OT: Why do Hispanics and Asians trent heavily to Clinton

[admin]

Question for you Californians now that I am not one. I see that Hispanics and Asians trended heavily – 70/30 in some cases, toward Clinton. Asians and ‘Other’ showed an even heavier trend. Can someone please explain to me why this is the case? Seriously, I am sitting here wondering why Obama was able to make serious headway in every other group, including white males, but not the groups I mentioned. Is he just not reaching those groups as well as he has whites, are there cultural values at play here like perhaps placing a higher value on experience than whites do?

[bsrsharma]

Unfortunately, our political parties are increasingly looking like tribal affiliations. Republicans are becoming mostly a white male party. Females are tilting heavily Democratic (at least partly based on pro-choice vs. pro-life issue). Majority of non-whites are tilting Democratic, feeling they don’t belong in the Republican party. Within this big picture, I think there is a competition between African-Americans and Hispanics . Since it is widely assumed that AAs will tilt towards Obama, Hispanics want to tilt towards Clinton. There may also be a subtext in Hispanics trying to identify themselves as belonging among working class Whites than Blacks.

[bsrsharma]

Unfortunately, our political parties are increasingly looking like tribal affiliations. Republicans are becoming mostly a white male party. Females are tilting heavily Democratic (at least partly based on pro-choice vs. pro-life issue). Majority of non-whites are tilting Democratic, feeling they don’t belong in the Republican party. Within this big picture, I think there is a competition between African-Americans and Hispanics . Since it is widely assumed that AAs will tilt towards Obama, Hispanics want to tilt towards Clinton. There may also be a subtext in Hispanics trying to identify themselves as belonging among working class Whites than Blacks.

[bsrsharma]

Unfortunately, our political parties are increasingly looking like tribal affiliations. Republicans are becoming mostly a white male party. Females are tilting heavily Democratic (at least partly based on pro-choice vs. pro-life issue). Majority of non-whites are tilting Democratic, feeling they don’t belong in the Republican party. Within this big picture, I think there is a competition between African-Americans and Hispanics . Since it is widely assumed that AAs will tilt towards Obama, Hispanics want to tilt towards Clinton. There may also be a subtext in Hispanics trying to identify themselves as belonging among working class Whites than Blacks.

[bsrsharma]

Unfortunately, our political parties are increasingly looking like tribal affiliations. Republicans are becoming mostly a white male party. Females are tilting heavily Democratic (at least partly based on pro-choice vs. pro-life issue). Majority of non-whites are tilting Democratic, feeling they don’t belong in the Republican party. Within this big picture, I think there is a competition between African-Americans and Hispanics . Since it is widely assumed that AAs will tilt towards Obama, Hispanics want to tilt towards Clinton. There may also be a subtext in Hispanics trying to identify themselves as belonging among working class Whites than Blacks.

[bsrsharma]

Unfortunately, our political parties are increasingly looking like tribal affiliations. Republicans are becoming mostly a white male party. Females are tilting heavily Democratic (at least partly based on pro-choice vs. pro-life issue). Majority of non-whites are tilting Democratic, feeling they don’t belong in the Republican party. Within this big picture, I think there is a competition between African-Americans and Hispanics . Since it is widely assumed that AAs will tilt towards Obama, Hispanics want to tilt towards Clinton. There may also be a subtext in Hispanics trying to identify themselves as belonging among working class Whites than Blacks.

[34f3f3f]

I haven’t heard any news analysis that has put their finger on it. I think it’s not so much that Obama isn’t reaching these groups, but more that Clinton has deliberately targeted them, at least the Hispanics. Asians who vote Democrat may be more conservative in their outlook, and Clinton appeals to those core democratic values. The racial/gender card is also an obvious factor in this.

[34f3f3f]

I haven’t heard any news analysis that has put their finger on it. I think it’s not so much that Obama isn’t reaching these groups, but more that Clinton has deliberately targeted them, at least the Hispanics. Asians who vote Democrat may be more conservative in their outlook, and Clinton appeals to those core democratic values. The racial/gender card is also an obvious factor in this.

[34f3f3f]

I haven’t heard any news analysis that has put their finger on it. I think it’s not so much that Obama isn’t reaching these groups, but more that Clinton has deliberately targeted them, at least the Hispanics. Asians who vote Democrat may be more conservative in their outlook, and Clinton appeals to those core democratic values. The racial/gender card is also an obvious factor in this.

[34f3f3f]

I haven’t heard any news analysis that has put their finger on it. I think it’s not so much that Obama isn’t reaching these groups, but more that Clinton has deliberately targeted them, at least the Hispanics. Asians who vote Democrat may be more conservative in their outlook, and Clinton appeals to those core democratic values. The racial/gender card is also an obvious factor in this.

[34f3f3f]

I haven’t heard any news analysis that has put their finger on it. I think it’s not so much that Obama isn’t reaching these groups, but more that Clinton has deliberately targeted them, at least the Hispanics. Asians who vote Democrat may be more conservative in their outlook, and Clinton appeals to those core democratic values. The racial/gender card is also an obvious factor in this.

[Borat]

If you think that these election results have any basis in reality, you haven’t been paying attention. They are a complete farce and have been for years. Elections in Kazakhstan are more honest than in the US.

[kev374]

I am Asian and a Republican.

I think it has more has to do with income level than race. Those of us with higher than median incomes do not want a heavier tax burden than it is currently. The Bush tax cuts were well deserved to those in our income bracket. I am SICK of all the low income losers who cry for hand outs. If you want more money STUDY, WORK HARD and quit your damn whining!! That is how it has been in this country and we don’t want to change to a socialist society.

Of all the socialist Democrats Hillary I think is the WORST. She wants total and complete income redistribution. Take from the wealthy (classified now as those who make above $75k/yr!!!!!!!) and give to the rest!

If you think these rebates are bad wait till Hillary becomes President. She will garnish wages to pay for health care (which will be poorly administered of course), seriously increase taxes on the middle class and work to force lenders to modify contracts for lower income people so they can live in houses that they do not deserve to be in the first place! Hillary for this country would be the ultimate travesty!

[contraman]

Kev374, Just to address your post here. STUDY (going to college and getting a degree) and WORKING HARD does not always guarantee a high income in this country.

The reality is, and I am by no means racist, that if you are a minority in America today (not of european decent), you actually have a slightly better chance of getting a degree and landing a high paying job. This is due to quotas placed on companies to hire a certain percentage of minorities to avoid lawsuits.

Try being of hungarian european decent and getting a grant from the government to go to college. Good Luck on that one.

I am a proponent of equal rights no matter what your creed, culture, or race. Unfortunately, this is not the case anymore in America. You can have 2 educated and experienced candidates for a job, one european decent the other Asian decent, the European guy can have more experience and a degree from a better school, yet the Asian candidate gets the job due to quota regulations. This is not equal rights.

So whining may be slightly justified by some……..who are carrying 50,000 in school loans while their hispanic buddy has none……(FYI, I have no school loans).

Once again, I am not racist and have friends from all backgrounds and cultures. I discuss this with them also and it is an issue in our country that needs to be addressed.

Hispanics are probably voting for Clinton because she wants to put a freeze on foreclosures and bail everyone out. I think that that population of people (look at Eastlake and Chula Vista prices)have taken the biggest beating in the housing market. Just an observation.

Sincerely, Contraman

[CMcG]

This is just an observation. One of my best friends is black with two brothers…all of them are registered Repubs and all voted for Romney because they had the all-Repub ballot. They are all arch conservatives but they are ALL voting Obama if he’s the candidate in November. My friend said “It’s time for a black,” just like my 19-year-old daughter said, “It’s time for a woman,” although she voted Obama. I think it’s gonna be Hillary vs. McCain. I know in her case, and in mine, she will vote Hillary, but I have no idea what the three black brothers will do. My friend seems seriously upset today, but he just doesn’t want to talk about it yet.

[Dukehorn]

Contraman,

I think you’re incorrect. It’s well documented that if you’re Asian and applying to let’s say Yale or Berkeley, you will be rejected against an equally qualified white because those institutions have initiated quotas since they have TOO many Asians. Same for a number of med schools.

As for economic handouts, how come our “free market” system is all good and fine until we hit a bubble (like the housing bubble) and then all the capitalists are asking for a government bailout? As a tech trans attorney, I’ve seen way too much of this.

Saving and loans bailout in the 80s, Enron etc. If free market means less government enforcement, that promotes fraud which then leads to people demanding a bailout from the government (when these same people were the ones demanding no government oversight).

Why is it that under a “free market” president, the SEC and the EPA somehow find their enforcement budgets decreased? Regardless of whether white collar or blue collar crime, when you take the cops off the street, crime increases. When crime increases (even white collar), we all get hurt. Government is not necessarily a bad thing.

[Dukehorn]

Contraman,

I think you’re incorrect. It’s well documented that if you’re Asian and applying to let’s say Yale or Berkeley, you will be rejected against an equally qualified white because those institutions have initiated quotas since they have TOO many Asians. Same for a number of med schools.

As for economic handouts, how come our “free market” system is all good and fine until we hit a bubble (like the housing bubble) and then all the capitalists are asking for a government bailout? As a tech trans attorney, I’ve seen way too much of this.

Saving and loans bailout in the 80s, Enron etc. If free market means less government enforcement, that promotes fraud which then leads to people demanding a bailout from the government (when these same people were the ones demanding no government oversight).

Why is it that under a “free market” president, the SEC and the EPA somehow find their enforcement budgets decreased? Regardless of whether white collar or blue collar crime, when you take the cops off the street, crime increases. When crime increases (even white collar), we all get hurt. Government is not necessarily a bad thing.

[Dukehorn]

Contraman,

I think you’re incorrect. It’s well documented that if you’re Asian and applying to let’s say Yale or Berkeley, you will be rejected against an equally qualified white because those institutions have initiated quotas since they have TOO many Asians. Same for a number of med schools.

As for economic handouts, how come our “free market” system is all good and fine until we hit a bubble (like the housing bubble) and then all the capitalists are asking for a government bailout? As a tech trans attorney, I’ve seen way too much of this.

Saving and loans bailout in the 80s, Enron etc. If free market means less government enforcement, that promotes fraud which then leads to people demanding a bailout from the government (when these same people were the ones demanding no government oversight).

Why is it that under a “free market” president, the SEC and the EPA somehow find their enforcement budgets decreased? Regardless of whether white collar or blue collar crime, when you take the cops off the street, crime increases. When crime increases (even white collar), we all get hurt. Government is not necessarily a bad thing.

[Dukehorn]

Contraman,

I think you’re incorrect. It’s well documented that if you’re Asian and applying to let’s say Yale or Berkeley, you will be rejected against an equally qualified white because those institutions have initiated quotas since they have TOO many Asians. Same for a number of med schools.

As for economic handouts, how come our “free market” system is all good and fine until we hit a bubble (like the housing bubble) and then all the capitalists are asking for a government bailout? As a tech trans attorney, I’ve seen way too much of this.

Saving and loans bailout in the 80s, Enron etc. If free market means less government enforcement, that promotes fraud which then leads to people demanding a bailout from the government (when these same people were the ones demanding no government oversight).

Why is it that under a “free market” president, the SEC and the EPA somehow find their enforcement budgets decreased? Regardless of whether white collar or blue collar crime, when you take the cops off the street, crime increases. When crime increases (even white collar), we all get hurt. Government is not necessarily a bad thing.

[Dukehorn]

Contraman,

I think you’re incorrect. It’s well documented that if you’re Asian and applying to let’s say Yale or Berkeley, you will be rejected against an equally qualified white because those institutions have initiated quotas since they have TOO many Asians. Same for a number of med schools.

As for economic handouts, how come our “free market” system is all good and fine until we hit a bubble (like the housing bubble) and then all the capitalists are asking for a government bailout? As a tech trans attorney, I’ve seen way too much of this.

Saving and loans bailout in the 80s, Enron etc. If free market means less government enforcement, that promotes fraud which then leads to people demanding a bailout from the government (when these same people were the ones demanding no government oversight).

Why is it that under a “free market” president, the SEC and the EPA somehow find their enforcement budgets decreased? Regardless of whether white collar or blue collar crime, when you take the cops off the street, crime increases. When crime increases (even white collar), we all get hurt. Government is not necessarily a bad thing.

[CMcG]

This is just an observation. One of my best friends is black with two brothers…all of them are registered Repubs and all voted for Romney because they had the all-Repub ballot. They are all arch conservatives but they are ALL voting Obama if he’s the candidate in November. My friend said “It’s time for a black,” just like my 19-year-old daughter said, “It’s time for a woman,” although she voted Obama. I think it’s gonna be Hillary vs. McCain. I know in her case, and in mine, she will vote Hillary, but I have no idea what the three black brothers will do. My friend seems seriously upset today, but he just doesn’t want to talk about it yet.

[CMcG]

This is just an observation. One of my best friends is black with two brothers…all of them are registered Repubs and all voted for Romney because they had the all-Repub ballot. They are all arch conservatives but they are ALL voting Obama if he’s the candidate in November. My friend said “It’s time for a black,” just like my 19-year-old daughter said, “It’s time for a woman,” although she voted Obama. I think it’s gonna be Hillary vs. McCain. I know in her case, and in mine, she will vote Hillary, but I have no idea what the three black brothers will do. My friend seems seriously upset today, but he just doesn’t want to talk about it yet.

[CMcG]

This is just an observation. One of my best friends is black with two brothers…all of them are registered Repubs and all voted for Romney because they had the all-Repub ballot. They are all arch conservatives but they are ALL voting Obama if he’s the candidate in November. My friend said “It’s time for a black,” just like my 19-year-old daughter said, “It’s time for a woman,” although she voted Obama. I think it’s gonna be Hillary vs. McCain. I know in her case, and in mine, she will vote Hillary, but I have no idea what the three black brothers will do. My friend seems seriously upset today, but he just doesn’t want to talk about it yet.

[CMcG]

This is just an observation. One of my best friends is black with two brothers…all of them are registered Repubs and all voted for Romney because they had the all-Repub ballot. They are all arch conservatives but they are ALL voting Obama if he’s the candidate in November. My friend said “It’s time for a black,” just like my 19-year-old daughter said, “It’s time for a woman,” although she voted Obama. I think it’s gonna be Hillary vs. McCain. I know in her case, and in mine, she will vote Hillary, but I have no idea what the three black brothers will do. My friend seems seriously upset today, but he just doesn’t want to talk about it yet.

[bobby]

contraman,
you are simply wrong about Asians having it easier in education. Just go to any University of CA and see that Asians have the highest average testscore/GPA of any class. Medschool is the same thing based on my own and many of my friends’ experience.

Asians in America are not minority, they’re “ethnic” but aren’t “minority” so don’t get any special treatment. At least the Caucasians have connections (e.g. George Bush going to Yale) but Asians by and large succeed on their own merits.

[bobby]

contraman,
you are simply wrong about Asians having it easier in education. Just go to any University of CA and see that Asians have the highest average testscore/GPA of any class. Medschool is the same thing based on my own and many of my friends’ experience.

Asians in America are not minority, they’re “ethnic” but aren’t “minority” so don’t get any special treatment. At least the Caucasians have connections (e.g. George Bush going to Yale) but Asians by and large succeed on their own merits.

