...otherwise, it was very straightforward... "A PROPOSAL TO AMEND THE STATE CONSTITUTION TO BAN PROGRAMS THAT GIVE PREFERENTIAL TREATMENT TO GROUPS OR INDIVIDUALS BASED ON THEIR RACE, GENDER, COLOR, ETHNICITY OR NATIONAL ORIGIN FOR PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT, EDUCATION OR CONTRACTING PURPOSES" The only change made was from "programs" to "affirmative action programs" Either way, the MCRI people find the revised language to be perfectly fair, albeit a tad bit less descriptive of what the ballot initiative actually is. (Message edited by thejesus on August 13, 2006) | ||
Oldredfordette Member Username: Oldredfordette Post Number: 241 Registered: 02-2004 Posted From: 68.60.181.41 |
If it doesn't say what it is, it's a dodge. If you can't see that, you must be a fucking ignoramus or at best, a tool. | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 190 Registered: 06-2006 Posted From: 68.62.6.138 |
The original language states EXACTLY what it is...adding the words, "to ban Affirmative Action programs" to the language only makes the initiative sound like it's more limited in it's scope than it really is... The text that will be added to the Michigan constitution, if it passes, will not contain the words 'affirmative action' because the law will ban ANY form of discrimination in public employment and university admission...not just those resulting from affirmative action... Under the amended constituion, for example, it would be unconstitutional for a state employee in a hiring position to NOT hire a qualified minority just because they are a minority...or for a state university admissions commitee to NOT admit a qualified woman just because she is a woman. It's true that out of all the forms of discrimination this initiative would outlaw, affirmative action programs are what concern most people...which is why the state felt it was necessary to amend the ballot language. But the original language is still to most and accurate. (Message edited by thejesus on August 13, 2006) (Message edited by thejesus on August 13, 2006) |
