Proposition 107-- Ending Reverse Discrimination (Affirmative Action)

[999969999]

http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/local/articles/2010/09/28/20100928arizona-proposition-107-affirmative-action.html


"Proposition 107 would amend the Arizona Constitution and ban preferential treatment for, or discrimination against, any individual or group on the basis of race, gender, color, ethnicity or national origin in public employment, education or contracting. The amendment would apply to the state government, counties and municipalities, special districts and public schools, universities and community colleges.

The ban would not be retroactive and would not prohibit officials from considering qualifications based on gender when necessary for the operation of public employment, education or contracting. It also would not prohibit efforts to abide by court orders or establish eligibility for federal programs when failing to abide would result in a loss of federal funds."

Does anyone see anything wrong with this? I don't. But yet so many people are outraged by the idea of treating all people fairly.

[HeavyMetalParkingLot]

Affirmative action trumps this....

[megabyteme]

It's nice to know that discrimination against minorities has been eliminated in Arizona. :rolleyes:

[j2k4]

It's nice to know that discrimination against minorities has been eliminated in Arizona. :rolleyes:

It would be as nice to know discrimination against majorities has ended as well.

[clocker]

Yeah, all those poor oppressed snowbirds.

[l33tpirata13]

Another failed attempt to ratify thinly veiled racist BS. What's new?

[megabyteme]

It's nice to know that discrimination against minorities has been eliminated in Arizona. :rolleyes:

It would be as nice to know discrimination against majorities has ended as well.

That majority will be just fine, what, with controlling through status quo, electing candidates who favor them, having the majority of resources, having a stronger networking structure in place (to get jobs)... not to mention never having to face TRUE racism.

[j2k4]

... not to mention never having to face TRUE racism.

As opposed to the state-sanctioned version?

[l33tpirata13]

:rolleyes:

[l33tpirata13]

... not to mention never having to face TRUE racism.

As opposed to the state-sanctioned version?

Oh, please.

[j2k4]

Please...what?

[l33tpirata13]

Please...what?

Are you complaining about state sanctioned racism?

[j2k4]

Please...what?

Are you complaining about state sanctioned racism?

Of course.

I am against racism in all forms.

To be otherwise is to be...racist.

If you take exception, you may begin the festivities by defining good racism, as opposed to the type you like to complain about.

[999969999]

Yeah, all those poor oppressed snowbirds.

Ha! There are no snowbirds where I live. Eagar is 7000 feet above sea level, so we get snow here. And lots of chilly wind, frost, and icicles. I can't wait for the snow. I'm looking forward to doing some snow skiing and snowboarding in December.

It's amazing how libs think it is somehow evil to treat everyone equally regardless of skin color or ethnicity or gender, etc.

Martin Luther King, jr., wanted everyone to be judged on the content of their character rather than their skin color.

I think he would be sickened to see just how racially-minded the left wingers turned out to be.

[l33tpirata13]

Sorry, but I find both 999969999 and J2K2 to be, well, how should i say this? Hypocrites!!!! J2k2, you were all for State Sanctioned Racism when it dealt with MY people. Then it was OK, and the reasons were lucid in your view. But NO, not this form of "racism", since in this particular scenario, it works against white folk. Affirmative action is there for good reason, and WILL continue to be there for a long, long while. If it weren't, people like 999969999 would take it upon themselves to only hire white folk, as he has stated he would do. The simple fact that this is being bought up in AZ again, where the major minority is Latino, speaks volumes. Affirmative action is there to force to the majority, (white), not to be racist, since they had proved otherwise.

999969999, quoting MLK makes you look sorta Glenn-Beckian. King would be sickened to see the context in which you use his teachings. He is the reason why affirmative action even exists.

[999969999]

So, discriminating against me, because I just so happen to have an Austrian ethnic background is okay in your opinion?

I had no control over the fact that my ancestors were Austrians, and yet it is somehow fair in your mind to punish me because of that fact?

And you had no control over the fact that your ancestors were of Hispanic origin, but yet you think you should be rewarded for that?

Why shouldn't people be treated equally?

And the full quote from MLK, jr. is as follows: "I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character."

How do race quotas for jobs and basing employment on one's skin color fit into that dream?

How about basing employment opportunity on the content of one's character, rather than on the color of one's skin? Or is that evil in your opinion?

