The President is speaking in a bit (WATCH IT!)

Blatham, you want a piece o' me? Come on, put 'em up, put 'em up!

Please take off that dress...it is very disconcerting.

I'll take off the dress as soon as you grow a penis.

Maybe I should have the dress.

I've already thoroughly demonstrated why this is untrue.


I've already demonstrated why this too is untrue. Said speech patterns are not exclusive to blacks (or even minorities for that matter), and therefore constitute no racism whatsoever.

This statement indicates your ignorance of law is on par with your ignorance of business. I doubt you'd find a judge to hear the case let alone a jury who'd rule against me. Quit while you're behind.

This admission proves beyond a reasonable doubt that you are judging a situation of which you have no knowledge whatsoever. You are suggesting Joe should fire his other 4 dozen employees and seek some other means of earning a living… One, which meets your ridiculously idealistic sense of morality, just so that he doesn't have to face facts as facts.

And you were the one who introduced the word "moron" into the conversation? LOL . Go ahead and shout at the rain, whenever you work up the courage to pull your head out of the sand, but stop trying to judge the people who actually do the things idealistic imbeciles like yourself can only criticize from the peanut gallery. In your fantasy world there would be no such thing as marketing, and all manner of employment would be open to everyone, regardless of his or her qualifications. The real world will continue to turn regardless of the criticism from the clueless. Your ignorance has been demonstrated, and frankly has only been clarified further by your continued groundless attacks on me. Until you can suggest an alternate course of action for Joe, stop judging him through a child's idealistic perspective. Your excellent writing ability is indicative of an intelligence that is utterly missing in your arguments. Don't embarrass yourself further.

Quite simply Craven: because you, like InfraBlue are taking me out of context. Admitting that customer consideration in business is an economic reality is not the same thing as being a racist. InfraBlue stormed onto this thread accusing me of:
1) being a racist
2) being a hypocrite
3) being dishonest in my concern for the Iraqi people.
If you read the thread you'll see that InfraBlue's motivation for this attack was to attempt to demonstrate that my concern for the HUMAN BEINGS in Iraq is false. In truth, all 3 of these accusations are as false as they are offensive. While I have no doubt you could do a better job of attacking me than the feeble attempt InfraBlue put up, I doubt your heart would be in slandering my character to attempt to prove a false premise. If I'm misjudging you; go ahead and try.

Just stopping by this thread for the first time, and......what do I read? The same old same old argumentative back and forthing.

sumac, Is "forthing" a new word?

Sorry Sumac. My integrity has suffered a personal attack... and I won't allow that to go unpunished.

That's 'frothing', su and c.i. :wink:

Watch the foam on your way out...

Bill,

I've read the thread and think that InfraBlue is making amountain out of a molehill.

I've not accused you of being a racist. But you did admit to racism.

Now, before you get caught up on that you should know that I don't think anyone is devoid of racism.

Try as we might I think we all carry a bit of it.

I'm not trying to slander you, but on some level I think InfraBlue is ranting about something you'd already conceded in the past.

You said that despite your efforts to be racially fair you expect black people to underperform in work.

That's a prejudice, and admiting it and trying to counter it is the best you can do.

This isn't a knock on your character. But don't let the specter of racism make you deny it.

If you strip Infrablue's posts of the hyperbole and character-based accusations there are a few levels on which he has a valid point.

But before saying so I hope you know that I think you are a good guy, by this I don't mean an average and not bad but a better than average good guy.

Anywho, here are a few valid points I saw:

The examples you chose kinda made me wonder. But then recalling the post on Noah's thread it makes more sense.

It does seem like you expect less from blacks in your business. And IMO that is a racially based prejudice. That you try to counter your prejudices is all we can ask of anyone, because we all bring prejudices of various sorts to the table.

Now one of the things you mentioned is something I wrestle with a lot.

You invoke that certain people might not be as accepted in certain settings by the clientele.

I've thought of similar issues with both race and sex. I used to be paid to discuss things with people and one of the discussions I had with many female executives was whether in a "man's world" it makes more sense to hire men.

Interestingly my own perspective on this is sorta straddling the fence. In many ways hiring a woman can be seen as a downside from a business standpoint.

But how much can this be a factor? Does a prejudiced status-quo justify its perpetuation?

These are tough questions, with no easy answers. Don't let the accusations about your character prevent introspection on it.

For example, in sales, how much should the jaundiced eye of the customer play a part in hiring?

Is it fair to take the business of prejudice into account?

IMO, the answers are not absolutes. Anywho, it's disjointed but that's all I've to say about that right now.

Not to worry, OccomBill.

And on this thread it is both frothing and forthing. It is what I say it is and it is both, simultaneously and independently.

Craven: What you've written here, I take in an entirely different light. You've not accused me of being dishonest in my concern for HUMAN BEINGS. You've never accused me of being a hypocrite. You've not suggested that rational business decisions can be extrapolated into extremes where I become incapable of compassion for victims of brutal crimes. This was the foundation of InfraBlue's attack. Being the victim of the attack; it is far more difficult for me to "strip Infrablue's posts of the hyperbole and character-based accusations" when they are the very purpose of the attack. Surely you can understand that.

I agree with you that all people carry some prejudice, and don't pretend to be above it. I too have wrestled with this reality and subsequently have not allowed myself to do anything that I consider overtly racist. In truth, I've made some decisions that hurt the bottom line in an attempt to be fair. My "Joe" example is founded very deeply in reality and is a make-or-break situation. I brought it up to prove that making decisions based purely from an idealist ideology is impractical to the point of absurdity.

I would be very interested in discussing exactly where economic realities should or shouldn't take precedence over ideological fairness. That is not what InfraBlue attempted to do here.

I don't know why you remind me of that Lewinsky girl.

Perhaps an utter lack of prejudice when determining your objects of desire?

Does she smoke cigars too?

Sort of. :wink:

LOL

Is it not against civil rights to discriminate against people who are from another country and would not that person have the right to file a suit against someone who did that?

Well sure it would Revel; if that was the criteria the decision was based on (being from a foreign country). However: If their English was poor, and the job required excellent English skills, than no, it would not be a civil rights violation.

I can tell you that, more than once, I have been displeased with service when I reach an operator who is pretty clearly working in a phone room in New Delhi (or some other such locale) and my own time is wasted through communication difficulties. Of course, I have exactly the same frustration and displeasure with automated answering services which give me a rich abundance of options but none is the one I want.