[bobby]

contraman,
you are simply wrong about Asians having it easier in education. Just go to any University of CA and see that Asians have the highest average testscore/GPA of any class. Medschool is the same thing based on my own and many of my friends’ experience.

Asians in America are not minority, they’re “ethnic” but aren’t “minority” so don’t get any special treatment. At least the Caucasians have connections (e.g. George Bush going to Yale) but Asians by and large succeed on their own merits.

[bobby]

contraman,
you are simply wrong about Asians having it easier in education. Just go to any University of CA and see that Asians have the highest average testscore/GPA of any class. Medschool is the same thing based on my own and many of my friends’ experience.

Asians in America are not minority, they’re “ethnic” but aren’t “minority” so don’t get any special treatment. At least the Caucasians have connections (e.g. George Bush going to Yale) but Asians by and large succeed on their own merits.

[bobby]

contraman,
you are simply wrong about Asians having it easier in education. Just go to any University of CA and see that Asians have the highest average testscore/GPA of any class. Medschool is the same thing based on my own and many of my friends’ experience.

Asians in America are not minority, they’re “ethnic” but aren’t “minority” so don’t get any special treatment. At least the Caucasians have connections (e.g. George Bush going to Yale) but Asians by and large succeed on their own merits.

[Coronita]

I am a proponent of equal rights no matter what your creed, culture, or race. Unfortunately, this is not the case anymore in America. You can have 2 educated and experienced candidates for a job, one european decent the other Asian decent, the European guy can have more experience and a degree from a better school, yet the Asian candidate gets the job due to quota regulations. This is not equal rights.

Contraman, with all due respect, I don't think Asians qualify under any type of affirmative action in any of the professions in colleges. I would be a huge proponent of dropping all affirmative action programs based on race,gender, ethnicity, but I do think doing so would lead to a dramatic increase in enrollment by asian students into engineering, mdicine, and other professions that are normally capped by quotas limiting our admissions.

As an asian, I can say that I had to work my ass off to get in an Ivy League school, more so than other peers of different ethnicity, just so I can stand out in a field of other asian applications applying to engineering. And i know some of my peers of different ethnicity had lower qualifications than me and nevertheless had less of an issue gaining admissions. Also, when I was a student, I had the opportunity to work in the admissions office, and reviewing some of the applicants, there were several cases in which asian students were turned away, simply because there was a "need" to diversify the student body, while students of other ethnicity were fast tracked, yet had lower qualifications (caucasians included). Call it diversity or quotas, but quotas don't benefit asians in general.

The long running joke is that if our society is going to have affirmative action programs, why not apply this uniformly to all aspects of our society that doesn't have equal representation. Let's start with sports. How many asians do we see plan in the NFL? Shouldn't there be an affirmative action program for under-represented asians in the NFL? I guess the same would be said about the NBA (though Yao Ming sort of shoots down that argument these days).

Anyway, you're right in that there isn't a level playing field, but you're wrong in who you think benefits from this playing field. The argument has been, that well only the best should play in sports. But shouldn't we demand only the best in other things as well, like in education too?

I should also add that in corporate america, statistically how many asians are really in upper management in non-tech related companies? Not many. You think people aren't qualified for that? Doubtful. There's often a misconception about asians in corporate america. We're sometimes perceived as timid and shy and lacking leadership skills. Perhaps it's a culture thing that when speak, we don't have an affinity and have not mastered the skill of the 1:100 ratio bullshit speak that is prevalent among corporate america, in which 1 task take 100 emails,memos, status reports,meetings,and reviews to discuss what was accomplished. Some would even say this is "short-selling" yourself. But it's typically not in the culture, which unfortunately is why a lot of times you have an utterly incompetent manager leading a group of asians workaholics. Of course, these cultural gaps are not wrapped in some "affirmative action" program that you think gives us better opportunities that your corresponding caucasian peer. It just doesn't happen that way.

I have a rule of thumb when it comes to working in corporate america that I try to teach asians that want to survive in corporate america. Traditionally, first generation asians will say 1 thing for 100 things they do. In corporate america, it's more often people who are successful are those that say 100 things for every 1 thing they do. To be a successful, you should at least say 1 thing for every 1 thing you do. This is a concept that so few asians in corporate america has thus far grasped. And by no means should you ever count on any "affirmative action" program to cover any cultural gaps you may have, because it won't.

 

 

 

 

[img_assist|nid=5962|title=selfportrait|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=100|height=80]

—– Sour grapes for everyone!

[drunkle]

seems to me, the democratic party saw a great opportunity to push the limits in this election figuring that republicans would lose flat out. so, they pushed the woman or the black guy. break the american mold and all that, make history, blah blah.

yeah, edwards was one of my favorites. no bullshit “we are the world” nonsense, no family ties bullshit. simple message, clean up the corporate corruption that’s rotting the country.

ron paul too, yeah, fix the “free market” that we supposedly live under. but speaking of uncharismatic, jesus.. ron has the charisma of boiled broccoli.

asian and “hispanic” vote being racist? sure, why not. blacks are the niggers of all other peoples. even their own in america. it’s cultural, black stereotypes (and asian and hispanic) are still predominant in american minds. obama can’t and won’t change that.

and the la riots weren’t that long ago. it’s still in our collective conciousness. you honestly think some asian liquor store owner is going to be smart enough to look past his own prejudices? to be smart enough to consider history or sociological pressures? do you think he’s going to be smart enough to even consider that much of his opportunities were bought by the blood of blacks?

and hispanics… despised by blacks for competing for the same scraps? for coming in cheaper with no demands, no legal status and no standards?

yeah, race baiting happens. asians and mexicans hating on the black guy, whoo hoo. people will wake up to minorities being racist and institutional racism by whites will be given a pass. break out the champagne.

[Eugene]

Most of my friends (who have graduate degrees and make 6 figures) are willing to pay our tax burden and more to support the country. … Also, some of us are not bigoted or stupid enough to punish poor children who are unfortunate enough to have poor parents.

Amen.

My own political position is simple. Everyone deserves an equal shot at life regardless of how rich his/her parents are. It means free or heavily subsidized healthcare and education (up to the graduate level). You can’t do that without taxes. Imagine a country where a poor teenager could end up with a limp for life because he breaks his leg and he can’t afford to go to a real hospital, or where a parent must sell his kidney to send his gifted son to college. I’d rather pay 30% income tax than live there.

So, on one hand, I can see why many wealthy people choose to vote Republican (lower taxes and affordable kidneys? Cool!) I can’t blame anyone for looking after his/her own best interests. On the other hand, any Republican presidential candidate would have to be either short-sighted (if he does not see the problem with small government and reduced social programs) or immoral (if he sees the problem but chooses to ignore it). Or both.

[Eugene]

Most of my friends (who have graduate degrees and make 6 figures) are willing to pay our tax burden and more to support the country. … Also, some of us are not bigoted or stupid enough to punish poor children who are unfortunate enough to have poor parents.

Amen.

My own political position is simple. Everyone deserves an equal shot at life regardless of how rich his/her parents are. It means free or heavily subsidized healthcare and education (up to the graduate level). You can’t do that without taxes. Imagine a country where a poor teenager could end up with a limp for life because he breaks his leg and he can’t afford to go to a real hospital, or where a parent must sell his kidney to send his gifted son to college. I’d rather pay 30% income tax than live there.

So, on one hand, I can see why many wealthy people choose to vote Republican (lower taxes and affordable kidneys? Cool!) I can’t blame anyone for looking after his/her own best interests. On the other hand, any Republican presidential candidate would have to be either short-sighted (if he does not see the problem with small government and reduced social programs) or immoral (if he sees the problem but chooses to ignore it). Or both.

[Eugene]

Most of my friends (who have graduate degrees and make 6 figures) are willing to pay our tax burden and more to support the country. … Also, some of us are not bigoted or stupid enough to punish poor children who are unfortunate enough to have poor parents.

Amen.

My own political position is simple. Everyone deserves an equal shot at life regardless of how rich his/her parents are. It means free or heavily subsidized healthcare and education (up to the graduate level). You can’t do that without taxes. Imagine a country where a poor teenager could end up with a limp for life because he breaks his leg and he can’t afford to go to a real hospital, or where a parent must sell his kidney to send his gifted son to college. I’d rather pay 30% income tax than live there.

So, on one hand, I can see why many wealthy people choose to vote Republican (lower taxes and affordable kidneys? Cool!) I can’t blame anyone for looking after his/her own best interests. On the other hand, any Republican presidential candidate would have to be either short-sighted (if he does not see the problem with small government and reduced social programs) or immoral (if he sees the problem but chooses to ignore it). Or both.

[Eugene]

Most of my friends (who have graduate degrees and make 6 figures) are willing to pay our tax burden and more to support the country. … Also, some of us are not bigoted or stupid enough to punish poor children who are unfortunate enough to have poor parents.

Amen.

My own political position is simple. Everyone deserves an equal shot at life regardless of how rich his/her parents are. It means free or heavily subsidized healthcare and education (up to the graduate level). You can’t do that without taxes. Imagine a country where a poor teenager could end up with a limp for life because he breaks his leg and he can’t afford to go to a real hospital, or where a parent must sell his kidney to send his gifted son to college. I’d rather pay 30% income tax than live there.

So, on one hand, I can see why many wealthy people choose to vote Republican (lower taxes and affordable kidneys? Cool!) I can’t blame anyone for looking after his/her own best interests. On the other hand, any Republican presidential candidate would have to be either short-sighted (if he does not see the problem with small government and reduced social programs) or immoral (if he sees the problem but chooses to ignore it). Or both.

[Eugene]

Most of my friends (who have graduate degrees and make 6 figures) are willing to pay our tax burden and more to support the country. … Also, some of us are not bigoted or stupid enough to punish poor children who are unfortunate enough to have poor parents.

Amen.

My own political position is simple. Everyone deserves an equal shot at life regardless of how rich his/her parents are. It means free or heavily subsidized healthcare and education (up to the graduate level). You can’t do that without taxes. Imagine a country where a poor teenager could end up with a limp for life because he breaks his leg and he can’t afford to go to a real hospital, or where a parent must sell his kidney to send his gifted son to college. I’d rather pay 30% income tax than live there.

So, on one hand, I can see why many wealthy people choose to vote Republican (lower taxes and affordable kidneys? Cool!) I can’t blame anyone for looking after his/her own best interests. On the other hand, any Republican presidential candidate would have to be either short-sighted (if he does not see the problem with small government and reduced social programs) or immoral (if he sees the problem but chooses to ignore it). Or both.

[drunkle]

seems to me, the democratic party saw a great opportunity to push the limits in this election figuring that republicans would lose flat out. so, they pushed the woman or the black guy. break the american mold and all that, make history, blah blah.

yeah, edwards was one of my favorites. no bullshit “we are the world” nonsense, no family ties bullshit. simple message, clean up the corporate corruption that’s rotting the country.

ron paul too, yeah, fix the “free market” that we supposedly live under. but speaking of uncharismatic, jesus.. ron has the charisma of boiled broccoli.

asian and “hispanic” vote being racist? sure, why not. blacks are the niggers of all other peoples. even their own in america. it’s cultural, black stereotypes (and asian and hispanic) are still predominant in american minds. obama can’t and won’t change that.

and the la riots weren’t that long ago. it’s still in our collective conciousness. you honestly think some asian liquor store owner is going to be smart enough to look past his own prejudices? to be smart enough to consider history or sociological pressures? do you think he’s going to be smart enough to even consider that much of his opportunities were bought by the blood of blacks?

and hispanics… despised by blacks for competing for the same scraps? for coming in cheaper with no demands, no legal status and no standards?

yeah, race baiting happens. asians and mexicans hating on the black guy, whoo hoo. people will wake up to minorities being racist and institutional racism by whites will be given a pass. break out the champagne.

[drunkle]

seems to me, the democratic party saw a great opportunity to push the limits in this election figuring that republicans would lose flat out. so, they pushed the woman or the black guy. break the american mold and all that, make history, blah blah.

yeah, edwards was one of my favorites. no bullshit “we are the world” nonsense, no family ties bullshit. simple message, clean up the corporate corruption that’s rotting the country.

ron paul too, yeah, fix the “free market” that we supposedly live under. but speaking of uncharismatic, jesus.. ron has the charisma of boiled broccoli.

asian and “hispanic” vote being racist? sure, why not. blacks are the niggers of all other peoples. even their own in america. it’s cultural, black stereotypes (and asian and hispanic) are still predominant in american minds. obama can’t and won’t change that.

and the la riots weren’t that long ago. it’s still in our collective conciousness. you honestly think some asian liquor store owner is going to be smart enough to look past his own prejudices? to be smart enough to consider history or sociological pressures? do you think he’s going to be smart enough to even consider that much of his opportunities were bought by the blood of blacks?

and hispanics… despised by blacks for competing for the same scraps? for coming in cheaper with no demands, no legal status and no standards?

yeah, race baiting happens. asians and mexicans hating on the black guy, whoo hoo. people will wake up to minorities being racist and institutional racism by whites will be given a pass. break out the champagne.

[drunkle]

seems to me, the democratic party saw a great opportunity to push the limits in this election figuring that republicans would lose flat out. so, they pushed the woman or the black guy. break the american mold and all that, make history, blah blah.

yeah, edwards was one of my favorites. no bullshit “we are the world” nonsense, no family ties bullshit. simple message, clean up the corporate corruption that’s rotting the country.

ron paul too, yeah, fix the “free market” that we supposedly live under. but speaking of uncharismatic, jesus.. ron has the charisma of boiled broccoli.

asian and “hispanic” vote being racist? sure, why not. blacks are the niggers of all other peoples. even their own in america. it’s cultural, black stereotypes (and asian and hispanic) are still predominant in american minds. obama can’t and won’t change that.

and the la riots weren’t that long ago. it’s still in our collective conciousness. you honestly think some asian liquor store owner is going to be smart enough to look past his own prejudices? to be smart enough to consider history or sociological pressures? do you think he’s going to be smart enough to even consider that much of his opportunities were bought by the blood of blacks?

and hispanics… despised by blacks for competing for the same scraps? for coming in cheaper with no demands, no legal status and no standards?

yeah, race baiting happens. asians and mexicans hating on the black guy, whoo hoo. people will wake up to minorities being racist and institutional racism by whites will be given a pass. break out the champagne.

[drunkle]

seems to me, the democratic party saw a great opportunity to push the limits in this election figuring that republicans would lose flat out. so, they pushed the woman or the black guy. break the american mold and all that, make history, blah blah.

yeah, edwards was one of my favorites. no bullshit “we are the world” nonsense, no family ties bullshit. simple message, clean up the corporate corruption that’s rotting the country.

ron paul too, yeah, fix the “free market” that we supposedly live under. but speaking of uncharismatic, jesus.. ron has the charisma of boiled broccoli.

asian and “hispanic” vote being racist? sure, why not. blacks are the niggers of all other peoples. even their own in america. it’s cultural, black stereotypes (and asian and hispanic) are still predominant in american minds. obama can’t and won’t change that.

and the la riots weren’t that long ago. it’s still in our collective conciousness. you honestly think some asian liquor store owner is going to be smart enough to look past his own prejudices? to be smart enough to consider history or sociological pressures? do you think he’s going to be smart enough to even consider that much of his opportunities were bought by the blood of blacks?

and hispanics… despised by blacks for competing for the same scraps? for coming in cheaper with no demands, no legal status and no standards?

yeah, race baiting happens. asians and mexicans hating on the black guy, whoo hoo. people will wake up to minorities being racist and institutional racism by whites will be given a pass. break out the champagne.

