Transparency - Not!

[DanaC]

Do you have any proof of this new prevailing attitude?

because it really sounds like you're the one being racist right now.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by DanaC

Do you have any proof of this new prevailing attitude?

because it really sounds like you're the one being racist right now.

What prevailing attitude. Cases should be taken on merit, not race. Just because a person is white does not mean they can not experience racism. Just because a person is some other color than white does not mean standards should be lowered to ensure that people with less merit are promoted above those who previously met the standards for promotion.

[Fair&Balanced]

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

What prevailing attitude. Cases should be taken on merit, not race. Just because a person is white does not mean they can not experience racism. Just because a person is some other color than white does not mean standards should be lowered to ensure that people with less merit are promoted above those who previously met the standards for promotion.

So blame Bush and Mukasey for their actions.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Fair&Balanced

So blame Bush and Mukasey for their actions.

Are they still in those jobs?

[DanaC]

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

Holder and the DOJ illegally withheld documents pertinent to the case. The case was dropped because of the new prevailing attitude that cases not involving "minority" cases were not going to be followed, racism.

Originally Posted by DanaC

Do you have any proof of this new prevailing attitude?
because it really sounds like you're the one being racist right now.

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

What prevailing attitude. Cases should be taken on merit, not race. Just because a person is white does not mean they can not experience racism. Just because a person is some other color than white does not mean standards should be lowered to ensure that people with less merit are promoted above those who previously met the standards for promotion.

You tell me what prevailing attitude. You're the one who suggested it.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by DanaC

You tell me what prevailing attitude. You're the one who suggested it.

Read the link and get back to me.

[BigV]

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

Read the link and get back to me.

I read the link.

I am getting back to you.

Now, explain the

the case was dropped because of the new prevailing attitude that cases not involving "minority" cases were not going to be followed, racism.

statement you made. I read the article, there's a statement in there by a couple people that say this. There are other people's statements that say just the opposite. I believe you're picking the statement that justifies your conclusion.

I will tell you that there is NOT a prevailing attitude in the whole of my experience that minorities are benefiting from racial attitudes and actions. They're not. We could argue about what constitutes racism, and certainly racism can be experienced in any color. But that's like characterizing climate by one day's weather. It is an unreasonable and uselessly narrow attempt to redefine the term.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by BigV

I will tell you that there is NOT a prevailing attitude in the whole of my experience that minorities are benefiting from racial attitudes and actions. They're not. We could argue about what constitutes racism, and certainly racism can be experienced in any color. But that's like characterizing climate by one day's weather. It is an unreasonable and uselessly narrow attempt to redefine the term.

I guess it depends on your personal experiences. Mine support the notion that you must be of a minority group to experience racism, that is the prevailing attitude in my experiences. It is supported by statements in this article and others. It is supported by actions of the Holder DOJ. It is sickening. I completely support a color-race blind society. That is not what we are getting out of this DOJ.

[Fair&Balanced]

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

I guess it depends on your personal experiences. Mine support the notion that you must be of a minority group to experience racism, that is the prevailing attitude in my experiences. It is supported by statements in this article and others. It is supported by actions of the Holder DOJ. It is sickening. I completely support a color-race blind society. That is not what we are getting out of this DOJ.

From my personal experience, when charges of racism are based on cherry picking selected facts while ignoring or misrepresenting other equally relevant facts, or based on unsubstantiated allegations or innuendo to further feed the misrepresent of all the facts, it is politically motivated and not for any altruistic reasons.