user ballots
Login
Register
Add One
FAQ/Contact
Popular Ballots
Recent Popular
Recent Votes
Best
Worst
Yes or No
Choices
What If
Prediction
Advice
Would You
Crime
Recommend
Quiz
TV & Movie
Music & Radio
Political
Science
Sports
Relationship
Techonology
Culture
Philosophy
Religion
Ethics
History
Food & Health
Fashion & Beauty
Crime
FanBase
Discussion
Bug Report
|
COMMENTS:
Hell no... if more black guys are better.. then abviously more black guys should play. Why let a guy who is worse for the job play in place of someone better?
obviously*
That's my point rawiron. This is a question to the pro-affirmative action AKA "the people who want to hire people based on their skin color rather than their skill at work". I'm against it but you get my point...I hope.
yep
I agree, let the best man/woman win in any employment opportunity.
Actually, a WHITE GUY was the NBA MVP this year, and another scored the most points in the finals game last night. Plus many white guys play football, look at the NFL MVPs for the last 20 years, they are largely white. Do you watch sports? As far as affirmative action in sports, it just wouldnt work. Sports are driven by fan $$$, the fans dont care what color their team is as long as they win. If your team cut great players to hire guys that werent as good, just to fill a quota on skin color, the fans would stop paying and the team would go belly up.
In short, it would be a bad idea for fans and teams.
Sure! We need midget white guys in the NBA; 400 pound jockies in our races; and cringing cowards in our boxing rings. And let's not forget myopic pilots for our passenger airplances. Oh, what fun!
On a more serious note, this ballot illustrates the silliness of imagining that you can artifically change market forces.
It's racist to hire people who are best qualified for the job regardless of their skin color if that doesn't result in a perfect balance of racial diversity. The only solution to this obviously racist system is to set up a series of quotas where teams are required to hire a number of people based on their skin color. Right AA proponents?
The Republican Party needs affirmative action. Only 99% of their elected officials are white. They must do something to get more whites into the GOP.
You realize how silly this makes you look crank? Bush has appointed (and tried to appoint if the democrats would stop attacking conservative minorities for five minutes) more minorities than any preceding president. Sure they lose out among blacks, but they are ahead with hispanics and asians, not that it really matters except to point out just how wrong you are.
Compare for a moment bushs cabinet with clintons. Do that, then come back and report what you've learned.
I think that anyone who thinks a president is racist just beacuse he has single colored people in his cabinet is full of $hit.
LD: I agree. People should hire the most qualified applicant, and if it works out to be out of proportion to the rest of the country racially, too bad.
But crank was bringing up the need for affirmative action in political parties, to balance out these descrepencies. And I don't think anyone can deny that the republicans have put more minorities in power than democrats have.
Response to Zerhog's untruth:
99% of all elected Republicans are white. In other words, in real positions of power the racist Republican party is true to its bigotry.
True, the racist Republicans are better at propaganda, i.e. putting "Toms" and Bush's girlfriend in as political appointees as window dressing. But we've always known that Republicans are better liars.
Actually crank you just made that number up, which means it has no relevence whatsoever. Because you see, 98% of democrats are former klansmen. Making up statistics is fun isn't it?
And on another note I like how none of the pro-affirmative action types on this site came to defend their program. I guess it only applies when it screws over whites?
I answer this because, the way you have it worded, you want answers from people who have pro-affirmative action sentiments. In some situations, I have supported it, because we had no other recourse; however, Affirmative Action is like putting a bandaid on a melanoma. It will never truly "fix" anything...until we (everyone, all cultures, and I start with myself)stop blaming other people and start looking within. I don't waver on my answer; it is much too complex, and I think I would like to follow the advice of one of the (ballot)creator's favorites, and look for a third option; but, I don't know how to put it in a soundbite. I am intrigued, and a bit amused that a user who has the word Liberal in his handle would ask this question, especially considering the verbage. Bravo! (i guess)
then again, LibDem, (tic) maybe you're a little bit hypocritical? Why ARE we discussing bandaids when we still have the melanoma? But seriously, I really liked the ballot.
RawIRon it happens all the time in the coporate world. Why is it only fair in the sports world.
|
|