[Coronita]

I am a proponent of equal rights no matter what your creed, culture, or race. Unfortunately, this is not the case anymore in America. You can have 2 educated and experienced candidates for a job, one european decent the other Asian decent, the European guy can have more experience and a degree from a better school, yet the Asian candidate gets the job due to quota regulations. This is not equal rights.

Contraman, with all due respect, I don't think Asians qualify under any type of affirmative action in any of the professions in colleges. I would be a huge proponent of dropping all affirmative action programs based on race,gender, ethnicity, but I do think doing so would lead to a dramatic increase in enrollment by asian students into engineering, mdicine, and other professions that are normally capped by quotas limiting our admissions.

As an asian, I can say that I had to work my ass off to get in an Ivy League school, more so than other peers of different ethnicity, just so I can stand out in a field of other asian applications applying to engineering. And i know some of my peers of different ethnicity had lower qualifications than me and nevertheless had less of an issue gaining admissions. Also, when I was a student, I had the opportunity to work in the admissions office, and reviewing some of the applicants, there were several cases in which asian students were turned away, simply because there was a "need" to diversify the student body, while students of other ethnicity were fast tracked, yet had lower qualifications (caucasians included). Call it diversity or quotas, but quotas don't benefit asians in general.

The long running joke is that if our society is going to have affirmative action programs, why not apply this uniformly to all aspects of our society that doesn't have equal representation. Let's start with sports. How many asians do we see plan in the NFL? Shouldn't there be an affirmative action program for under-represented asians in the NFL? I guess the same would be said about the NBA (though Yao Ming sort of shoots down that argument these days).

Anyway, you're right in that there isn't a level playing field, but you're wrong in who you think benefits from this playing field. The argument has been, that well only the best should play in sports. But shouldn't we demand only the best in other things as well, like in education too?

I should also add that in corporate america, statistically how many asians are really in upper management in non-tech related companies? Not many. You think people aren't qualified for that? Doubtful. There's often a misconception about asians in corporate america. We're sometimes perceived as timid and shy and lacking leadership skills. Perhaps it's a culture thing that when speak, we don't have an affinity and have not mastered the skill of the 1:100 ratio bullshit speak that is prevalent among corporate america, in which 1 task take 100 emails,memos, status reports,meetings,and reviews to discuss what was accomplished. Some would even say this is "short-selling" yourself. But it's typically not in the culture, which unfortunately is why a lot of times you have an utterly incompetent manager leading a group of asians workaholics. Of course, these cultural gaps are not wrapped in some "affirmative action" program that you think gives us better opportunities that your corresponding caucasian peer. It just doesn't happen that way.

I have a rule of thumb when it comes to working in corporate america that I try to teach asians that want to survive in corporate america. Traditionally, first generation asians will say 1 thing for 100 things they do. In corporate america, it's more often people who are successful are those that say 100 things for every 1 thing they do. To be a successful, you should at least say 1 thing for every 1 thing you do. This is a concept that so few asians in corporate america has thus far grasped. And by no means should you ever count on any "affirmative action" program to cover any cultural gaps you may have, because it won't.

 

 

 

 

[img_assist|nid=5962|title=selfportrait|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=100|height=80]

—– Sour grapes for everyone!

[Coronita]

I am a proponent of equal rights no matter what your creed, culture, or race. Unfortunately, this is not the case anymore in America. You can have 2 educated and experienced candidates for a job, one european decent the other Asian decent, the European guy can have more experience and a degree from a better school, yet the Asian candidate gets the job due to quota regulations. This is not equal rights.

Contraman, with all due respect, I don't think Asians qualify under any type of affirmative action in any of the professions in colleges. I would be a huge proponent of dropping all affirmative action programs based on race,gender, ethnicity, but I do think doing so would lead to a dramatic increase in enrollment by asian students into engineering, mdicine, and other professions that are normally capped by quotas limiting our admissions.

As an asian, I can say that I had to work my ass off to get in an Ivy League school, more so than other peers of different ethnicity, just so I can stand out in a field of other asian applications applying to engineering. And i know some of my peers of different ethnicity had lower qualifications than me and nevertheless had less of an issue gaining admissions. Also, when I was a student, I had the opportunity to work in the admissions office, and reviewing some of the applicants, there were several cases in which asian students were turned away, simply because there was a "need" to diversify the student body, while students of other ethnicity were fast tracked, yet had lower qualifications (caucasians included). Call it diversity or quotas, but quotas don't benefit asians in general.

The long running joke is that if our society is going to have affirmative action programs, why not apply this uniformly to all aspects of our society that doesn't have equal representation. Let's start with sports. How many asians do we see plan in the NFL? Shouldn't there be an affirmative action program for under-represented asians in the NFL? I guess the same would be said about the NBA (though Yao Ming sort of shoots down that argument these days).

Anyway, you're right in that there isn't a level playing field, but you're wrong in who you think benefits from this playing field. The argument has been, that well only the best should play in sports. But shouldn't we demand only the best in other things as well, like in education too?

I should also add that in corporate america, statistically how many asians are really in upper management in non-tech related companies? Not many. You think people aren't qualified for that? Doubtful. There's often a misconception about asians in corporate america. We're sometimes perceived as timid and shy and lacking leadership skills. Perhaps it's a culture thing that when speak, we don't have an affinity and have not mastered the skill of the 1:100 ratio bullshit speak that is prevalent among corporate america, in which 1 task take 100 emails,memos, status reports,meetings,and reviews to discuss what was accomplished. Some would even say this is "short-selling" yourself. But it's typically not in the culture, which unfortunately is why a lot of times you have an utterly incompetent manager leading a group of asians workaholics. Of course, these cultural gaps are not wrapped in some "affirmative action" program that you think gives us better opportunities that your corresponding caucasian peer. It just doesn't happen that way.

I have a rule of thumb when it comes to working in corporate america that I try to teach asians that want to survive in corporate america. Traditionally, first generation asians will say 1 thing for 100 things they do. In corporate america, it's more often people who are successful are those that say 100 things for every 1 thing they do. To be a successful, you should at least say 1 thing for every 1 thing you do. This is a concept that so few asians in corporate america has thus far grasped. And by no means should you ever count on any "affirmative action" program to cover any cultural gaps you may have, because it won't.

 

 

 

 

[img_assist|nid=5962|title=selfportrait|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=100|height=80]

—– Sour grapes for everyone!

[Coronita]

I am a proponent of equal rights no matter what your creed, culture, or race. Unfortunately, this is not the case anymore in America. You can have 2 educated and experienced candidates for a job, one european decent the other Asian decent, the European guy can have more experience and a degree from a better school, yet the Asian candidate gets the job due to quota regulations. This is not equal rights.

Contraman, with all due respect, I don't think Asians qualify under any type of affirmative action in any of the professions in colleges. I would be a huge proponent of dropping all affirmative action programs based on race,gender, ethnicity, but I do think doing so would lead to a dramatic increase in enrollment by asian students into engineering, mdicine, and other professions that are normally capped by quotas limiting our admissions.

As an asian, I can say that I had to work my ass off to get in an Ivy League school, more so than other peers of different ethnicity, just so I can stand out in a field of other asian applications applying to engineering. And i know some of my peers of different ethnicity had lower qualifications than me and nevertheless had less of an issue gaining admissions. Also, when I was a student, I had the opportunity to work in the admissions office, and reviewing some of the applicants, there were several cases in which asian students were turned away, simply because there was a "need" to diversify the student body, while students of other ethnicity were fast tracked, yet had lower qualifications (caucasians included). Call it diversity or quotas, but quotas don't benefit asians in general.

The long running joke is that if our society is going to have affirmative action programs, why not apply this uniformly to all aspects of our society that doesn't have equal representation. Let's start with sports. How many asians do we see plan in the NFL? Shouldn't there be an affirmative action program for under-represented asians in the NFL? I guess the same would be said about the NBA (though Yao Ming sort of shoots down that argument these days).

Anyway, you're right in that there isn't a level playing field, but you're wrong in who you think benefits from this playing field. The argument has been, that well only the best should play in sports. But shouldn't we demand only the best in other things as well, like in education too?

I should also add that in corporate america, statistically how many asians are really in upper management in non-tech related companies? Not many. You think people aren't qualified for that? Doubtful. There's often a misconception about asians in corporate america. We're sometimes perceived as timid and shy and lacking leadership skills. Perhaps it's a culture thing that when speak, we don't have an affinity and have not mastered the skill of the 1:100 ratio bullshit speak that is prevalent among corporate america, in which 1 task take 100 emails,memos, status reports,meetings,and reviews to discuss what was accomplished. Some would even say this is "short-selling" yourself. But it's typically not in the culture, which unfortunately is why a lot of times you have an utterly incompetent manager leading a group of asians workaholics. Of course, these cultural gaps are not wrapped in some "affirmative action" program that you think gives us better opportunities that your corresponding caucasian peer. It just doesn't happen that way.

I have a rule of thumb when it comes to working in corporate america that I try to teach asians that want to survive in corporate america. Traditionally, first generation asians will say 1 thing for 100 things they do. In corporate america, it's more often people who are successful are those that say 100 things for every 1 thing they do. To be a successful, you should at least say 1 thing for every 1 thing you do. This is a concept that so few asians in corporate america has thus far grasped. And by no means should you ever count on any "affirmative action" program to cover any cultural gaps you may have, because it won't.

 

 

 

 

[img_assist|nid=5962|title=selfportrait|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=100|height=80]

—– Sour grapes for everyone!

[Coronita]

I am a proponent of equal rights no matter what your creed, culture, or race. Unfortunately, this is not the case anymore in America. You can have 2 educated and experienced candidates for a job, one european decent the other Asian decent, the European guy can have more experience and a degree from a better school, yet the Asian candidate gets the job due to quota regulations. This is not equal rights.

Contraman, with all due respect, I don't think Asians qualify under any type of affirmative action in any of the professions in colleges. I would be a huge proponent of dropping all affirmative action programs based on race,gender, ethnicity, but I do think doing so would lead to a dramatic increase in enrollment by asian students into engineering, mdicine, and other professions that are normally capped by quotas limiting our admissions.

As an asian, I can say that I had to work my ass off to get in an Ivy League school, more so than other peers of different ethnicity, just so I can stand out in a field of other asian applications applying to engineering. And i know some of my peers of different ethnicity had lower qualifications than me and nevertheless had less of an issue gaining admissions. Also, when I was a student, I had the opportunity to work in the admissions office, and reviewing some of the applicants, there were several cases in which asian students were turned away, simply because there was a "need" to diversify the student body, while students of other ethnicity were fast tracked, yet had lower qualifications (caucasians included). Call it diversity or quotas, but quotas don't benefit asians in general.

The long running joke is that if our society is going to have affirmative action programs, why not apply this uniformly to all aspects of our society that doesn't have equal representation. Let's start with sports. How many asians do we see plan in the NFL? Shouldn't there be an affirmative action program for under-represented asians in the NFL? I guess the same would be said about the NBA (though Yao Ming sort of shoots down that argument these days).

Anyway, you're right in that there isn't a level playing field, but you're wrong in who you think benefits from this playing field. The argument has been, that well only the best should play in sports. But shouldn't we demand only the best in other things as well, like in education too?

I should also add that in corporate america, statistically how many asians are really in upper management in non-tech related companies? Not many. You think people aren't qualified for that? Doubtful. There's often a misconception about asians in corporate america. We're sometimes perceived as timid and shy and lacking leadership skills. Perhaps it's a culture thing that when speak, we don't have an affinity and have not mastered the skill of the 1:100 ratio bullshit speak that is prevalent among corporate america, in which 1 task take 100 emails,memos, status reports,meetings,and reviews to discuss what was accomplished. Some would even say this is "short-selling" yourself. But it's typically not in the culture, which unfortunately is why a lot of times you have an utterly incompetent manager leading a group of asians workaholics. Of course, these cultural gaps are not wrapped in some "affirmative action" program that you think gives us better opportunities that your corresponding caucasian peer. It just doesn't happen that way.

I have a rule of thumb when it comes to working in corporate america that I try to teach asians that want to survive in corporate america. Traditionally, first generation asians will say 1 thing for 100 things they do. In corporate america, it's more often people who are successful are those that say 100 things for every 1 thing they do. To be a successful, you should at least say 1 thing for every 1 thing you do. This is a concept that so few asians in corporate america has thus far grasped. And by no means should you ever count on any "affirmative action" program to cover any cultural gaps you may have, because it won't.

 

 

 

 

[img_assist|nid=5962|title=selfportrait|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=100|height=80]

—– Sour grapes for everyone!

[boyle_heights]

You say you are not a racist but state: So whining may be slightly justified by some……..who are carrying 50,000 in school loans while their hispanic buddy has none……(FYI, I have no school loans).

Then you say you are not racist again then state: Hispanics are probably voting for Clinton because she wants to put a freeze on foreclosures and bail everyone out.

Sounds like a racist to me.

Latinos voted for Hillary because they know more about her than they know about Obama. Obama himself has stated that he reached out to the Latino community too late.

As for bailouts, who is it really helping? Latinos have one of the lowest home ownership rates among the different races. Who does it benefit by allowing Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac to purchase loans at 700K+? How many Latino families will benefit from that?

I am Latino. Graduated from USC. Voted for Obama.

Using your logic I should be able to whine. I had 50k in loans and you had none. It must mean you got government handouts.

[Anonymous]

OP here. Just have to say how proud I am that I finally initiated a thread that took off! Seriously, there are obviously some generalities that can be made about these issues, but also endless points of contention.

For example, I see one of the past posters claimed that an earlier poster was racist for saying it is OK for whites to whine about Hispanics not having school loans, and also for saying Hillary’s foreclosure stance would cause Hispanics to vote for her.

In fact, I’ve seen reports on how disproportionately affected Hispanics have been with foreclosures, so is it really racist to say they some of them may cast a vote based on this issue?

Also, you can go to http://www.lawschoolnumbers.com right now, search accepted law school applicants for next year to all US schools, and find numerous Hispanic (and black) applicants accepted with LSAT scores 5-8 points lower than their white counterparts and they are also receiving scholarships to these schools that the whites are not receiving. EG: Two Hispanic applicants accepted to U of Iowa – a top 25 school – with 150 LSATs (very low percentile wise, would barely get you into the lowest ranked schools). These applicants are also getting money to go to school. White applicants with 155-159s are being denied entrance, and many with scores even above 160 are getting no money.

Iowa has no past discrimination against Hispanics to ‘remedy’ and until recently there weren’t many even living in Iowa. They simply want to be able to list that they have say 10% minority enrolment for the yearly rankings so they look diverse, and since it is Iowa they need to ‘import’ this diversity, and they pay for it and accept those with lower scores by discriminating against white and Asian applicants, although Asians may also have an edge in that state.

I’ll whine all day because I am one of those whites who had a 160+, was an in state applicant and a military veteran and was denied, only to see Hispnaic applicants with a 150 get in with money. I call BS on that any day.