I'll admit that it doesn't matter to me right now anyways, because I have a job with my family's cattle ranch, and so it doesn't apply to me at the moment, but what about the other guys out there with white skin, blue eyes, and blonde hair? It's not fair to them.

And, I'll say it again. I like Glenn Beck. He's great.

[megabyteme]

Under the premise that all people are equal, an area's population is broken down into its makeup. Let's say that is 70% white, 15% black, 10% Latino, and 5% Native American (Indian).

When one looks at equality, from this view, it would be expected that employment percentages would mirror this population. Affirmative Action ONLY is enforced WHEN these numbers do not coincide with the surrounding population.

The problem is, that for most "fair minded" populations, such as Arizona, these numbers are not compatible. Since they are not compatible, AA must be enforced. If the numbers ARE compatible, the government does nothing to change the balance. Also, businesses must be of certain size before the government (AA) will have any effect.

So, the cries being heard from the "right" are either bullshit (because the ones crying are not being fair, as they say), or they are bullshit (because there is nothing to be enforced, and therefore nothing to cry about).

[l33tpirata13]

And, I'll say it again. I like Glenn Beck. He's great.

That explains why you feel the need to quote MLK in such egotistical ways. Martin Luther King Jr. and Glen Beck are not compatible on any level. MLK fought against morons like Beck. Why do you think he would side with you?

[HeavyMetalParkingLot]

[QUOTE]
That explains why you feel the need to quote MLK in such egotistical ways. Martin Luther King Jr. and Glen Beck are not compatible on any level. MLK fought against morons like Beck. Why do you think he would side with you?

Funny, MLk's own niece spoke at Beck's rally. Seems she doesn't see them as being opposed....but then again your grandfather was a bracero so you automatically trump MLK's own blood.

Go ahead and run along to your La Raza rally, I hear their founder Jose Angel Gutierrez is going to be talking about killing white people again.

[devilsadvocate]

Funny, MLk's own niece spoke at Beck's rally. Seems she doesn't see them as being opposed..

So if Ron Reagan jr speaks at an Obama rally does that mean Obama and the gipper(RIP) are like minded?

[l33tpirata13]

Funny, MLk's own niece ....blah blah blah.



You're words are insignificant to me, Tio Tomas.

[j2k4]

Sorry, but I find both 999969999 and J2K2 to be, well, how should i say this? Hypocrites!!!! J2k2, you were all for State Sanctioned Racism when it dealt with MY people. Then it was OK, and the reasons were lucid in your view. But NO, not this form of "racism", since in this particular scenario, it works against white folk. Affirmative action is there for good reason, and WILL continue to be there for a long, long while. If it weren't, people like 999969999 would take it upon themselves to only hire white folk, as he has stated he would do. The simple fact that this is being bought up in AZ again, where the major minority is Latino, speaks volumes. Affirmative action is there to force to the majority, (white), not to be racist, since they had proved otherwise.

999969999, quoting MLK makes you look sorta Glenn-Beckian. King would be sickened to see the context in which you use his teachings. He is the reason why affirmative action even exists.

Dear stupid-fuck:

I speak of U.S. citizens.

You do not.

You do not understand the difference, and, indeed, do not even acknowledge that there is a difference.

[megabyteme]

More of the same, it appears. I can say l33t would do quite well in a university classroom where the professors are not radio hosts.

[j2k4]

More of the same, it appears. I can say l33t would do quite well in a university classroom where the professors are not radio hosts.

??

[megabyteme]

I was saying that there is a difference between listening to a radio personality, and being educated.

Again, we have suspensions being handed out for being on the "wrong" side of the argument. I is OK for you to address him as "stupid fuck", but L33t so much as makes an argument (which had nothing to do with illegals since this is an AA topic), and gets suspended.

I'm out of this for the same reason I would leave a sleazy billiard hall. Have fun patting yourselves on the back and agreeing with one another.

[Skiz]

I was saying that there is a difference between listening to a radio personality, and being educated.

Again, we have suspensions being handed out for being on the "wrong" side of the argument. I is OK for you to address him as "stupid fuck", but L33t so much as makes an argument (which had nothing to do with illegals since this is an AA topic), and gets suspended.

I'm out of this for the same reason I would leave a sleazy billiard hall. Have fun patting yourselves on the back and agreeing with one another.

That isn't why he was disabled. Don't derail this thread (like others) with talks of why he was disabled again.

