Baalzamon said:
1. I never said it was ok for Republicans to be racist. I said it would be more expected, given that that is how we perceive them to be. I expect lots of people to act in ways that I don't think are ok. That is just human nature. 2. I'd argue it is made very clear via liberal news agencies on a recurring basis that Republicans are not fair to minorities. VERY clear. 3. Having more minorities working for you does not mean you are not racist. We'll use an example of an incredibly racist farmer who then goes and employs Mexican workers (a minority). 4. I will agree that minorities have lower education, but if that is the argument being made, then there SHOULD be a wage gap between different ethnicities. The problem with this argument, however, is you will never, ever, get somebody who thinks racism needs to stop to say that a wage gap should exist so long as there is an education gap. 5. You are once again using the education argument, but you can't even look just at the pay being received. If they are hiring so many more minorities, perhaps Democrats themselves are actually being unfair to non-minority groups by giving preference to hiring minorities. The fact that they are just hiring more minorities doesn't just give them the clear from being racist themselves. Keep in mind, racism can (and does) exist against whites in many cases too. If you aren't familiar with a situation, I'll provide one I've had to deal with for 5 years. There are CONSIDERABLY more scholarships available for minorities than there are for a white male (I have seen exactly 0 scholarships in my entire college life that were specifically dedicated to white males...it would be considered incredibly offensive and racist, yet there are a huge plethora of scholarships that only minorities can receive...yet this is somehow not racist). 6. No, it actually seems like a pretty gigantic story. A Democrat would argue to the death with me that we are racist against blacks, and therefore pay them less because of it. They wouldn't use the education argument, they would simply say we are paying them less because they are black. But these percentages indicate that even the Democratic party, which is supposed to be (I say supposed to be because they are also incredibly racist, just to different people) non-racist, actually pays black people at virtually the exact same lower amounts than everybody else does. So it seems to me a pretty big story could be released that tells Democrats they need to make up their mind, and that either everybody (including Democrats, despite saying it is so horrible) is racist against black people regarding pay, or nobody is racist against black people regarding pay (including Republicans), and it actually has a lot more to do with the fact that the education among them is, on average, lower than their white counterparts. It may be troublesome to realize what I am saying here, but it has more to do with the fact that it goes to show many of the arguments people use against somebody such as myself and why I am racist either cannot be used because there are other underlying factors, or must also be used against themselves because they follow the exact same practices. |
1. Only holding one party accountable is grossly unfair, particularly when the data does not support that. The article basically completely excuses republicans while condemning democrats.
2. Reread the article. They claim it would be front page news if the same thing about democrats in the article was true for the republicans. Then, they say the same thing IS true. I've never seen front page news about it. The article defeats its own argument.
3. The article is about hiring practices being fair or unfair. I'd say having more opportunities for minorities is indicative of fairer hiring practices. Campaign wages are pretty standardized, so it's not like farmers who are hiring Mexicans and paying them less than minimum wage.
4. Of course there should be a wage gap if there is an educational gap. The problem is that there is an educational gap.
5. It's not a matter of unfairness, but more likely a matter of needs. Democrats have historically performed better with minorities, and they put a lot more emphasis on minority votes. So, they need more field workers within minority communities. Naturally, someone from that community would be better at the job, particularly in Latino or Asian communities where language barriers exist. As far as scholarships go, there is really not need for scholarships for whites as they're not a group that faces large scale social injustice. You could argue for scholarships based on income levels, but those exist i.e. pell grants.
6. It seems that your creating strawmen arguments that weren't made, and using the biased article to refute that. That kind of silly partisan bickering is certainly not newsworthy.