[boyle_heights]

Latinos have one of the lowest home ownership rates of the various groups. Because of this the numbers can look higher than normal. Lets say 5 in 10 Latinos owns a home. Whites are at about 8 in 10. If 2 latinos had foreclosures that means 40% had issues. If 2 whites had the same issue that is 25%. Now, if the latinos and the whites were bailed out is it any different? If you want to play with the numbers you can say 40% of latinos are being bailed out while only 25% of whites are being helped out. Sure the numbers look like more latinos benefit even if the real numbers could actually be the same. It can be all about presentation.

Now if you want to talk about the bailout. Who exactly is being helped the most? Bush and the Fed didn’t really want to bail out home owners. They only changed their mind when the banks and investors started getting hit with big losses. Then they could not cut rates fast enough to help them out. I think there are more white investors than there are latinos.

As for school, sure some Latinos get into schools they probably should not be in. I am not going to deny that. The same can be said of other groups. How many wealthy families, alumni, etc get their kids into schools using their connections? Kids that many times did not deserve to be admitted. I know a few of those. Take a look at the case at UCLA. I think it is their medical school that has an investigation under way because alumni were being asked to donate money to get their kids in.

As for your 160+. Does your score mean you deserved to get in? Does their 150 mean they didn’t? I don’t know the answer to those questions. What undergraduate schools did those students attend? Unless you have two students with the same exact applications with only different scores you can’t really compare. Now if they had a 150 with top undergrad degress from say Harvard and you had a 160 with a degree from U. of Miami then I would choose those other students also. Unless you know what was on their applications how can you say that you deserved to be admitted more than them based only on a score? Now if they came from a school that was not academically strong and you did then I would say it was unfair.

[boyle_heights]

Latinos have one of the lowest home ownership rates of the various groups. Because of this the numbers can look higher than normal. Lets say 5 in 10 Latinos owns a home. Whites are at about 8 in 10. If 2 latinos had foreclosures that means 40% had issues. If 2 whites had the same issue that is 25%. Now, if the latinos and the whites were bailed out is it any different? If you want to play with the numbers you can say 40% of latinos are being bailed out while only 25% of whites are being helped out. Sure the numbers look like more latinos benefit even if the real numbers could actually be the same. It can be all about presentation.

Now if you want to talk about the bailout. Who exactly is being helped the most? Bush and the Fed didn’t really want to bail out home owners. They only changed their mind when the banks and investors started getting hit with big losses. Then they could not cut rates fast enough to help them out. I think there are more white investors than there are latinos.

As for school, sure some Latinos get into schools they probably should not be in. I am not going to deny that. The same can be said of other groups. How many wealthy families, alumni, etc get their kids into schools using their connections? Kids that many times did not deserve to be admitted. I know a few of those. Take a look at the case at UCLA. I think it is their medical school that has an investigation under way because alumni were being asked to donate money to get their kids in.

As for your 160+. Does your score mean you deserved to get in? Does their 150 mean they didn’t? I don’t know the answer to those questions. What undergraduate schools did those students attend? Unless you have two students with the same exact applications with only different scores you can’t really compare. Now if they had a 150 with top undergrad degress from say Harvard and you had a 160 with a degree from U. of Miami then I would choose those other students also. Unless you know what was on their applications how can you say that you deserved to be admitted more than them based only on a score? Now if they came from a school that was not academically strong and you did then I would say it was unfair.

[boyle_heights]

Latinos have one of the lowest home ownership rates of the various groups. Because of this the numbers can look higher than normal. Lets say 5 in 10 Latinos owns a home. Whites are at about 8 in 10. If 2 latinos had foreclosures that means 40% had issues. If 2 whites had the same issue that is 25%. Now, if the latinos and the whites were bailed out is it any different? If you want to play with the numbers you can say 40% of latinos are being bailed out while only 25% of whites are being helped out. Sure the numbers look like more latinos benefit even if the real numbers could actually be the same. It can be all about presentation.

Now if you want to talk about the bailout. Who exactly is being helped the most? Bush and the Fed didn’t really want to bail out home owners. They only changed their mind when the banks and investors started getting hit with big losses. Then they could not cut rates fast enough to help them out. I think there are more white investors than there are latinos.

As for school, sure some Latinos get into schools they probably should not be in. I am not going to deny that. The same can be said of other groups. How many wealthy families, alumni, etc get their kids into schools using their connections? Kids that many times did not deserve to be admitted. I know a few of those. Take a look at the case at UCLA. I think it is their medical school that has an investigation under way because alumni were being asked to donate money to get their kids in.

As for your 160+. Does your score mean you deserved to get in? Does their 150 mean they didn’t? I don’t know the answer to those questions. What undergraduate schools did those students attend? Unless you have two students with the same exact applications with only different scores you can’t really compare. Now if they had a 150 with top undergrad degress from say Harvard and you had a 160 with a degree from U. of Miami then I would choose those other students also. Unless you know what was on their applications how can you say that you deserved to be admitted more than them based only on a score? Now if they came from a school that was not academically strong and you did then I would say it was unfair.

[boyle_heights]

Latinos have one of the lowest home ownership rates of the various groups. Because of this the numbers can look higher than normal. Lets say 5 in 10 Latinos owns a home. Whites are at about 8 in 10. If 2 latinos had foreclosures that means 40% had issues. If 2 whites had the same issue that is 25%. Now, if the latinos and the whites were bailed out is it any different? If you want to play with the numbers you can say 40% of latinos are being bailed out while only 25% of whites are being helped out. Sure the numbers look like more latinos benefit even if the real numbers could actually be the same. It can be all about presentation.

Now if you want to talk about the bailout. Who exactly is being helped the most? Bush and the Fed didn’t really want to bail out home owners. They only changed their mind when the banks and investors started getting hit with big losses. Then they could not cut rates fast enough to help them out. I think there are more white investors than there are latinos.

As for school, sure some Latinos get into schools they probably should not be in. I am not going to deny that. The same can be said of other groups. How many wealthy families, alumni, etc get their kids into schools using their connections? Kids that many times did not deserve to be admitted. I know a few of those. Take a look at the case at UCLA. I think it is their medical school that has an investigation under way because alumni were being asked to donate money to get their kids in.

As for your 160+. Does your score mean you deserved to get in? Does their 150 mean they didn’t? I don’t know the answer to those questions. What undergraduate schools did those students attend? Unless you have two students with the same exact applications with only different scores you can’t really compare. Now if they had a 150 with top undergrad degress from say Harvard and you had a 160 with a degree from U. of Miami then I would choose those other students also. Unless you know what was on their applications how can you say that you deserved to be admitted more than them based only on a score? Now if they came from a school that was not academically strong and you did then I would say it was unfair.

[boyle_heights]

Latinos have one of the lowest home ownership rates of the various groups. Because of this the numbers can look higher than normal. Lets say 5 in 10 Latinos owns a home. Whites are at about 8 in 10. If 2 latinos had foreclosures that means 40% had issues. If 2 whites had the same issue that is 25%. Now, if the latinos and the whites were bailed out is it any different? If you want to play with the numbers you can say 40% of latinos are being bailed out while only 25% of whites are being helped out. Sure the numbers look like more latinos benefit even if the real numbers could actually be the same. It can be all about presentation.

Now if you want to talk about the bailout. Who exactly is being helped the most? Bush and the Fed didn’t really want to bail out home owners. They only changed their mind when the banks and investors started getting hit with big losses. Then they could not cut rates fast enough to help them out. I think there are more white investors than there are latinos.

As for school, sure some Latinos get into schools they probably should not be in. I am not going to deny that. The same can be said of other groups. How many wealthy families, alumni, etc get their kids into schools using their connections? Kids that many times did not deserve to be admitted. I know a few of those. Take a look at the case at UCLA. I think it is their medical school that has an investigation under way because alumni were being asked to donate money to get their kids in.

As for your 160+. Does your score mean you deserved to get in? Does their 150 mean they didn’t? I don’t know the answer to those questions. What undergraduate schools did those students attend? Unless you have two students with the same exact applications with only different scores you can’t really compare. Now if they had a 150 with top undergrad degress from say Harvard and you had a 160 with a degree from U. of Miami then I would choose those other students also. Unless you know what was on their applications how can you say that you deserved to be admitted more than them based only on a score? Now if they came from a school that was not academically strong and you did then I would say it was unfair.

[Anonymous]

OP here. Just have to say how proud I am that I finally initiated a thread that took off! Seriously, there are obviously some generalities that can be made about these issues, but also endless points of contention.

For example, I see one of the past posters claimed that an earlier poster was racist for saying it is OK for whites to whine about Hispanics not having school loans, and also for saying Hillary’s foreclosure stance would cause Hispanics to vote for her.

In fact, I’ve seen reports on how disproportionately affected Hispanics have been with foreclosures, so is it really racist to say they some of them may cast a vote based on this issue?

Also, you can go to http://www.lawschoolnumbers.com right now, search accepted law school applicants for next year to all US schools, and find numerous Hispanic (and black) applicants accepted with LSAT scores 5-8 points lower than their white counterparts and they are also receiving scholarships to these schools that the whites are not receiving. EG: Two Hispanic applicants accepted to U of Iowa – a top 25 school – with 150 LSATs (very low percentile wise, would barely get you into the lowest ranked schools). These applicants are also getting money to go to school. White applicants with 155-159s are being denied entrance, and many with scores even above 160 are getting no money.

Iowa has no past discrimination against Hispanics to ‘remedy’ and until recently there weren’t many even living in Iowa. They simply want to be able to list that they have say 10% minority enrolment for the yearly rankings so they look diverse, and since it is Iowa they need to ‘import’ this diversity, and they pay for it and accept those with lower scores by discriminating against white and Asian applicants, although Asians may also have an edge in that state.

I’ll whine all day because I am one of those whites who had a 160+, was an in state applicant and a military veteran and was denied, only to see Hispnaic applicants with a 150 get in with money. I call BS on that any day.

[Anonymous]

OP here. Just have to say how proud I am that I finally initiated a thread that took off! Seriously, there are obviously some generalities that can be made about these issues, but also endless points of contention.

For example, I see one of the past posters claimed that an earlier poster was racist for saying it is OK for whites to whine about Hispanics not having school loans, and also for saying Hillary’s foreclosure stance would cause Hispanics to vote for her.

In fact, I’ve seen reports on how disproportionately affected Hispanics have been with foreclosures, so is it really racist to say they some of them may cast a vote based on this issue?

Also, you can go to http://www.lawschoolnumbers.com right now, search accepted law school applicants for next year to all US schools, and find numerous Hispanic (and black) applicants accepted with LSAT scores 5-8 points lower than their white counterparts and they are also receiving scholarships to these schools that the whites are not receiving. EG: Two Hispanic applicants accepted to U of Iowa – a top 25 school – with 150 LSATs (very low percentile wise, would barely get you into the lowest ranked schools). These applicants are also getting money to go to school. White applicants with 155-159s are being denied entrance, and many with scores even above 160 are getting no money.

Iowa has no past discrimination against Hispanics to ‘remedy’ and until recently there weren’t many even living in Iowa. They simply want to be able to list that they have say 10% minority enrolment for the yearly rankings so they look diverse, and since it is Iowa they need to ‘import’ this diversity, and they pay for it and accept those with lower scores by discriminating against white and Asian applicants, although Asians may also have an edge in that state.

I’ll whine all day because I am one of those whites who had a 160+, was an in state applicant and a military veteran and was denied, only to see Hispnaic applicants with a 150 get in with money. I call BS on that any day.

[Anonymous]

OP here. Just have to say how proud I am that I finally initiated a thread that took off! Seriously, there are obviously some generalities that can be made about these issues, but also endless points of contention.

For example, I see one of the past posters claimed that an earlier poster was racist for saying it is OK for whites to whine about Hispanics not having school loans, and also for saying Hillary’s foreclosure stance would cause Hispanics to vote for her.

In fact, I’ve seen reports on how disproportionately affected Hispanics have been with foreclosures, so is it really racist to say they some of them may cast a vote based on this issue?

Also, you can go to http://www.lawschoolnumbers.com right now, search accepted law school applicants for next year to all US schools, and find numerous Hispanic (and black) applicants accepted with LSAT scores 5-8 points lower than their white counterparts and they are also receiving scholarships to these schools that the whites are not receiving. EG: Two Hispanic applicants accepted to U of Iowa – a top 25 school – with 150 LSATs (very low percentile wise, would barely get you into the lowest ranked schools). These applicants are also getting money to go to school. White applicants with 155-159s are being denied entrance, and many with scores even above 160 are getting no money.

Iowa has no past discrimination against Hispanics to ‘remedy’ and until recently there weren’t many even living in Iowa. They simply want to be able to list that they have say 10% minority enrolment for the yearly rankings so they look diverse, and since it is Iowa they need to ‘import’ this diversity, and they pay for it and accept those with lower scores by discriminating against white and Asian applicants, although Asians may also have an edge in that state.

I’ll whine all day because I am one of those whites who had a 160+, was an in state applicant and a military veteran and was denied, only to see Hispnaic applicants with a 150 get in with money. I call BS on that any day.

[Anonymous]

OP here. Just have to say how proud I am that I finally initiated a thread that took off! Seriously, there are obviously some generalities that can be made about these issues, but also endless points of contention.

For example, I see one of the past posters claimed that an earlier poster was racist for saying it is OK for whites to whine about Hispanics not having school loans, and also for saying Hillary’s foreclosure stance would cause Hispanics to vote for her.

In fact, I’ve seen reports on how disproportionately affected Hispanics have been with foreclosures, so is it really racist to say they some of them may cast a vote based on this issue?

Also, you can go to http://www.lawschoolnumbers.com right now, search accepted law school applicants for next year to all US schools, and find numerous Hispanic (and black) applicants accepted with LSAT scores 5-8 points lower than their white counterparts and they are also receiving scholarships to these schools that the whites are not receiving. EG: Two Hispanic applicants accepted to U of Iowa – a top 25 school – with 150 LSATs (very low percentile wise, would barely get you into the lowest ranked schools). These applicants are also getting money to go to school. White applicants with 155-159s are being denied entrance, and many with scores even above 160 are getting no money.

Iowa has no past discrimination against Hispanics to ‘remedy’ and until recently there weren’t many even living in Iowa. They simply want to be able to list that they have say 10% minority enrolment for the yearly rankings so they look diverse, and since it is Iowa they need to ‘import’ this diversity, and they pay for it and accept those with lower scores by discriminating against white and Asian applicants, although Asians may also have an edge in that state.

I’ll whine all day because I am one of those whites who had a 160+, was an in state applicant and a military veteran and was denied, only to see Hispnaic applicants with a 150 get in with money. I call BS on that any day.

[boyle_heights]

You say you are not a racist but state: So whining may be slightly justified by some……..who are carrying 50,000 in school loans while their hispanic buddy has none……(FYI, I have no school loans).

Then you say you are not racist again then state: Hispanics are probably voting for Clinton because she wants to put a freeze on foreclosures and bail everyone out.

Sounds like a racist to me.

Latinos voted for Hillary because they know more about her than they know about Obama. Obama himself has stated that he reached out to the Latino community too late.

As for bailouts, who is it really helping? Latinos have one of the lowest home ownership rates among the different races. Who does it benefit by allowing Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac to purchase loans at 700K+? How many Latino families will benefit from that?

I am Latino. Graduated from USC. Voted for Obama.

Using your logic I should be able to whine. I had 50k in loans and you had none. It must mean you got government handouts.