Also, if you choose not to comment, that's perfectly acceptable, but there's no need to comment about how you won't be commenting; just abstaining from doing so is sufficient.

As for my two pennies on the topic, how could affirmative action not be considered racist when it provides favoritism on the basis of race? :blink:

[JustDOSE]

wait so this means black people wont get pulled over for being black! an now whites will get pulled over just as much as our negro brothers.... incredible, wait wait wait dont tell me mexicans wont get carded at every chance..... its a gift from Jesus how words on paper can change profiling. Arizona is a safe place brothers let us rejoice. -.-

its BS media to put masses at ease this shit is still going on hard core in Arizona; believe none of what you hear and only half of what you see you ignorant bastards =D

[sandman_1]

If you think racism is going to go away one day, you are going to be waiting a long time because it never will. People will always not like someone else for whatever reason.

Knowing this, when should AA be abolished? Also I don't know how many jobs I applied for and never got, despite having the qualifications, due to AA. I might be white but I have just as much right to support my family as anyone else. I am not some elite rich white guy. I am just an average joe trying to get by and want a fair shake.

[clocker]

So, how many jobs did you apply for and not get?
One...a hundred?
How do you know you didn't get them because of affirmative action?

[sandman_1]

How do you know you didn't get them because of affirmative action?

Because I was told by someone employed at the business. Was there a point to your line of questioning?

[Skiz]

So, how many jobs did you apply for and not get?
One...a hundred?
How do you know you didn't get them because of affirmative action?

I can name one.

I went to a panel interview a few years back and was passed up for a promotion. I found out a bit later that a Mexican woman, without a degree, with a third of the years worked, and only one job ever held within the company was given the position over me, who has a degree, has far more time in the company, and has rotated to several areas in the company and has a broad knowledge of everything that goes on. When I scheduled a meeting with my Division Mgr. to find out why, he asked me, "What two things do you and I have working against us?" The answer was, "We're white and we're male."

Fuck AA. I see it constantly. If I lose an employee and need to hire another, HR will blatantly hire by the numbers. I get told all the time, I need a female, or, you have enough males you need some females, etc. If I lose a male employee in an area of my operation that requires a lot of heavy lifting, etc.. I need another male to fill that position.

If employers are going to say they don't discriminate on the basis of "race, color, religion, sex or national origin" they need to adhere to it.

[clocker]

How do you know you didn't get them because of affirmative action?

Because I was told by someone employed at the business. Was there a point to your line of questioning?
Yes.

[j2k4]

wait so this means black people wont get pulled over for being black! an now whites will get pulled over just as much as our negro brothers....

I think you would have to grant the preferred scenario would be if blacks were pulled over with the same frequency as whites (equality, you see).

Btw-

I don't know that the complaint of blacks over 'profiling' includes or accounts for when black officers accost black motorists, do you?

In any case, if it weren't for things like affirmative action, I imagine one would find the attitude of a white cop toward a black motorist might moderate a bit.

Makes sense, right?

[bigboab]

Would it not be better just to pull over law breakers? If you don't break the law you don't get pulled over.

[j2k4]

Would it not be better just to pull over law breakers? If you don't break the law you don't get pulled over.

Two problems:

1. Genuine profiling (pulled-over for being colored) is rightfully regarded as falling a bit too far on the pro-active side of the scale.

2. Genuine law-breakers (who are colored) characterize any and every "pull-over" as profiling.

See the problem?

[whatcdfan]

http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/local/articles/2010/09/28/20100928arizona-proposition-107-affirmative-action.html


"Proposition 107 would amend the Arizona Constitution and ban preferential treatment for, or discrimination against, any individual or group on the basis of race, gender, color, ethnicity or national origin in public employment, education or contracting. The amendment would apply to the state government, counties and municipalities, special districts and public schools, universities and community colleges.

The ban would not be retroactive and would not prohibit officials from considering qualifications based on gender when necessary for the operation of public employment, education or contracting. It also would not prohibit efforts to abide by court orders or establish eligibility for federal programs when failing to abide would result in a loss of federal funds."

Does anyone see anything wrong with this? I don't. But yet so many people are outraged by the idea of treating all people fairly.

one stop forward on social justice

[999969999]

Funny, MLk's own niece ....blah blah blah.



You're words are insignificant to me, Tio Tomas.

