• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Maddow Fires Back At O'Reily

LizardofOz

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 31, 2010
Messages
3,595
Reaction score
1,259
Location
Kentucky
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
What are the "flat out made up scare stories" she says Fox reports on?

And Bill O'Reilly is right. African Americans have overwhelmingly voted Democrat for a very long time. Democrats generally are for social justice and redistribution of wealth. What did he say that was incorrect?
 
What are the "flat out made up scare stories" she says Fox reports on?

And Bill O'Reilly is right. African Americans have overwhelmingly voted Democrat for a very long time. Democrats generally are for social justice and redistribution of wealth. What did he say that was incorrect?

Interesting term, "redistribution of wealth." Not sure that would be completely accurate.
 
By the way, OP...O'Reilly isn't a "far-right nut". You obviously don't watch often.
 
Why not?...

Because affording opportunity, promoting fairness, equality of opportunity, and social justice does not equal "redsistribution of wealth." I think it is a made up term, both used dishonestly and out of ignorance.
 
Because affording opportunity, promoting fairness, equality of opportunity, and social justice does not equal "redsistribution of wealth." I think it is a made up term, both used dishonestly and out of ignorance.

What is social justice? How are they promoting fairness? What is fairness?
 
What is social justice? How are they promoting fairness? What is fairness?

In all kinds of ways. Promoting education. Lending helping hands to deserving. Adding ways to counter old barriers, like legacy and old boys clubs that denied others not part of the club. Some even effectively.

But no weath redistribution.
 
Social justice:

Social justice generally refers to the idea of creating an egalitarian society or institution that is based on the principles of equality and solidarity, that understands and values human rights, and that recognises the dignity of every human being.[

Social justice - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Fair and proper administration of laws conforming to the natural law that all persons, irrespective of ethnic origin, gender, possessions, race, religion, etc., are to be treated equally and without prejudice.

social justice definition

This concept demands that people have equal rights and opportunities; everyone, from the poorest person on the margins of society to the wealthiest deserves an even playing field.

What is Social Justice?
 
How does a government implement social justice?
 
How does a government implement social justice?

Laws that require equality and encourage equal access. Incentives.

if your trying to get at something, state it clearly.
 
Laws that require equality and encourage equal access. Incentives.

if your trying to get at something, state it clearly.

We already have equality. What do YOU mean by "equality"? How does the government insure equal access and to what? What incentives?
 
We already have equality. What do YOU mean by "equality"? How does the government insure equal access and to what? What incentives?

Actually, we have not had equality. African Americans have only had equality since the sixties. That's quite a head start for whites. Institutions and attitudes have long been established that do systematically deny rights to minorities. To combat this, other institutions and attitudes have been established. Some even effectively, few, but some.

Government makes laws that say you can't discrminate based on race, gnender or religion. Government seeks equality in this way. They also look at the head start whites had on blacks and seek to help them catch up. Nothing unreasonable about this. And it moves us toward equality.


I don't think any of this is a secret. ;)
 
While I think both have their own motives one is a far right nut, the other a far left one, and lol at the idea of her not wanting to play ping pong with Fox, it's still always fun to see MSNBC fire back at Fox, because normally Fox doesn't come up with a rebuttal, they just love to redirect.

Fox shouldn't go back and forth with MSNBC or any other cable news network for that matter. They have the best ratings and the best policy going forward is that you only criticize those above you or equal in ratings. I know it seems silly and all, but you simply don't do it or else you give them more viewers and more notoriety than they would have otherwise.

With that said, I like watching them go back and forth, it's pretty funny most of the time.
 
Boo, how should the government go about "paying back" the African American community? What would that look like and where would the money come from?
 
Last edited:
Boo, how should the government go about "paying back" the African American community? What would that look like and where would the money come from?

I think I have stated that already, though I didn't say paying back.

Government makes laws that say you can't discrminate based on race, gender or religion. Government seeks equality in this way. They also look at the head start whites had on blacks and seek to help them catch up. Nothing unreasonable about this. And it moves us toward equality.
 