[boyle_heights]

You say you are not a racist but state: So whining may be slightly justified by some……..who are carrying 50,000 in school loans while their hispanic buddy has none……(FYI, I have no school loans).

Then you say you are not racist again then state: Hispanics are probably voting for Clinton because she wants to put a freeze on foreclosures and bail everyone out.

Sounds like a racist to me.

Latinos voted for Hillary because they know more about her than they know about Obama. Obama himself has stated that he reached out to the Latino community too late.

As for bailouts, who is it really helping? Latinos have one of the lowest home ownership rates among the different races. Who does it benefit by allowing Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac to purchase loans at 700K+? How many Latino families will benefit from that?

I am Latino. Graduated from USC. Voted for Obama.

Using your logic I should be able to whine. I had 50k in loans and you had none. It must mean you got government handouts.

[boyle_heights]

You say you are not a racist but state: So whining may be slightly justified by some……..who are carrying 50,000 in school loans while their hispanic buddy has none……(FYI, I have no school loans).

Then you say you are not racist again then state: Hispanics are probably voting for Clinton because she wants to put a freeze on foreclosures and bail everyone out.

Sounds like a racist to me.

Latinos voted for Hillary because they know more about her than they know about Obama. Obama himself has stated that he reached out to the Latino community too late.

As for bailouts, who is it really helping? Latinos have one of the lowest home ownership rates among the different races. Who does it benefit by allowing Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac to purchase loans at 700K+? How many Latino families will benefit from that?

I am Latino. Graduated from USC. Voted for Obama.

Using your logic I should be able to whine. I had 50k in loans and you had none. It must mean you got government handouts.

[boyle_heights]

You say you are not a racist but state: So whining may be slightly justified by some……..who are carrying 50,000 in school loans while their hispanic buddy has none……(FYI, I have no school loans).

Then you say you are not racist again then state: Hispanics are probably voting for Clinton because she wants to put a freeze on foreclosures and bail everyone out.

Sounds like a racist to me.

Latinos voted for Hillary because they know more about her than they know about Obama. Obama himself has stated that he reached out to the Latino community too late.

As for bailouts, who is it really helping? Latinos have one of the lowest home ownership rates among the different races. Who does it benefit by allowing Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac to purchase loans at 700K+? How many Latino families will benefit from that?

I am Latino. Graduated from USC. Voted for Obama.

Using your logic I should be able to whine. I had 50k in loans and you had none. It must mean you got government handouts.

[contraman]

Kev374, Just to address your post here. STUDY (going to college and getting a degree) and WORKING HARD does not always guarantee a high income in this country.

The reality is, and I am by no means racist, that if you are a minority in America today (not of european decent), you actually have a slightly better chance of getting a degree and landing a high paying job. This is due to quotas placed on companies to hire a certain percentage of minorities to avoid lawsuits.

Try being of hungarian european decent and getting a grant from the government to go to college. Good Luck on that one.

I am a proponent of equal rights no matter what your creed, culture, or race. Unfortunately, this is not the case anymore in America. You can have 2 educated and experienced candidates for a job, one european decent the other Asian decent, the European guy can have more experience and a degree from a better school, yet the Asian candidate gets the job due to quota regulations. This is not equal rights.

So whining may be slightly justified by some……..who are carrying 50,000 in school loans while their hispanic buddy has none……(FYI, I have no school loans).

Once again, I am not racist and have friends from all backgrounds and cultures. I discuss this with them also and it is an issue in our country that needs to be addressed.

Hispanics are probably voting for Clinton because she wants to put a freeze on foreclosures and bail everyone out. I think that that population of people (look at Eastlake and Chula Vista prices)have taken the biggest beating in the housing market. Just an observation.

Sincerely, Contraman

[contraman]

Kev374, Just to address your post here. STUDY (going to college and getting a degree) and WORKING HARD does not always guarantee a high income in this country.

The reality is, and I am by no means racist, that if you are a minority in America today (not of european decent), you actually have a slightly better chance of getting a degree and landing a high paying job. This is due to quotas placed on companies to hire a certain percentage of minorities to avoid lawsuits.

Try being of hungarian european decent and getting a grant from the government to go to college. Good Luck on that one.

I am a proponent of equal rights no matter what your creed, culture, or race. Unfortunately, this is not the case anymore in America. You can have 2 educated and experienced candidates for a job, one european decent the other Asian decent, the European guy can have more experience and a degree from a better school, yet the Asian candidate gets the job due to quota regulations. This is not equal rights.

So whining may be slightly justified by some……..who are carrying 50,000 in school loans while their hispanic buddy has none……(FYI, I have no school loans).

Once again, I am not racist and have friends from all backgrounds and cultures. I discuss this with them also and it is an issue in our country that needs to be addressed.

Hispanics are probably voting for Clinton because she wants to put a freeze on foreclosures and bail everyone out. I think that that population of people (look at Eastlake and Chula Vista prices)have taken the biggest beating in the housing market. Just an observation.

Sincerely, Contraman

[contraman]

Kev374, Just to address your post here. STUDY (going to college and getting a degree) and WORKING HARD does not always guarantee a high income in this country.

The reality is, and I am by no means racist, that if you are a minority in America today (not of european decent), you actually have a slightly better chance of getting a degree and landing a high paying job. This is due to quotas placed on companies to hire a certain percentage of minorities to avoid lawsuits.

Try being of hungarian european decent and getting a grant from the government to go to college. Good Luck on that one.

I am a proponent of equal rights no matter what your creed, culture, or race. Unfortunately, this is not the case anymore in America. You can have 2 educated and experienced candidates for a job, one european decent the other Asian decent, the European guy can have more experience and a degree from a better school, yet the Asian candidate gets the job due to quota regulations. This is not equal rights.

So whining may be slightly justified by some……..who are carrying 50,000 in school loans while their hispanic buddy has none……(FYI, I have no school loans).

Once again, I am not racist and have friends from all backgrounds and cultures. I discuss this with them also and it is an issue in our country that needs to be addressed.

Hispanics are probably voting for Clinton because she wants to put a freeze on foreclosures and bail everyone out. I think that that population of people (look at Eastlake and Chula Vista prices)have taken the biggest beating in the housing market. Just an observation.

Sincerely, Contraman

[contraman]

Kev374, Just to address your post here. STUDY (going to college and getting a degree) and WORKING HARD does not always guarantee a high income in this country.

The reality is, and I am by no means racist, that if you are a minority in America today (not of european decent), you actually have a slightly better chance of getting a degree and landing a high paying job. This is due to quotas placed on companies to hire a certain percentage of minorities to avoid lawsuits.

Try being of hungarian european decent and getting a grant from the government to go to college. Good Luck on that one.

I am a proponent of equal rights no matter what your creed, culture, or race. Unfortunately, this is not the case anymore in America. You can have 2 educated and experienced candidates for a job, one european decent the other Asian decent, the European guy can have more experience and a degree from a better school, yet the Asian candidate gets the job due to quota regulations. This is not equal rights.

So whining may be slightly justified by some……..who are carrying 50,000 in school loans while their hispanic buddy has none……(FYI, I have no school loans).

Once again, I am not racist and have friends from all backgrounds and cultures. I discuss this with them also and it is an issue in our country that needs to be addressed.

Hispanics are probably voting for Clinton because she wants to put a freeze on foreclosures and bail everyone out. I think that that population of people (look at Eastlake and Chula Vista prices)have taken the biggest beating in the housing market. Just an observation.

Sincerely, Contraman

[kev374]

I am Asian and a Republican.

I think it has more has to do with income level than race. Those of us with higher than median incomes do not want a heavier tax burden than it is currently. The Bush tax cuts were well deserved to those in our income bracket. I am SICK of all the low income losers who cry for hand outs. If you want more money STUDY, WORK HARD and quit your damn whining!! That is how it has been in this country and we don’t want to change to a socialist society.

Of all the socialist Democrats Hillary I think is the WORST. She wants total and complete income redistribution. Take from the wealthy (classified now as those who make above $75k/yr!!!!!!!) and give to the rest!

If you think these rebates are bad wait till Hillary becomes President. She will garnish wages to pay for health care (which will be poorly administered of course), seriously increase taxes on the middle class and work to force lenders to modify contracts for lower income people so they can live in houses that they do not deserve to be in the first place! Hillary for this country would be the ultimate travesty!

[kev374]

I am Asian and a Republican.

I think it has more has to do with income level than race. Those of us with higher than median incomes do not want a heavier tax burden than it is currently. The Bush tax cuts were well deserved to those in our income bracket. I am SICK of all the low income losers who cry for hand outs. If you want more money STUDY, WORK HARD and quit your damn whining!! That is how it has been in this country and we don’t want to change to a socialist society.

Of all the socialist Democrats Hillary I think is the WORST. She wants total and complete income redistribution. Take from the wealthy (classified now as those who make above $75k/yr!!!!!!!) and give to the rest!

If you think these rebates are bad wait till Hillary becomes President. She will garnish wages to pay for health care (which will be poorly administered of course), seriously increase taxes on the middle class and work to force lenders to modify contracts for lower income people so they can live in houses that they do not deserve to be in the first place! Hillary for this country would be the ultimate travesty!

[kev374]

I am Asian and a Republican.

I think it has more has to do with income level than race. Those of us with higher than median incomes do not want a heavier tax burden than it is currently. The Bush tax cuts were well deserved to those in our income bracket. I am SICK of all the low income losers who cry for hand outs. If you want more money STUDY, WORK HARD and quit your damn whining!! That is how it has been in this country and we don’t want to change to a socialist society.

Of all the socialist Democrats Hillary I think is the WORST. She wants total and complete income redistribution. Take from the wealthy (classified now as those who make above $75k/yr!!!!!!!) and give to the rest!

If you think these rebates are bad wait till Hillary becomes President. She will garnish wages to pay for health care (which will be poorly administered of course), seriously increase taxes on the middle class and work to force lenders to modify contracts for lower income people so they can live in houses that they do not deserve to be in the first place! Hillary for this country would be the ultimate travesty!

[kev374]

I am Asian and a Republican.

I think it has more has to do with income level than race. Those of us with higher than median incomes do not want a heavier tax burden than it is currently. The Bush tax cuts were well deserved to those in our income bracket. I am SICK of all the low income losers who cry for hand outs. If you want more money STUDY, WORK HARD and quit your damn whining!! That is how it has been in this country and we don’t want to change to a socialist society.

Of all the socialist Democrats Hillary I think is the WORST. She wants total and complete income redistribution. Take from the wealthy (classified now as those who make above $75k/yr!!!!!!!) and give to the rest!

If you think these rebates are bad wait till Hillary becomes President. She will garnish wages to pay for health care (which will be poorly administered of course), seriously increase taxes on the middle class and work to force lenders to modify contracts for lower income people so they can live in houses that they do not deserve to be in the first place! Hillary for this country would be the ultimate travesty!

[nla]

I’m an Asian American and voted for Clinton. My views are more inclined to Republican moderate but was registered as a Democrat. Obama is too liberal for me and also I haven’t heard anything from him that compelled me to vote for him. IMHO, I don’t think he’s got the goods to fight the republican machinery. Obama against McCain, I will go for McCain. Clinton against McCain, it’s a toss up.

With regards to the race factor, it’s true that some Asians have prejudice against blacks and I say this because I’ve seen it.

It would be interesting how Hawaii will vote. More than half of Hawaii’s population are Asians, mostly Filipinos and Japanese. But I think Obama’s sister lives in Hawaii and she’s married to a Canadian with a Chinese descent and she’s a popular figure there.

[nla]

kev374 is on the money regarding Hillary’s socialist view. But I think Obama will be as bad or worst than her in that regard. That’s why I’m for McCain if it’s Obama vs McCain in the general election.

McCain vs Hillary? I like Clinton’s policy against the war in Iraq but don’t like her illegal immigration view. I don’t like McCain’s policy against the war but I’m beginning to like his policy against ILLEGAL immigration.

[Dukehorn]

I’m Asian and voted for Obama. Most of my friends (who have graduate degrees and make 6 figures) are willing to pay our tax burden and more to support the country. Of course, most of us have traveled to countries with higher tax burdens (like Sweden and Denmark) with a government network that protects the population and to 3rd world countries (Bolivia, Guatemala) where there is abject poverty. I appreciate the US and I have no qualms about paying my taxes.

Also, some of us are not bigoted or stupid enough to punish poor children who are unfortunate enough to have poor parents.

Seriously, the BS about handouts needs to stop, especially in the context of the children living below the poverty line. That’s like saying an abused child deserves to be abused because her father is a sexual predator.

I guess some of the Republicans here definitely believe in the children paying for the sins of their fathers…..

I use to be a Republican but I’d rather hang out with the hippy environmentalists with social concerns than with the religious conservatives and those people who are solely concerned about money.

PS Asians are some of the most racist folks around. I can’t imagine the 1st generation folks voting for an African American.

[Dukehorn]

I’m Asian and voted for Obama. Most of my friends (who have graduate degrees and make 6 figures) are willing to pay our tax burden and more to support the country. Of course, most of us have traveled to countries with higher tax burdens (like Sweden and Denmark) with a government network that protects the population and to 3rd world countries (Bolivia, Guatemala) where there is abject poverty. I appreciate the US and I have no qualms about paying my taxes.

Also, some of us are not bigoted or stupid enough to punish poor children who are unfortunate enough to have poor parents.

Seriously, the BS about handouts needs to stop, especially in the context of the children living below the poverty line. That’s like saying an abused child deserves to be abused because her father is a sexual predator.

I guess some of the Republicans here definitely believe in the children paying for the sins of their fathers…..

I use to be a Republican but I’d rather hang out with the hippy environmentalists with social concerns than with the religious conservatives and those people who are solely concerned about money.

PS Asians are some of the most racist folks around. I can’t imagine the 1st generation folks voting for an African American.

[Dukehorn]

I’m Asian and voted for Obama. Most of my friends (who have graduate degrees and make 6 figures) are willing to pay our tax burden and more to support the country. Of course, most of us have traveled to countries with higher tax burdens (like Sweden and Denmark) with a government network that protects the population and to 3rd world countries (Bolivia, Guatemala) where there is abject poverty. I appreciate the US and I have no qualms about paying my taxes.

Also, some of us are not bigoted or stupid enough to punish poor children who are unfortunate enough to have poor parents.

Seriously, the BS about handouts needs to stop, especially in the context of the children living below the poverty line. That’s like saying an abused child deserves to be abused because her father is a sexual predator.

I guess some of the Republicans here definitely believe in the children paying for the sins of their fathers…..

I use to be a Republican but I’d rather hang out with the hippy environmentalists with social concerns than with the religious conservatives and those people who are solely concerned about money.

PS Asians are some of the most racist folks around. I can’t imagine the 1st generation folks voting for an African American.

[Dukehorn]

I’m Asian and voted for Obama. Most of my friends (who have graduate degrees and make 6 figures) are willing to pay our tax burden and more to support the country. Of course, most of us have traveled to countries with higher tax burdens (like Sweden and Denmark) with a government network that protects the population and to 3rd world countries (Bolivia, Guatemala) where there is abject poverty. I appreciate the US and I have no qualms about paying my taxes.

Also, some of us are not bigoted or stupid enough to punish poor children who are unfortunate enough to have poor parents.

