Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
2011/09/28 07:25:20
Subject: Re:Republicans and Muffins in a Liberal School
Radiation wrote:If you want to talk about the dental status of SB 185 as "toothless" just look at Prop 209 and its Federal Funding Exemption. Prop 209 is wearing a nice and removable set of dentures for when the Feds show up with twenty dollars. The horror.
According to the 14th Amendment, and to keep this debate interactive, I will ask you to point out where SB 185 abridges, deprives, or denies anyone the right to apply for college.
I feel your pain.
Sorry but that's 2 bad arguments.
If Prop 209 is toothless then there is no need to weaken it any more with prop 185. What useful purpose does prop 185 serve? Prop 209 served a very useful purpose, it allowed thousands of Asians to be admitted into California state universities based upon the contents of their character rather than being rejected based upon the color of their skin. Once again what useful purpose does prop 185 serve?
Back in the days of the Jim Crow South African Americans could apply to any college they wanted to and nobody ever stopped them. Admission was another story. The KKK didn't do much to abridge, deprive, or deny African Americans of their right to apply to a whites only college, they did however do everything in their formally substantial power to ensure every African American application was rejected. By your very logic the KKK was in compliance with the 14th amendment during the period of Jim Crow.
I could help one of my psych patients with a sub par IQ, disabling axis I diagnosis, and lack of even a GED fill out an application to Harvard Law and mail it in from a psychiatric hospital. (Could but would never do so as doing so would be highly unethical, this is purely hypothetical to prove a point) There is no law on the books that would abridge, deprive, or deny said psych patient from applying to any college. Everything is in compliance with the 14th amendment, would one of my psych patient then be accepted into Harvard Law?
Chaos isn’t a pit. Chaos is a ladder. Many who try to climb it fail, and never get to try again. The fall breaks them. And some are given a chance to climb, but refuse. They cling to the realm, or love, or the gods…illusions. Only the ladder is real. The climb is all there is, but they’ll never know this. Not until it’s too late.
2011/09/28 08:40:25
Subject: Re:Republicans and Muffins in a Liberal School
Radiation wrote:That's too funny. Considering it is your "hypothetical" and "highly unethical" fantasy, feel free to elaborate if you would like.
Good dodge, so go ahead and ignore the 3rd paragraph from my last post all that did was give you an exit route . My points from the 1st and 2nd paragraph still stand.
Chaos isn’t a pit. Chaos is a ladder. Many who try to climb it fail, and never get to try again. The fall breaks them. And some are given a chance to climb, but refuse. They cling to the realm, or love, or the gods…illusions. Only the ladder is real. The climb is all there is, but they’ll never know this. Not until it’s too late.
2011/09/28 09:18:35
Subject: Re:Republicans and Muffins in a Liberal School
I will ask you to point out where SB 185 abridges, deprives, or denies anyone the right to apply for college.
Ah, so a college that denies an applicant on the basis of race is OK, because the denied applicant was able to apply at all?
Fraid I disagree. I'm cool with discretionary admission, but these things being officially codified as acceptable criteria to exercise it over..well...Ain't acceptable.
2011/09/28 09:22:04
Subject: Republicans and Muffins in a Liberal School
Rented Tritium wrote:The trick here is to get a native american to buy up all of the muffins and open a "capitalism bake sale" with them right next door for just under the price of the white muffin.
I can't believe not one person so far has pointed out how goddamn funny this comment was.
lord_blackfang wrote: Respect to the guy who subscribed just to post a massive ASCII dong in the chat and immediately get banned.
Flinty wrote: The benefit of slate is that its.actually a.rock with rock like properties. The downside is that it's a rock
2011/09/28 09:28:45
Subject: Re:Republicans and Muffins in a Liberal School
The main point of the bill is to apply CSU application policy to the UC system, then report on the process in the future.
I have supplied the link to the bill as others have. The original Section Code is also available to read online, as well as Prop 209. Your arguments for what the laws allow just don't have any backing. Discrimination based on race is still not allowed.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2011/09/28 09:34:56
Radiation wrote:The main point of the bill is to apply CSU application policy to the UC system, then report on the process in the future.
I have supplied the link to the bill as others have. The original Section Code is also available to read online, as well as Prop 209. Your arguments for what the laws allow just don't have any backing. Discrimination based on race is still not allowed.
I know this appears hard for you, like simple math to a journalist, but its clear. The moment you prefer one candidate over another because of their ethnicity, thats discrimination. Now you may get off on it because it helps your preferred group, but its still discrimination.
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
2011/09/28 11:32:18
Subject: Republicans and Muffins in a Liberal School
Rented Tritium wrote:The trick here is to get a native american to buy up all of the muffins and open a "capitalism bake sale" with them right next door for just under the price of the white muffin.
I can't believe not one person so far has pointed out how goddamn funny this comment was.