So, any Hispanic who doesn't blindly follow the leftist, communist, and racist La Raza mindset is an Uncle Tom?

[j2k4]

http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/local/articles/2010/09/28/20100928arizona-proposition-107-affirmative-action.html


"Proposition 107 would amend the Arizona Constitution and ban preferential treatment for, or discrimination against, any individual or group on the basis of race, gender, color, ethnicity or national origin in public employment, education or contracting. The amendment would apply to the state government, counties and municipalities, special districts and public schools, universities and community colleges.

The ban would not be retroactive and would not prohibit officials from considering qualifications based on gender when necessary for the operation of public employment, education or contracting. It also would not prohibit efforts to abide by court orders or establish eligibility for federal programs when failing to abide would result in a loss of federal funds."

Does anyone see anything wrong with this? I don't. But yet so many people are outraged by the idea of treating all people fairly.

one stop forward on social justice

Freudian accuracy, ftw.





You're words are insignificant to me, Tio Tomas.

So, any Hispanic who doesn't blindly follow the leftist, communist, and racist La Raza mindset is an Uncle Tom?

That's what he said, yup.

[999969999]

I am delighted to report that Proposition 107 passed by 60% of Arizona voters. It is now against state law to offer preferential treatment in hiring based upon a person's skin color, ethnic background, or gender.

[j2k4]

I am delighted to report that Proposition 107 passed by 60% of Arizona voters. It is now against state law to offer preferential treatment in hiring based upon a person's skin color, ethnic background, or gender.

Huzzah.

About fucking time.

[clocker]

I am delighted to report that Proposition 107 passed by 60% of Arizona voters. It is now against state law to offer preferential treatment in hiring based upon a person's skin color, ethnic background, or gender.
So, does this mean all the unqualified white males in Arizona are now out of work?
Huzzah, indeed.

[999969999]

I am delighted to report that Proposition 107 passed by 60% of Arizona voters. It is now against state law to offer preferential treatment in hiring based upon a person's skin color, ethnic background, or gender.
So, does this mean all the unqualified white males in Arizona are now out of work?
Huzzah, indeed.

What it means is that preferential treatment based on race and gender -- sometimes called racism or sexism by liberals, depending upon who it hurts -- is now against state law.

It's merely a baby step in the right direction.

[megabyteme]

So, does this mean all the unqualified white males in Arizona are now out of work?
Huzzah, indeed.

It's merely a baby step in the right direction.

1960, working on 1950? :unsure:

However, the feds will smack this down like an insolent [pick your least favorite race] child.

This merely shows that 60% of the voters in Arizona don't know what the law truly does. Read my second to last post in this thread for details.

*EDIT* Or do, just don't like minorities in jobs (including good ones) proportionate to their percentage of state population. (yeah, that's all it does-assumes that all people should be represented equally in the job market).

[l33tpirata13]

I won't even dignify that with a response. Anyone with half a brain cell can see why.

Later Sweetheart.

[clocker]

So, does this mean all the unqualified white males in Arizona are now out of work?
Huzzah, indeed.

What it means is that preferential treatment based on race and gender -- sometimes called racism or sexism by liberals, depending upon who it hurts -- is now against state law.

It's merely a baby step in the right direction.
I'll ask again...does this mean that all the unqualified white males will lose their jobs?

[j2k4]

What it means is that preferential treatment based on race and gender -- sometimes called racism or sexism by liberals, depending upon who it hurts -- is now against state law.

It's merely a baby step in the right direction.
I'll ask again...does this mean that all the unqualified white males will lose their jobs?

I assume, then, that you favor reparations for American slavery.

The correlation to the situation in AZ is no less tenuous than your assertion that "unqualified white males" should give up their jobs.

In any case, Arizona is inhabited by Arizonans, and it is Arizonans who should determine how their state is run.

If Hispanics find it inhospitable, they will depart, leaving the state poorer for their lack, and bringing ridicule to it's residents.

What's it to you?

[sandman_1]

What it means is that preferential treatment based on race and gender -- sometimes called racism or sexism by liberals, depending upon who it hurts -- is now against state law.

It's merely a baby step in the right direction.
I'll ask again...does this mean that all the unqualified white males will lose their jobs?

And who would be "unqualified", white, and male hired by Affirmative Action program? Wait they don't have that job because some other "unqualified" [insert minority] got it. Is that what you were saying?