Seriously, the BS about handouts needs to stop, especially in the context of the children living below the poverty line. That’s like saying an abused child deserves to be abused because her father is a sexual predator.

I guess some of the Republicans here definitely believe in the children paying for the sins of their fathers…..

I use to be a Republican but I’d rather hang out with the hippy environmentalists with social concerns than with the religious conservatives and those people who are solely concerned about money.

PS Asians are some of the most racist folks around. I can’t imagine the 1st generation folks voting for an African American.

[Dukehorn]

I’m Asian and voted for Obama. Most of my friends (who have graduate degrees and make 6 figures) are willing to pay our tax burden and more to support the country. Of course, most of us have traveled to countries with higher tax burdens (like Sweden and Denmark) with a government network that protects the population and to 3rd world countries (Bolivia, Guatemala) where there is abject poverty. I appreciate the US and I have no qualms about paying my taxes.

Also, some of us are not bigoted or stupid enough to punish poor children who are unfortunate enough to have poor parents.

Seriously, the BS about handouts needs to stop, especially in the context of the children living below the poverty line. That’s like saying an abused child deserves to be abused because her father is a sexual predator.

I guess some of the Republicans here definitely believe in the children paying for the sins of their fathers…..

I use to be a Republican but I’d rather hang out with the hippy environmentalists with social concerns than with the religious conservatives and those people who are solely concerned about money.

PS Asians are some of the most racist folks around. I can’t imagine the 1st generation folks voting for an African American.

[nla]

kev374 is on the money regarding Hillary’s socialist view. But I think Obama will be as bad or worst than her in that regard. That’s why I’m for McCain if it’s Obama vs McCain in the general election.

McCain vs Hillary? I like Clinton’s policy against the war in Iraq but don’t like her illegal immigration view. I don’t like McCain’s policy against the war but I’m beginning to like his policy against ILLEGAL immigration.

[nla]

kev374 is on the money regarding Hillary’s socialist view. But I think Obama will be as bad or worst than her in that regard. That’s why I’m for McCain if it’s Obama vs McCain in the general election.

McCain vs Hillary? I like Clinton’s policy against the war in Iraq but don’t like her illegal immigration view. I don’t like McCain’s policy against the war but I’m beginning to like his policy against ILLEGAL immigration.

[nla]

kev374 is on the money regarding Hillary’s socialist view. But I think Obama will be as bad or worst than her in that regard. That’s why I’m for McCain if it’s Obama vs McCain in the general election.

McCain vs Hillary? I like Clinton’s policy against the war in Iraq but don’t like her illegal immigration view. I don’t like McCain’s policy against the war but I’m beginning to like his policy against ILLEGAL immigration.

[nla]

kev374 is on the money regarding Hillary’s socialist view. But I think Obama will be as bad or worst than her in that regard. That’s why I’m for McCain if it’s Obama vs McCain in the general election.

McCain vs Hillary? I like Clinton’s policy against the war in Iraq but don’t like her illegal immigration view. I don’t like McCain’s policy against the war but I’m beginning to like his policy against ILLEGAL immigration.

[oshens]

This was in yesterday’s Honolulu Star Bulletin…

The Clinton camp, however, is acknowledging that Obama, because he was born in Hawaii and went to Punahou and played basketball for the high school, will resonate.

“I always felt he had an advantage in Hawaii by his associations,” Senate President Colleen Hanabusa said. “He has been able to mobilize the youth, and, remember, only in Hawaii do people ask where you went to high school.”

Randy Perreira, executive director of the HGEA, the state’s largest government union, which is supporting Clinton, said the caucus will be difficult.

“Realistically, a lot depends on the mainland primaries, but we know there is a lot of sentiment for Senator Obama. He was born and to a great extent raised in Hawaii and he is a local favorite,” Perreira acknowledged.

Just my 2 cents but we Hawaii folks are pretty loyal to fellow locals. Everyone is related to or knows each other it seems. My brother and I went to the same school and my bro even had one of Obama’s teachers. I think it’ll go Obama’s way.

[Anonymous]

Why is it surprising that Hispanics favor Hillary? If you want to talk racism, it is very strong in Mexico where in general blacks are not held in high regard (and there are very few of them). So given that reality, and most hispanics in the US are from Mexico, it’s not surprising they wouldn’t vote for Obama.

[Anonymous]

Why is it surprising that Hispanics favor Hillary? If you want to talk racism, it is very strong in Mexico where in general blacks are not held in high regard (and there are very few of them). So given that reality, and most hispanics in the US are from Mexico, it’s not surprising they wouldn’t vote for Obama.

[Anonymous]

Why is it surprising that Hispanics favor Hillary? If you want to talk racism, it is very strong in Mexico where in general blacks are not held in high regard (and there are very few of them). So given that reality, and most hispanics in the US are from Mexico, it’s not surprising they wouldn’t vote for Obama.

[Anonymous]

Why is it surprising that Hispanics favor Hillary? If you want to talk racism, it is very strong in Mexico where in general blacks are not held in high regard (and there are very few of them). So given that reality, and most hispanics in the US are from Mexico, it’s not surprising they wouldn’t vote for Obama.

[Anonymous]

Why is it surprising that Hispanics favor Hillary? If you want to talk racism, it is very strong in Mexico where in general blacks are not held in high regard (and there are very few of them). So given that reality, and most hispanics in the US are from Mexico, it’s not surprising they wouldn’t vote for Obama.

[oshens]

This was in yesterday’s Honolulu Star Bulletin…

The Clinton camp, however, is acknowledging that Obama, because he was born in Hawaii and went to Punahou and played basketball for the high school, will resonate.

“I always felt he had an advantage in Hawaii by his associations,” Senate President Colleen Hanabusa said. “He has been able to mobilize the youth, and, remember, only in Hawaii do people ask where you went to high school.”

Randy Perreira, executive director of the HGEA, the state’s largest government union, which is supporting Clinton, said the caucus will be difficult.

“Realistically, a lot depends on the mainland primaries, but we know there is a lot of sentiment for Senator Obama. He was born and to a great extent raised in Hawaii and he is a local favorite,” Perreira acknowledged.

Just my 2 cents but we Hawaii folks are pretty loyal to fellow locals. Everyone is related to or knows each other it seems. My brother and I went to the same school and my bro even had one of Obama’s teachers. I think it’ll go Obama’s way.

[oshens]

This was in yesterday’s Honolulu Star Bulletin…

The Clinton camp, however, is acknowledging that Obama, because he was born in Hawaii and went to Punahou and played basketball for the high school, will resonate.

“I always felt he had an advantage in Hawaii by his associations,” Senate President Colleen Hanabusa said. “He has been able to mobilize the youth, and, remember, only in Hawaii do people ask where you went to high school.”

Randy Perreira, executive director of the HGEA, the state’s largest government union, which is supporting Clinton, said the caucus will be difficult.

“Realistically, a lot depends on the mainland primaries, but we know there is a lot of sentiment for Senator Obama. He was born and to a great extent raised in Hawaii and he is a local favorite,” Perreira acknowledged.

Just my 2 cents but we Hawaii folks are pretty loyal to fellow locals. Everyone is related to or knows each other it seems. My brother and I went to the same school and my bro even had one of Obama’s teachers. I think it’ll go Obama’s way.

[oshens]

This was in yesterday’s Honolulu Star Bulletin…

The Clinton camp, however, is acknowledging that Obama, because he was born in Hawaii and went to Punahou and played basketball for the high school, will resonate.

“I always felt he had an advantage in Hawaii by his associations,” Senate President Colleen Hanabusa said. “He has been able to mobilize the youth, and, remember, only in Hawaii do people ask where you went to high school.”

Randy Perreira, executive director of the HGEA, the state’s largest government union, which is supporting Clinton, said the caucus will be difficult.

“Realistically, a lot depends on the mainland primaries, but we know there is a lot of sentiment for Senator Obama. He was born and to a great extent raised in Hawaii and he is a local favorite,” Perreira acknowledged.

Just my 2 cents but we Hawaii folks are pretty loyal to fellow locals. Everyone is related to or knows each other it seems. My brother and I went to the same school and my bro even had one of Obama’s teachers. I think it’ll go Obama’s way.

[oshens]

This was in yesterday’s Honolulu Star Bulletin…

The Clinton camp, however, is acknowledging that Obama, because he was born in Hawaii and went to Punahou and played basketball for the high school, will resonate.

“I always felt he had an advantage in Hawaii by his associations,” Senate President Colleen Hanabusa said. “He has been able to mobilize the youth, and, remember, only in Hawaii do people ask where you went to high school.”

Randy Perreira, executive director of the HGEA, the state’s largest government union, which is supporting Clinton, said the caucus will be difficult.

“Realistically, a lot depends on the mainland primaries, but we know there is a lot of sentiment for Senator Obama. He was born and to a great extent raised in Hawaii and he is a local favorite,” Perreira acknowledged.

Just my 2 cents but we Hawaii folks are pretty loyal to fellow locals. Everyone is related to or knows each other it seems. My brother and I went to the same school and my bro even had one of Obama’s teachers. I think it’ll go Obama’s way.

[nla]

I’m an Asian American and voted for Clinton. My views are more inclined to Republican moderate but was registered as a Democrat. Obama is too liberal for me and also I haven’t heard anything from him that compelled me to vote for him. IMHO, I don’t think he’s got the goods to fight the republican machinery. Obama against McCain, I will go for McCain. Clinton against McCain, it’s a toss up.

With regards to the race factor, it’s true that some Asians have prejudice against blacks and I say this because I’ve seen it.

It would be interesting how Hawaii will vote. More than half of Hawaii’s population are Asians, mostly Filipinos and Japanese. But I think Obama’s sister lives in Hawaii and she’s married to a Canadian with a Chinese descent and she’s a popular figure there.

[nla]

I’m an Asian American and voted for Clinton. My views are more inclined to Republican moderate but was registered as a Democrat. Obama is too liberal for me and also I haven’t heard anything from him that compelled me to vote for him. IMHO, I don’t think he’s got the goods to fight the republican machinery. Obama against McCain, I will go for McCain. Clinton against McCain, it’s a toss up.

With regards to the race factor, it’s true that some Asians have prejudice against blacks and I say this because I’ve seen it.

It would be interesting how Hawaii will vote. More than half of Hawaii’s population are Asians, mostly Filipinos and Japanese. But I think Obama’s sister lives in Hawaii and she’s married to a Canadian with a Chinese descent and she’s a popular figure there.

[nla]

I’m an Asian American and voted for Clinton. My views are more inclined to Republican moderate but was registered as a Democrat. Obama is too liberal for me and also I haven’t heard anything from him that compelled me to vote for him. IMHO, I don’t think he’s got the goods to fight the republican machinery. Obama against McCain, I will go for McCain. Clinton against McCain, it’s a toss up.

With regards to the race factor, it’s true that some Asians have prejudice against blacks and I say this because I’ve seen it.

It would be interesting how Hawaii will vote. More than half of Hawaii’s population are Asians, mostly Filipinos and Japanese. But I think Obama’s sister lives in Hawaii and she’s married to a Canadian with a Chinese descent and she’s a popular figure there.

[nla]

I’m an Asian American and voted for Clinton. My views are more inclined to Republican moderate but was registered as a Democrat. Obama is too liberal for me and also I haven’t heard anything from him that compelled me to vote for him. IMHO, I don’t think he’s got the goods to fight the republican machinery. Obama against McCain, I will go for McCain. Clinton against McCain, it’s a toss up.

With regards to the race factor, it’s true that some Asians have prejudice against blacks and I say this because I’ve seen it.

It would be interesting how Hawaii will vote. More than half of Hawaii’s population are Asians, mostly Filipinos and Japanese. But I think Obama’s sister lives in Hawaii and she’s married to a Canadian with a Chinese descent and she’s a popular figure there.

[Borat]

If you think that these election results have any basis in reality, you haven’t been paying attention. They are a complete farce and have been for years. Elections in Kazakhstan are more honest than in the US.

[Borat]

If you think that these election results have any basis in reality, you haven’t been paying attention. They are a complete farce and have been for years. Elections in Kazakhstan are more honest than in the US.

[Borat]

If you think that these election results have any basis in reality, you haven’t been paying attention. They are a complete farce and have been for years. Elections in Kazakhstan are more honest than in the US.

[Borat]

If you think that these election results have any basis in reality, you haven’t been paying attention. They are a complete farce and have been for years. Elections in Kazakhstan are more honest than in the US.

[OC Burns]

I guess it would not be politically correct to suggest that Latinos and Blacks in the cities have something of an acrimonious relationship. But if that is true, then maybe the Latino voters simply don’t want to vote for a Black dude.

I know, there is no racism among anyone other than white males. BUT…if there were racist beliefs held by a large percentage of Latinos, that might explain the voting results.

[OC Burns]

I guess it would not be politically correct to suggest that Latinos and Blacks in the cities have something of an acrimonious relationship. But if that is true, then maybe the Latino voters simply don’t want to vote for a Black dude.

I know, there is no racism among anyone other than white males. BUT…if there were racist beliefs held by a large percentage of Latinos, that might explain the voting results.

[OC Burns]

I guess it would not be politically correct to suggest that Latinos and Blacks in the cities have something of an acrimonious relationship. But if that is true, then maybe the Latino voters simply don’t want to vote for a Black dude.

I know, there is no racism among anyone other than white males. BUT…if there were racist beliefs held by a large percentage of Latinos, that might explain the voting results.

[OC Burns]

I guess it would not be politically correct to suggest that Latinos and Blacks in the cities have something of an acrimonious relationship. But if that is true, then maybe the Latino voters simply don’t want to vote for a Black dude.

I know, there is no racism among anyone other than white males. BUT…if there were racist beliefs held by a large percentage of Latinos, that might explain the voting results.

[OC Burns]

I guess it would not be politically correct to suggest that Latinos and Blacks in the cities have something of an acrimonious relationship. But if that is true, then maybe the Latino voters simply don’t want to vote for a Black dude.

I know, there is no racism among anyone other than white males. BUT…if there were racist beliefs held by a large percentage of Latinos, that might explain the voting results.

[gold_dredger_phd]

I make less than $75K per year, so I’m voting for Hillary.

Once I lose my job, I can qualify for Section 8 housing.
Saving that much money on housing is like having a real job.

[gold_dredger_phd]

I make less than $75K per year, so I’m voting for Hillary.

Once I lose my job, I can qualify for Section 8 housing.
Saving that much money on housing is like having a real job.

[gold_dredger_phd]

I make less than $75K per year, so I’m voting for Hillary.

Once I lose my job, I can qualify for Section 8 housing.
Saving that much money on housing is like having a real job.

[gold_dredger_phd]

I make less than $75K per year, so I’m voting for Hillary.

Once I lose my job, I can qualify for Section 8 housing.
Saving that much money on housing is like having a real job.

[gold_dredger_phd]

I make less than $75K per year, so I’m voting for Hillary.

Once I lose my job, I can qualify for Section 8 housing.
Saving that much money on housing is like having a real job.

[gold_dredger_phd]

One of the problems of being a *favored* minority and applying for college is that they will race-norm you into a school that is above your ability to succeed. The racial bean counters in the admission offices don’t care whether the favored minorities graduate, just what color the overall starting class is. The chances of graduation may be much lower than average, but that doesn’t count.