It's actually not that funny, considering normally ineligible people do this all the time to take advantage of affirmative action programs.
Companies with "straw owners" - minorities who have an ownership interest in a business but enjoy no real benefit from it - are commonly seen in applications for Federal contracts where minority-owned businesses are favored. A man who is a small business owner can incorporate in his wife's name in order to take advantage of "women owned business" state and federal advantages.
Affirmative action in the market is more of a shell game than it is a real change. At least with affirmative action in college admissions there's little likelihood of scamming the system (but see Soul Man).
text removed by Moderation team.
2011/09/28 11:49:11
Subject: Republicans and Muffins in a Liberal School
Radiation wrote:The main point of the bill is to apply CSU application policy to the UC system, then report on the process in the future.
I have supplied the link to the bill as others have. The original Section Code is also available to read online, as well as Prop 209. Your arguments for what the laws allow just don't have any backing. Discrimination based on race is still not allowed.
I know this appears hard for you, like simple math to a journalist, but its clear. The moment you prefer one candidate over another because of their ethnicity, thats discrimination. Now you may get off on it because it helps your preferred group, but its still discrimination.
Radiation wrote:The main point of the bill is to apply CSU application policy to the UC system, then report on the process in the future.
I have supplied the link to the bill as others have. The original Section Code is also available to read online, as well as Prop 209. Your arguments for what the laws allow just don't have any backing. Discrimination based on race is still not allowed.
I know this appears hard for you, like simple math to a journalist, but its clear. The moment you prefer one candidate over another because of their ethnicity, thats discrimination. Now you may get off on it because it helps your preferred group, but its still discrimination.
Try reading the part of the bill that says, "...so long as no preference is given."
You can believe what you want. That doesn't change the meaning and intent of this set of laws.
Define "no preference given" especially while simultaneously giving consideration without preference.
If you truly believe that "no preference given" means that absolutely no favoritism will be shown in in way shape or form then SB185 is 100% useless and serves absolutely no function. You've dodged this simple question multiple times. What useful purpose does SB185 serve if it is not going to do anything?
What many of us believe is when you combine consideration may be given with no preference given the result is preference will be given under another name. University officials can say they are not giving preference to minorities as they give preference to minorities under the guise of "consideration" Politicians are in the business of using ambiguous language in their bills to hide their true intent, look at how often Republicans do so. Why should we risk faceless and unaccountable bureaucrats abusing the ambiguous language of SB185 when you continuously say the bill will not do anything as is especially useless?
Which leads me back to the question that you keep dodging. What useful purpose does SB185 serve if it is not going to do anything?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2011/09/28 17:06:05
Chaos isn’t a pit. Chaos is a ladder. Many who try to climb it fail, and never get to try again. The fall breaks them. And some are given a chance to climb, but refuse. They cling to the realm, or love, or the gods…illusions. Only the ladder is real. The climb is all there is, but they’ll never know this. Not until it’s too late.
2011/09/28 17:15:35
Subject: Re:Republicans and Muffins in a Liberal School
Radiation wrote:The main point of the bill is to apply CSU application policy to the UC system, then report on the process in the future.
I have supplied the link to the bill as others have. The original Section Code is also available to read online, as well as Prop 209. Your arguments for what the laws allow just don't have any backing. Discrimination based on race is still not allowed.
I know this appears hard for you, like simple math to a journalist, but its clear. The moment you prefer one candidate over another because of their ethnicity, thats discrimination. Now you may get off on it because it helps your preferred group, but its still discrimination.
Try reading the part of the bill that says, "...so long as no preference is given."
You can believe what you want. That doesn't change the meaning and intent of this set of laws.
Here's the one that really matters. Its a little older and good men died by the thyousand to make it so. It also trumps any mealie mouthed state law.
Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. Section 2. Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.
Section 3. No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may, by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.
Section 4. The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.
Section 5. The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2011/09/28 17:16:17
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
2011/09/29 03:49:50
Subject: Re:Republicans and Muffins in a Liberal School
Frazzled wrote:
On the positive, its California. Its a states issue and frankly they are imploding on almost a goemetric rate. They deserve the politicians they elected.
Well, the politicians, and the choices the citizens themselves make regarding ballot day initiatives. That property tax ceiling is a real pain.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
biccat wrote:In their defense, this is at U.C. Berkeley. Childish student politics designed to provoke outrage is probably a requirement for graduation. Ever see PCU? That's Berkeley, except there's no redemption or cool kids, just faux outrage and political correctness.
Fun fact, my undergraduate school's science building was in PCU, I believe the computer lab scene.
But anyway, I know kids from Berkeley, and I visited there once. There are cool kids, they just stick out the crap because its a valuable degree, same as any other good school.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2011/09/29 03:59:08
Life does not cease to be funny when people die any more than it ceases to be serious when people laugh.