I think I have stated that already, though I didn't say paying back.

Are you promoting taking from white people and giving to blacks because of slavery, lack of civil rights, etc.? Is that what you mean by "catching up"?
 
Are you promoting taking from white people and giving to blacks because of slavery, lack of civil rights, etc.? Is that what you mean by "catching up"?

No. Whites already have help. Legacy, connections, support that many minorities don't have. Adding the same support for minorities is not taking away, but helping make more equal. For example, if Bush, and many othes, had to rely on grades and achievement, they would not have been allowed in to schools like Harvard and Yale. Priviliedge allows them entry unchallenged. I mention this not to bash, but to show how we allow entry for reasons other than achievement daily. I do an exercise with my classes in which I give them the particulars on eight students and tell them that only two get into college. They have to decide which two. Their answers vary, but the 4.0 student with the near perfect SAT is never chosen, thought they refuse to pick anyone based on race. Yet, beinga white classroom, they always see extras of value in lessor qualified whites. I find this interesting, and little more, but note that we do not allow access based on OBJECTIVE achievemet alone.


So, allowing for some route that allows more deserving people entrance is not taking anything away, but adding more opportunity.
 
No. Whites already have help. Legacy, connections, support that many minorities don't have. Adding the same support for minorities is not taking away, but helping make more equal. For example, if Bush, and many othes, had to rely on grades and achievement, they would not have been allowed in to schools like Harvard and Yale. Priviliedge allows them entry unchallenged. I mention this not to bash, but to show how we allow entry for reasons other than achievement daily. I do an exercise with my classes in which I give them the particulars on eight students and tell them that only two get into college. They have to decide which two. Their answers vary, but the 4.0 student with the near perfect SAT is never chosen, thought they refuse to pick anyone based on race. Yet, beinga white classroom, they always see extras of value in lessor qualified whites. I find this interesting, and little more, but note that we do not allow access based on OBJECTIVE achievemet alone.


So, allowing for some route that allows more deserving people entrance is not taking anything away, but adding more opportunity.




Aren't you against vouchers?
 
Yes, I am. They only move a few people around and not fix the core problem. Most left behind stay left behind.



Well that's one "opinion" I guess, though it more sounds like you are not for as much of that equality as you say you are. :shrug:
 
With that said, I like watching them go back and forth, it's pretty funny most of the time.

Aaaaand this is why they do it, because you like watching it. You feed into it. I find it to be annoying personally, it's like well, this forum come to life!
 
Well that's one "opinion" I guess, though it more sounds like you are not for as much of that equality as you say you are. :shrug:

I don't beleive vouchers will do anything for equality, other than mke things less equal. isit Holly Springs Mississippi sometime. Two schools. One White; one black. They are that way on purpose. Care to guess which one has the money and the better school? The white private school has excellent teachers. The black school has had people like the former police chief teaching math because they lack teachers.

Vouchers won't help them.

Private schools are often better because they avoid the problems of a general population. Most will fight to keep that advantage. We might get the Rent to Own version of education pop with vouchers, but that will likely be a lessor education and not help the situation.

Again, the problems are not fixed by moving only a few from a bad situation. better to fix the bad situation.
 
I don't beleive vouchers will do anything for equality, other than mke things less equal. isit Holly Springs Mississippi sometime. Two schools. One White; one black. They are that way on purpose. Care to guess which one has the money and the better school? The white private school has excellent teachers. The black school has had people like the former police chief teaching math because they lack teachers.

Vouchers won't help them.


well if it won't help one school my god, it will never work for the millions of other schools. :doh:



Private schools are often better because they avoid the problems of a general population. Most will fight to keep that advantage. We might get the Rent to Own version of education pop with vouchers, but that will likely be a lessor education and not help the situation.

Again, the problems are not fixed by moving only a few from a bad situation. better to fix the bad situation.


Cool, then lets just keep folks in bad schools in bad schools then..... great idea. :doh:
 
Back
Top Bottom