Years ago, people were complaining that UC-Berkeley was 51% asian. The proper response was, “So what?” But, there may have been some effort to change the racial composition by disfavoring asian applicants.

I knew a guy at a Midwestern university that said he was white, just so he would have no chance of being race-normed into a school that was too competitive for him. That was in the mid-80’s. Now everyone has a reason to distrust the admissions process.

[gold_dredger_phd]

One of the problems of being a *favored* minority and applying for college is that they will race-norm you into a school that is above your ability to succeed. The racial bean counters in the admission offices don’t care whether the favored minorities graduate, just what color the overall starting class is. The chances of graduation may be much lower than average, but that doesn’t count.

Years ago, people were complaining that UC-Berkeley was 51% asian. The proper response was, “So what?” But, there may have been some effort to change the racial composition by disfavoring asian applicants.

I knew a guy at a Midwestern university that said he was white, just so he would have no chance of being race-normed into a school that was too competitive for him. That was in the mid-80’s. Now everyone has a reason to distrust the admissions process.

[gold_dredger_phd]

One of the problems of being a *favored* minority and applying for college is that they will race-norm you into a school that is above your ability to succeed. The racial bean counters in the admission offices don’t care whether the favored minorities graduate, just what color the overall starting class is. The chances of graduation may be much lower than average, but that doesn’t count.

Years ago, people were complaining that UC-Berkeley was 51% asian. The proper response was, “So what?” But, there may have been some effort to change the racial composition by disfavoring asian applicants.

I knew a guy at a Midwestern university that said he was white, just so he would have no chance of being race-normed into a school that was too competitive for him. That was in the mid-80’s. Now everyone has a reason to distrust the admissions process.

[gold_dredger_phd]

One of the problems of being a *favored* minority and applying for college is that they will race-norm you into a school that is above your ability to succeed. The racial bean counters in the admission offices don’t care whether the favored minorities graduate, just what color the overall starting class is. The chances of graduation may be much lower than average, but that doesn’t count.

Years ago, people were complaining that UC-Berkeley was 51% asian. The proper response was, “So what?” But, there may have been some effort to change the racial composition by disfavoring asian applicants.

I knew a guy at a Midwestern university that said he was white, just so he would have no chance of being race-normed into a school that was too competitive for him. That was in the mid-80’s. Now everyone has a reason to distrust the admissions process.

[gold_dredger_phd]

One of the problems of being a *favored* minority and applying for college is that they will race-norm you into a school that is above your ability to succeed. The racial bean counters in the admission offices don’t care whether the favored minorities graduate, just what color the overall starting class is. The chances of graduation may be much lower than average, but that doesn’t count.

Years ago, people were complaining that UC-Berkeley was 51% asian. The proper response was, “So what?” But, there may have been some effort to change the racial composition by disfavoring asian applicants.

I knew a guy at a Midwestern university that said he was white, just so he would have no chance of being race-normed into a school that was too competitive for him. That was in the mid-80’s. Now everyone has a reason to distrust the admissions process.

[poorgradstudent]

No one is really sure why Latino and Asian Democrats tilted so heavily in favor of Clinton in the California primaries. One could suppose if the women leaned for Hillary and the men were evenly split it would create some of the gap, but that’s not enough. Policy wise, Obama and Hillary overlap heavily, but Obama tends to do better at pulling independants and moderates.

To correct the gross mis-statement Kev made, the Bush tax cuts that will be rolled back primarily only affect those making over $250k a year. I think most Americans have realized at this point that those tax cuts really only benefitted the uber-rich, while throwing a tiny bone to the middle class (And if you’re sub 100K a year, you’re middle class, and should vote Democrat if you’re voting with your pocketbook)

[poorgradstudent]

No one is really sure why Latino and Asian Democrats tilted so heavily in favor of Clinton in the California primaries. One could suppose if the women leaned for Hillary and the men were evenly split it would create some of the gap, but that’s not enough. Policy wise, Obama and Hillary overlap heavily, but Obama tends to do better at pulling independants and moderates.

To correct the gross mis-statement Kev made, the Bush tax cuts that will be rolled back primarily only affect those making over $250k a year. I think most Americans have realized at this point that those tax cuts really only benefitted the uber-rich, while throwing a tiny bone to the middle class (And if you’re sub 100K a year, you’re middle class, and should vote Democrat if you’re voting with your pocketbook)

[poorgradstudent]

No one is really sure why Latino and Asian Democrats tilted so heavily in favor of Clinton in the California primaries. One could suppose if the women leaned for Hillary and the men were evenly split it would create some of the gap, but that’s not enough. Policy wise, Obama and Hillary overlap heavily, but Obama tends to do better at pulling independants and moderates.

To correct the gross mis-statement Kev made, the Bush tax cuts that will be rolled back primarily only affect those making over $250k a year. I think most Americans have realized at this point that those tax cuts really only benefitted the uber-rich, while throwing a tiny bone to the middle class (And if you’re sub 100K a year, you’re middle class, and should vote Democrat if you’re voting with your pocketbook)

[poorgradstudent]

No one is really sure why Latino and Asian Democrats tilted so heavily in favor of Clinton in the California primaries. One could suppose if the women leaned for Hillary and the men were evenly split it would create some of the gap, but that’s not enough. Policy wise, Obama and Hillary overlap heavily, but Obama tends to do better at pulling independants and moderates.

To correct the gross mis-statement Kev made, the Bush tax cuts that will be rolled back primarily only affect those making over $250k a year. I think most Americans have realized at this point that those tax cuts really only benefitted the uber-rich, while throwing a tiny bone to the middle class (And if you’re sub 100K a year, you’re middle class, and should vote Democrat if you’re voting with your pocketbook)

[poorgradstudent]

No one is really sure why Latino and Asian Democrats tilted so heavily in favor of Clinton in the California primaries. One could suppose if the women leaned for Hillary and the men were evenly split it would create some of the gap, but that’s not enough. Policy wise, Obama and Hillary overlap heavily, but Obama tends to do better at pulling independants and moderates.

To correct the gross mis-statement Kev made, the Bush tax cuts that will be rolled back primarily only affect those making over $250k a year. I think most Americans have realized at this point that those tax cuts really only benefitted the uber-rich, while throwing a tiny bone to the middle class (And if you’re sub 100K a year, you’re middle class, and should vote Democrat if you’re voting with your pocketbook)

[DWCAP]

Wow, a discussion online that doesnt involve mud flinging and discusses race and politics!

My 2 cents…
Clinton:
1)Racism is everywhere, but only villified if it is someone who is white disagreeing with someone who isnt. Otherwise it is just cultural differences.
2)Women have been dreaming about a female prez alot longer than most blacks have about a black prez. They are also more likey to vote. Remember sexism is men keeping women down, not the generalization of a person based on gender. (quietly alot of women will admit that their backing a women because she is women is problematic, but they dont care.)
3) annxiety is high. We remember fondly the 1990’s, when the world didnt hate us and everyone was getting ahead or had a plan to. We want the comfort and security we had back when Clinton was in the White House, and now we can vote for a Clinton again to bring back the good times. Who wants change when the past was so good?

Obama

1)ALOT of the votes for Obama are comeing from the young, under 30 groups. The young have no skin in the game, but little chance to get into the games in the first place. Wages are stagnant, housing unaffordable, jobs are plentiful, but career tracks are longer, with ever longer educations and resumes needed to quialify. Education is more expensive and the best schools harder to get into. Specialization is required earlier and earlier. Some change is a good thing, because they dont have much to loose.
2) Obama brings hope. People who are lead by their emotions (not necessary a bad thing) are insipired by him. He brings a vision of a better tomorrow, instead of a return to a positive past. The details can come later, it is the promise that really matters.
3) either way you go, it is nearly impossible to confuse either with Bush. Change is desired from Bush, and Obama offers MORE change than Clinton.

Why are Asians and hispanics voting the way they are? That is too broad a question. Look to age, economic outlook and gender, with the qualification (see Clinton 1 as an example) of these cultures and you can get an answer that makes alot more sense.

[Duck]

What I find fascinating is that the right wing media including Limbaugh, etc. are so far out of touch they don’t see that the two candidates they hate most (McCain and Hilary) are the ONLY combination of candidates that will make the race close and a possible victory for a Republican. If Hillary gets the nomination you’ll see the independents and a huge amount of male Obama voters go for McCain. Hillary is so polarizing that Limbaugh is probably hoping she gets in. His ratings would soar which he probably already knows.

[Anonymous]

As of a few weeks ago I enjoyed listening to some of the conservatove talk shows, but now I find myself shaking my head wondering what on earth they are up to. John Mccain is the only hope that Republicans have to win, and it is not a solid one at that. Yet these hosts are clinging to some vague notion that Romney can still win, or worse that a Clinton/Obama win would be better than a Mccain victory for Republicans. I think what we are witnessing is the difference between those who are making a choice solely based on ideology, and others based on pragmatism.

They defend themselves by pointing to their inability to stray from their ‘principals’ but what they are really saying is that you better pass the entire litmus test or else they are going to stay home and not vote. Mccain will lean pro-life, will appoint right leaning judges to the Supreme Court, will court Hispanics by offering a more engaging, less divisive dialogue about immigration and is hawkish on defense. I think he is a little old, and I personally don’t like him that much either, but it’s time we recognized that he is likely – make that certainly – the only hope Republicans have to win this year.

[Duck]

I think we’re giving the talking heads too much credit if we think their principles are not aligned with their pocketbooks. These guys are so hypocritical it makes my head spin. And the lemmings that listen to their every word? The good news is that apparently they don’t have enough influence in their own party as to effect the outcome of the election. The right wing media basically formed a jihad to try and defeat McCain and their candidate (Romney) is getting trounced despite spending ungodly amounts of his own fortune and facing a guy who is about as uncharismatic as I’ve seen in recent elections.

[Duck]

I think we’re giving the talking heads too much credit if we think their principles are not aligned with their pocketbooks. These guys are so hypocritical it makes my head spin. And the lemmings that listen to their every word? The good news is that apparently they don’t have enough influence in their own party as to effect the outcome of the election. The right wing media basically formed a jihad to try and defeat McCain and their candidate (Romney) is getting trounced despite spending ungodly amounts of his own fortune and facing a guy who is about as uncharismatic as I’ve seen in recent elections.

[Duck]

I think we’re giving the talking heads too much credit if we think their principles are not aligned with their pocketbooks. These guys are so hypocritical it makes my head spin. And the lemmings that listen to their every word? The good news is that apparently they don’t have enough influence in their own party as to effect the outcome of the election. The right wing media basically formed a jihad to try and defeat McCain and their candidate (Romney) is getting trounced despite spending ungodly amounts of his own fortune and facing a guy who is about as uncharismatic as I’ve seen in recent elections.

[Duck]

I think we’re giving the talking heads too much credit if we think their principles are not aligned with their pocketbooks. These guys are so hypocritical it makes my head spin. And the lemmings that listen to their every word? The good news is that apparently they don’t have enough influence in their own party as to effect the outcome of the election. The right wing media basically formed a jihad to try and defeat McCain and their candidate (Romney) is getting trounced despite spending ungodly amounts of his own fortune and facing a guy who is about as uncharismatic as I’ve seen in recent elections.

[Duck]

I think we’re giving the talking heads too much credit if we think their principles are not aligned with their pocketbooks. These guys are so hypocritical it makes my head spin. And the lemmings that listen to their every word? The good news is that apparently they don’t have enough influence in their own party as to effect the outcome of the election. The right wing media basically formed a jihad to try and defeat McCain and their candidate (Romney) is getting trounced despite spending ungodly amounts of his own fortune and facing a guy who is about as uncharismatic as I’ve seen in recent elections.

[Anonymous]

As of a few weeks ago I enjoyed listening to some of the conservatove talk shows, but now I find myself shaking my head wondering what on earth they are up to. John Mccain is the only hope that Republicans have to win, and it is not a solid one at that. Yet these hosts are clinging to some vague notion that Romney can still win, or worse that a Clinton/Obama win would be better than a Mccain victory for Republicans. I think what we are witnessing is the difference between those who are making a choice solely based on ideology, and others based on pragmatism.

They defend themselves by pointing to their inability to stray from their ‘principals’ but what they are really saying is that you better pass the entire litmus test or else they are going to stay home and not vote. Mccain will lean pro-life, will appoint right leaning judges to the Supreme Court, will court Hispanics by offering a more engaging, less divisive dialogue about immigration and is hawkish on defense. I think he is a little old, and I personally don’t like him that much either, but it’s time we recognized that he is likely – make that certainly – the only hope Republicans have to win this year.

[Anonymous]

As of a few weeks ago I enjoyed listening to some of the conservatove talk shows, but now I find myself shaking my head wondering what on earth they are up to. John Mccain is the only hope that Republicans have to win, and it is not a solid one at that. Yet these hosts are clinging to some vague notion that Romney can still win, or worse that a Clinton/Obama win would be better than a Mccain victory for Republicans. I think what we are witnessing is the difference between those who are making a choice solely based on ideology, and others based on pragmatism.

They defend themselves by pointing to their inability to stray from their ‘principals’ but what they are really saying is that you better pass the entire litmus test or else they are going to stay home and not vote. Mccain will lean pro-life, will appoint right leaning judges to the Supreme Court, will court Hispanics by offering a more engaging, less divisive dialogue about immigration and is hawkish on defense. I think he is a little old, and I personally don’t like him that much either, but it’s time we recognized that he is likely – make that certainly – the only hope Republicans have to win this year.

[Anonymous]

As of a few weeks ago I enjoyed listening to some of the conservatove talk shows, but now I find myself shaking my head wondering what on earth they are up to. John Mccain is the only hope that Republicans have to win, and it is not a solid one at that. Yet these hosts are clinging to some vague notion that Romney can still win, or worse that a Clinton/Obama win would be better than a Mccain victory for Republicans. I think what we are witnessing is the difference between those who are making a choice solely based on ideology, and others based on pragmatism.

They defend themselves by pointing to their inability to stray from their ‘principals’ but what they are really saying is that you better pass the entire litmus test or else they are going to stay home and not vote. Mccain will lean pro-life, will appoint right leaning judges to the Supreme Court, will court Hispanics by offering a more engaging, less divisive dialogue about immigration and is hawkish on defense. I think he is a little old, and I personally don’t like him that much either, but it’s time we recognized that he is likely – make that certainly – the only hope Republicans have to win this year.

[Anonymous]

As of a few weeks ago I enjoyed listening to some of the conservatove talk shows, but now I find myself shaking my head wondering what on earth they are up to. John Mccain is the only hope that Republicans have to win, and it is not a solid one at that. Yet these hosts are clinging to some vague notion that Romney can still win, or worse that a Clinton/Obama win would be better than a Mccain victory for Republicans. I think what we are witnessing is the difference between those who are making a choice solely based on ideology, and others based on pragmatism.

They defend themselves by pointing to their inability to stray from their ‘principals’ but what they are really saying is that you better pass the entire litmus test or else they are going to stay home and not vote. Mccain will lean pro-life, will appoint right leaning judges to the Supreme Court, will court Hispanics by offering a more engaging, less divisive dialogue about immigration and is hawkish on defense. I think he is a little old, and I personally don’t like him that much either, but it’s time we recognized that he is likely – make that certainly – the only hope Republicans have to win this year.

