. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Nap Time!!!

Thursday, August 17, 2006
What a bunch of racists

Check out this pack of racists. This is a racist idea. Absolutely. No question about it.

Or, at least, it was, when Ward Connerly was behind it. Apparently, things have changed.

I'm kind of interested in this idea of specifically asking people whether they're Latino/Hispanic, but not for any other race. I don't have the thingie in front of me, though, so I can't really figure out where this comes from.

Update: I think this is the thingie I was looking for. I don't generally read boring government documents in great detail when it's not part of my job, but the explanation seems to be:
Educational Institutions and Other Recipients Will be Required to Use a Two-Question Format When Collecting Data on Race and Ethnicity Whenever Feasible. Educational institutions and other recipients will be required to collect data on race and ethnicity using a two-question format, except as provided in the following paragraph. Using the two-question format, the first question asks whether or not the respondent is Hispanic/Latino. The second question allows individuals to select one or more races from the five racial groups listed in paragraph 1 of this part, and Hispanic/Latino is NOT included in the list of racial categories. A two-question format provides flexibility and ensures data quality. In particular, a two-question format typically results in more complete reporting of Hispanic ethnicity; however, the most frequent cases of an individual not reporting a race occur for individuals who identify themselves as Hispanic/Latino. Therefore, educational institutions and other recipients should include instructions that encourage students and staff to answer both questions.
After asking this question, the student is supposed to pick from a list of five races, I guess, but can list more than one:
(1) American Indian or Alaska Native;
(2) Asian;
(3) Black or African American;
(4) Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander; and
(5) White.
And what would be reported to the feds would be from these categories:
(1) Hispanics of any race; and, for Non-Hispanics only,
(2) American Indian or Alaska Native,
(3) Asian,
(4) Black or African American,
(5) Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander,
(6) White, and
(7) Two or more races.
I think this is the one-drop rule for Hispanics, because it appears that they can never be included in the multiracial category.

posted by Beetle Aurora Drake 8/17/2006 12:12:00 PM #
Comments (4)
. . .
Comments:
Eh...? I'll never get how they classify us. "Some Other Race," that's Latinos. I guess it's because some people are afraid if they let us all check boxes, we might be stuffing chile peppers in them, and next, we might stretch nylon strings across the little boxes and start bangin' out some corridos or somethin'.

To hell with checkboxes.
 
Ha,Ha...,The Department of Education historically has been run by lefties.

No one in history has ever made a clear line to what is a race of being? It just doesn’t exist. I find this instinctively naive on part of the establishment.

Where is option (8)? More than three – if you are a mutt? Ha, Ha.


In addition, this is another attempt at racial profiling (That is gathering data) - aide memoire: That the left doesn’t want the Republicans to do to Middle Eastern peoples in America, claiming constitutional rights. Here, however, they *want to know your profile*. Why? What is their motive, what is there reason, what would be their cause-operandi?
 
I don't think it's a fair comparison to racial profiling. Education doesn't give a crap about individuals of various races, but they have their imposed concepts of equality to try to meet.
 
I agree, the education is not a verb, it has no action whatsoever. It’s just a noun.

Department of Education’s goal, the nouns addressed , uses this profiling to bring up the statistical averages of people they believe belong to races, such as African Americans. What is an African American? Do they have a skin tone? Does it not represent a population that is white? Mutt Lang is white and he is from Africa. If he lived in America (He doesn’t) could he call himself an African American? And if not why not? Who makes these rules? In Johannesburg, Africa, many people have white skin. What the hell is this questionnaire about? Can now a white person call themselves an African American? Is a African American only a direct descendant from the American slave period?

What they want to say is – does your skin appear Black, medium black, dark black, light-toned black, etc…

Next is your skin brown? If so, do you pray to Allah or to Jesus Christ? If not, did your parents?

How much money does your parent make? Do you have money in the bank?

Your response is muddled in contradiction!


Maybe you could go to MTV and complain they promote blacks as gangsters, thugs, criminals, womanizers, uneducated lifestyles of the black person while claiming they are Democrats. Only a small and few blacks get checks from this promotion – not the whole as a rule. Why not promote standard businessmen careers and world citizens, instead of this crap?

White Democrats in charge of America are not helping the blacks or other colors of people make it in America at the rate of their accusations against the Republicans saying they are some type of suppressive regime thwarting people of non-white skin tones.

If you look in history, Republicans gave the blacks their first political voice, their first armed and legitimate militia, their freedom from slavery, and called on them to join in equality of an American citizen. What did the democrats do or now do, but to blame republicans while still taking the highest positions of state in all regions of the U.S, as their white-ass own - TODAY. Such hypocrisy.

The DOE is categorizing the blacks ( And others) - like in these checkboxes. They want to continue to differentiate. What is needed is no differentiation, but one term for all people of all colors, namely Americans.



I heard of people consisting of being (of such) Native Indian along with French, Polish, Chinese and Spanish all in the same body. This is all absurd. What the hell is one? What box does one check now?

Either you are an American or you are not. That’s republicanism. There is no middle ground. Your skin color only matters to the old-style democrats that used slavery as a system of economics and couldn’t stand to be around people with other skin-types other then what they saw in a reflection from a lake or stream of themselves. It continues with this racial profiling on this form in question.

So what is the real issue then?


If the lefties cry under-representative blacks in major universities, then all other colored people, mostly run by whites, should be kicked out immediately and hire only, and all, black people to run, administer and teach the universities for any extended period of time. Democrats are hypocrites and all of them need to step down now from all public offices to back up what they say in public and promote in public to get elected. Who cares if blacks are told by the white people they are not qualified to be a prof. – pick up homeless black people off the street and put them into professorships – now. Kick the whites out. This is what this form is tending toward.

This way we do not have deal with all this fabricated “imposed concepts of equality.” It’s all garbage. This concept is a leftist agenda of forced distribution of funds for kids that are not up to grade with the rich parents and rich communities. If this is what is deemed necessary, the best plan is to kick the richy-people ( Mostly white) out of public offices including the capital hill crowd and force all poor people, unqualified or not, into office. This gives a complete * equal representation,* or at least shows something is getting done about it.

Some people would see this plan as a disaster, but then I would not have to deal with checking these stupid boxes any longer. The whole lefty issue is white man -bad and other skin colors good, and suppressed by the whity are all the skin colors not of white in spectrum in America. So the simple solution is to get rid of whity. I think you need to agree, because that is exactly what this questionnaire is all about: to count, then decide which and how to better distribute resources to people with skin colors other than whity, and correct the past crimes of the whity.

Nothing perturbs me more than sitting in class listening to a white professor tell the students how evil the white person is because they suppress these other colors of people’s skin. This person should quit immediately and go to the fields to pick produce – I do not care if it took that professor 20 years to get where they are at in their careers – they are hypocrites if they do not do so now and claim to be a democrat and a liberal (in the modern sense) while bashing whites.


So maybe you could start a blog calling for putting whity in the fields to harvest and re-distributing all the money from whity’s old land into people of other colors. This should solve the problems of the racial check-boxes on the DOE applications.

If you do not think it is an “I don't think it's a fair comparison” – now what do you think is correctly issued here as a solution? You only have one answer, the other one with any other derivative becomes hypocrisy.
 
Post a Comment


. . .