[clocker]

J2, I know you favor assumptions over facts, so carry on.

sandman...gee, who could I use to exemplify the "unqualified white male" stereotype...um, GW Bush?

[megabyteme]

In any case, Arizona is inhabited by Arizonans, and it is Arizonans who should determine how their state is run.

If Hispanics find it inhospitable, they will depart, leaving the state poorer for their lack, and bringing ridicule to it's residents.

What's it to you?

So, Hispanics (Latinos) aren't Arizonans because they lack majority in the state? :O

Would you be so quick/understanding if a majority deemed you and your family unwelcome in your state?

I'll give you credit for seeing the message being aimed at illegal AND legal Latinos in Arizona.

[clocker]

It's only "reverse" discrimination that upsets the right, regular ole discrimination is A-OK in their book.

It's only a matter of time before Arizona runs out of water, so the problem will solve itself anyway.

[megabyteme]

Well, when all of the (unwelcome) Latinos do a mass exodus out of Az, they will have a majority in the neighboring state. Hopefully, they will vote (and I am certain they will remember the hospitality they received) to not supply them water. :01:

[clocker]

Arizona's water woes will/can not be voted away.
Much like Las Vegas, Arizonans cleverly decided to build major metropolitan areas where there is no fucking water and are completely dependent on the largess of other states to provide for them.
This will come to an end as the multi-year drought in the West cuts waterflow to the bone.

Presumably, the withering golf greens and ban on washing your Buicks will be explained as the result of some form of discrimination and it's all Obama's fault.

[999969999]

Dudes! A river runs right through Eagar called the Little Colorado River. I drink water from that river, not from anywhere else. It comes from snowmelt and monsoon rains in the White Mountains of Arizona. No one can shut off our water supply.

http://www.sunriseskipark.com/

http://www.azwhitemountains.net/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Colorado_River

But back to the point of this discussion, treating all people fairly is somehow evil to liberals.

Liberals are truly the most racist people of them all.

All they think about is race, race, race.

They want employment to be based on the color of a person's skin.

And if anyone doesn't go along with their thinking, then they're evil.

[j2k4]

Arizona's water woes will/can not be voted away.
Much like Las Vegas, Arizonans cleverly decided to build major metropolitan areas where there is no fucking water and are completely dependent on the largess of other states to provide for them.
This will come to an end as the multi-year drought in the West cuts waterflow to the bone.

Presumably, the withering golf greens and ban on washing your Buicks will be explained as the result of some form of discrimination and it's all Obama's fault.

Dumbass Arizonans, eh?

Why aren't they entitled to your water, if you are entitled to dictate their immigration policy?

On the other note, what does one do about unqualified blacks or Hispanics?

And honestly, unless I am legally bound to demonstrate proficiency in ebonics or Spanish, how am I to determine the qualifications of a black or Hispanic applicant who cannot speak english?

[megabyteme]

If people could honestly self-regulate, there wouldn't have EVER been a need for the civil rights movements. You guys somehow think racism/discrimination in the workplace is NOW obsolete? :O

[j2k4]

If people could honestly self-regulate, there wouldn't have EVER been a need for the civil rights movements. You guys somehow think racism/discrimination in the workplace is NOW obsolete? :O

And you still think Affirmative Action will eliminate it.

Fat Fucking Chance.

[megabyteme]

Obviously, you'd like to pretend it's not a problem. It is ONLY if we are trying to have a fair society.

Again, you do not understand the legal concept of AA. Take a class from an actual active lawyer/professor and you might see it differently. Glen Beck is a radio host who panders to people who don't get it, don't want to, or feel violated by the "system".

I can only imagine how much you guys would cry if you actually had to be a minority...

[bigboab]

Obviously, you'd like to pretend it's not a problem. It is ONLY if we are trying to have a fair society.

Again, you do not understand the legal concept of AA. Take a class from an actual active lawyer/professor and you might see it differently. Glen Beck is a radio host who panders to people who don't get it, don't want to, or feel violated by the "system".

I can only imagine how much you guys would cry if you actually had to be a minority...

You are down there and you will stay down there except for short periods, when they want your vote. It is the same with all the working class of this world. I think we should dig out our muskets as someone in here 'suggested' as one solution. When the outlook was bleak, to their way of thinking. I'll get my knitting out to count the heads.:whistling