[Duck]

What I find fascinating is that the right wing media including Limbaugh, etc. are so far out of touch they don’t see that the two candidates they hate most (McCain and Hilary) are the ONLY combination of candidates that will make the race close and a possible victory for a Republican. If Hillary gets the nomination you’ll see the independents and a huge amount of male Obama voters go for McCain. Hillary is so polarizing that Limbaugh is probably hoping she gets in. His ratings would soar which he probably already knows.

[Duck]

What I find fascinating is that the right wing media including Limbaugh, etc. are so far out of touch they don’t see that the two candidates they hate most (McCain and Hilary) are the ONLY combination of candidates that will make the race close and a possible victory for a Republican. If Hillary gets the nomination you’ll see the independents and a huge amount of male Obama voters go for McCain. Hillary is so polarizing that Limbaugh is probably hoping she gets in. His ratings would soar which he probably already knows.

[Duck]

What I find fascinating is that the right wing media including Limbaugh, etc. are so far out of touch they don’t see that the two candidates they hate most (McCain and Hilary) are the ONLY combination of candidates that will make the race close and a possible victory for a Republican. If Hillary gets the nomination you’ll see the independents and a huge amount of male Obama voters go for McCain. Hillary is so polarizing that Limbaugh is probably hoping she gets in. His ratings would soar which he probably already knows.

[Duck]

What I find fascinating is that the right wing media including Limbaugh, etc. are so far out of touch they don’t see that the two candidates they hate most (McCain and Hilary) are the ONLY combination of candidates that will make the race close and a possible victory for a Republican. If Hillary gets the nomination you’ll see the independents and a huge amount of male Obama voters go for McCain. Hillary is so polarizing that Limbaugh is probably hoping she gets in. His ratings would soar which he probably already knows.

[DWCAP]

Wow, a discussion online that doesnt involve mud flinging and discusses race and politics!

My 2 cents…
Clinton:
1)Racism is everywhere, but only villified if it is someone who is white disagreeing with someone who isnt. Otherwise it is just cultural differences.
2)Women have been dreaming about a female prez alot longer than most blacks have about a black prez. They are also more likey to vote. Remember sexism is men keeping women down, not the generalization of a person based on gender. (quietly alot of women will admit that their backing a women because she is women is problematic, but they dont care.)
3) annxiety is high. We remember fondly the 1990’s, when the world didnt hate us and everyone was getting ahead or had a plan to. We want the comfort and security we had back when Clinton was in the White House, and now we can vote for a Clinton again to bring back the good times. Who wants change when the past was so good?

Obama

1)ALOT of the votes for Obama are comeing from the young, under 30 groups. The young have no skin in the game, but little chance to get into the games in the first place. Wages are stagnant, housing unaffordable, jobs are plentiful, but career tracks are longer, with ever longer educations and resumes needed to quialify. Education is more expensive and the best schools harder to get into. Specialization is required earlier and earlier. Some change is a good thing, because they dont have much to loose.
2) Obama brings hope. People who are lead by their emotions (not necessary a bad thing) are insipired by him. He brings a vision of a better tomorrow, instead of a return to a positive past. The details can come later, it is the promise that really matters.
3) either way you go, it is nearly impossible to confuse either with Bush. Change is desired from Bush, and Obama offers MORE change than Clinton.

Why are Asians and hispanics voting the way they are? That is too broad a question. Look to age, economic outlook and gender, with the qualification (see Clinton 1 as an example) of these cultures and you can get an answer that makes alot more sense.

[DWCAP]

Wow, a discussion online that doesnt involve mud flinging and discusses race and politics!

My 2 cents…
Clinton:
1)Racism is everywhere, but only villified if it is someone who is white disagreeing with someone who isnt. Otherwise it is just cultural differences.
2)Women have been dreaming about a female prez alot longer than most blacks have about a black prez. They are also more likey to vote. Remember sexism is men keeping women down, not the generalization of a person based on gender. (quietly alot of women will admit that their backing a women because she is women is problematic, but they dont care.)
3) annxiety is high. We remember fondly the 1990’s, when the world didnt hate us and everyone was getting ahead or had a plan to. We want the comfort and security we had back when Clinton was in the White House, and now we can vote for a Clinton again to bring back the good times. Who wants change when the past was so good?

Obama

1)ALOT of the votes for Obama are comeing from the young, under 30 groups. The young have no skin in the game, but little chance to get into the games in the first place. Wages are stagnant, housing unaffordable, jobs are plentiful, but career tracks are longer, with ever longer educations and resumes needed to quialify. Education is more expensive and the best schools harder to get into. Specialization is required earlier and earlier. Some change is a good thing, because they dont have much to loose.
2) Obama brings hope. People who are lead by their emotions (not necessary a bad thing) are insipired by him. He brings a vision of a better tomorrow, instead of a return to a positive past. The details can come later, it is the promise that really matters.
3) either way you go, it is nearly impossible to confuse either with Bush. Change is desired from Bush, and Obama offers MORE change than Clinton.

Why are Asians and hispanics voting the way they are? That is too broad a question. Look to age, economic outlook and gender, with the qualification (see Clinton 1 as an example) of these cultures and you can get an answer that makes alot more sense.

[DWCAP]

Wow, a discussion online that doesnt involve mud flinging and discusses race and politics!

My 2 cents…
Clinton:
1)Racism is everywhere, but only villified if it is someone who is white disagreeing with someone who isnt. Otherwise it is just cultural differences.
2)Women have been dreaming about a female prez alot longer than most blacks have about a black prez. They are also more likey to vote. Remember sexism is men keeping women down, not the generalization of a person based on gender. (quietly alot of women will admit that their backing a women because she is women is problematic, but they dont care.)
3) annxiety is high. We remember fondly the 1990’s, when the world didnt hate us and everyone was getting ahead or had a plan to. We want the comfort and security we had back when Clinton was in the White House, and now we can vote for a Clinton again to bring back the good times. Who wants change when the past was so good?

Obama

1)ALOT of the votes for Obama are comeing from the young, under 30 groups. The young have no skin in the game, but little chance to get into the games in the first place. Wages are stagnant, housing unaffordable, jobs are plentiful, but career tracks are longer, with ever longer educations and resumes needed to quialify. Education is more expensive and the best schools harder to get into. Specialization is required earlier and earlier. Some change is a good thing, because they dont have much to loose.
2) Obama brings hope. People who are lead by their emotions (not necessary a bad thing) are insipired by him. He brings a vision of a better tomorrow, instead of a return to a positive past. The details can come later, it is the promise that really matters.
3) either way you go, it is nearly impossible to confuse either with Bush. Change is desired from Bush, and Obama offers MORE change than Clinton.

Why are Asians and hispanics voting the way they are? That is too broad a question. Look to age, economic outlook and gender, with the qualification (see Clinton 1 as an example) of these cultures and you can get an answer that makes alot more sense.

[DWCAP]

Wow, a discussion online that doesnt involve mud flinging and discusses race and politics!

My 2 cents…
Clinton:
1)Racism is everywhere, but only villified if it is someone who is white disagreeing with someone who isnt. Otherwise it is just cultural differences.
2)Women have been dreaming about a female prez alot longer than most blacks have about a black prez. They are also more likey to vote. Remember sexism is men keeping women down, not the generalization of a person based on gender. (quietly alot of women will admit that their backing a women because she is women is problematic, but they dont care.)
3) annxiety is high. We remember fondly the 1990’s, when the world didnt hate us and everyone was getting ahead or had a plan to. We want the comfort and security we had back when Clinton was in the White House, and now we can vote for a Clinton again to bring back the good times. Who wants change when the past was so good?

Obama

1)ALOT of the votes for Obama are comeing from the young, under 30 groups. The young have no skin in the game, but little chance to get into the games in the first place. Wages are stagnant, housing unaffordable, jobs are plentiful, but career tracks are longer, with ever longer educations and resumes needed to quialify. Education is more expensive and the best schools harder to get into. Specialization is required earlier and earlier. Some change is a good thing, because they dont have much to loose.
2) Obama brings hope. People who are lead by their emotions (not necessary a bad thing) are insipired by him. He brings a vision of a better tomorrow, instead of a return to a positive past. The details can come later, it is the promise that really matters.
3) either way you go, it is nearly impossible to confuse either with Bush. Change is desired from Bush, and Obama offers MORE change than Clinton.

Why are Asians and hispanics voting the way they are? That is too broad a question. Look to age, economic outlook and gender, with the qualification (see Clinton 1 as an example) of these cultures and you can get an answer that makes alot more sense.

[Coronita]

deleted.

Sorry, I thought about posting something about this. But i decided it's better not to. I have my opinions on whyy this turned out the way it did.

It stems from some some tensions that exist between some Asians and African Americans, though I must be clear it's not representative of myself. Suffice to say, some asians feel that other ethicities receive unfair preferential treatment, and that there is a greater fear in Obama being elected that Clinton or McCain.Frankly, I'm not surprised why some of the votes ended up the way they did.

I do not want to post any more details, for I don't want to be misconstrued as this being my opinion. (ITS NOT for me or my ancestors or family). But I know people who feel this way, especially in SoCal.

And regarding the comments about asians getting preferential treatment. I beg to differ, we get reverse discriminated quite often.

[bsrsharma]

It is not so much Clinton Vs. Obama politics that puzzles me as much as the clear lack of leadership material to fill the Presidential pipeline. Both are weak Senators without much in terms of achievement. For a national party with as much advantage that Democrats have this year in taking WH, there is no strong governor with a record or a Senator with some gravitas.

The situation is not much better among Republicans either. A fairly strong Senator but much despised by large sections of his own party makes for a poor showing for a national leader. The others who were governors just couldn’t light a fire.

All points to a difficult problem: in a time of serious national crisis, there is just no leadership available to calm the citizenry.

[larrylujack]

the only difference between Hillary and Obama is rhetorical.
let’s face it, vote for either and the war in Iraq drones on and the bleeding of our tax dollars to the tune of over 100,00 dollars per minute continues unabated,
or, vote for McCain if you really really like the Iraq war and wish it to in fact escalate, whom also by the way has absolutely no plan to deal with the recession. whoopeee, screw the liberals, McCain loves war.
What a pathetic choice.
has anybody made the connection between the billions of dollars flushed away in Iraq and the current economic meltdown combined with the inflation numbers increasing? Like I said months ago, it is post Vietnam war all over again.
frankly, Ron Paul or John Edwards would have been better than any of the current crop of corporate schills and warmongers that are the leading candidates of our so-called democracy. face it, more than 2/3 of Americans oppose the Iraq war yet we still are there, is that a functioning, healthy democracy? I think not….we are fooling ourselves

Americans deserve what they get and will get it (bend over and smile) and no candidate really is being honest about the issues, its all about change, but really, what are they specifically proposing changing? Actually, nothing, sadly.
same war, same corporate interests running the show, and the beat goes on….
LL

[larrylujack]

the only difference between Hillary and Obama is rhetorical.
let’s face it, vote for either and the war in Iraq drones on and the bleeding of our tax dollars to the tune of over 100,00 dollars per minute continues unabated,
or, vote for McCain if you really really like the Iraq war and wish it to in fact escalate, whom also by the way has absolutely no plan to deal with the recession. whoopeee, screw the liberals, McCain loves war.
What a pathetic choice.
has anybody made the connection between the billions of dollars flushed away in Iraq and the current economic meltdown combined with the inflation numbers increasing? Like I said months ago, it is post Vietnam war all over again.
frankly, Ron Paul or John Edwards would have been better than any of the current crop of corporate schills and warmongers that are the leading candidates of our so-called democracy. face it, more than 2/3 of Americans oppose the Iraq war yet we still are there, is that a functioning, healthy democracy? I think not….we are fooling ourselves

Americans deserve what they get and will get it (bend over and smile) and no candidate really is being honest about the issues, its all about change, but really, what are they specifically proposing changing? Actually, nothing, sadly.
same war, same corporate interests running the show, and the beat goes on….
LL

[larrylujack]

the only difference between Hillary and Obama is rhetorical.
let’s face it, vote for either and the war in Iraq drones on and the bleeding of our tax dollars to the tune of over 100,00 dollars per minute continues unabated,
or, vote for McCain if you really really like the Iraq war and wish it to in fact escalate, whom also by the way has absolutely no plan to deal with the recession. whoopeee, screw the liberals, McCain loves war.
What a pathetic choice.
has anybody made the connection between the billions of dollars flushed away in Iraq and the current economic meltdown combined with the inflation numbers increasing? Like I said months ago, it is post Vietnam war all over again.
frankly, Ron Paul or John Edwards would have been better than any of the current crop of corporate schills and warmongers that are the leading candidates of our so-called democracy. face it, more than 2/3 of Americans oppose the Iraq war yet we still are there, is that a functioning, healthy democracy? I think not….we are fooling ourselves

Americans deserve what they get and will get it (bend over and smile) and no candidate really is being honest about the issues, its all about change, but really, what are they specifically proposing changing? Actually, nothing, sadly.
same war, same corporate interests running the show, and the beat goes on….
LL

[larrylujack]

the only difference between Hillary and Obama is rhetorical.
let’s face it, vote for either and the war in Iraq drones on and the bleeding of our tax dollars to the tune of over 100,00 dollars per minute continues unabated,
or, vote for McCain if you really really like the Iraq war and wish it to in fact escalate, whom also by the way has absolutely no plan to deal with the recession. whoopeee, screw the liberals, McCain loves war.
What a pathetic choice.
has anybody made the connection between the billions of dollars flushed away in Iraq and the current economic meltdown combined with the inflation numbers increasing? Like I said months ago, it is post Vietnam war all over again.
frankly, Ron Paul or John Edwards would have been better than any of the current crop of corporate schills and warmongers that are the leading candidates of our so-called democracy. face it, more than 2/3 of Americans oppose the Iraq war yet we still are there, is that a functioning, healthy democracy? I think not….we are fooling ourselves

Americans deserve what they get and will get it (bend over and smile) and no candidate really is being honest about the issues, its all about change, but really, what are they specifically proposing changing? Actually, nothing, sadly.
same war, same corporate interests running the show, and the beat goes on….
LL

[larrylujack]

the only difference between Hillary and Obama is rhetorical.
let’s face it, vote for either and the war in Iraq drones on and the bleeding of our tax dollars to the tune of over 100,00 dollars per minute continues unabated,
or, vote for McCain if you really really like the Iraq war and wish it to in fact escalate, whom also by the way has absolutely no plan to deal with the recession. whoopeee, screw the liberals, McCain loves war.
What a pathetic choice.
has anybody made the connection between the billions of dollars flushed away in Iraq and the current economic meltdown combined with the inflation numbers increasing? Like I said months ago, it is post Vietnam war all over again.
frankly, Ron Paul or John Edwards would have been better than any of the current crop of corporate schills and warmongers that are the leading candidates of our so-called democracy. face it, more than 2/3 of Americans oppose the Iraq war yet we still are there, is that a functioning, healthy democracy? I think not….we are fooling ourselves

Americans deserve what they get and will get it (bend over and smile) and no candidate really is being honest about the issues, its all about change, but really, what are they specifically proposing changing? Actually, nothing, sadly.
same war, same corporate interests running the show, and the beat goes on….
LL

[bsrsharma]

It is not so much Clinton Vs. Obama politics that puzzles me as much as the clear lack of leadership material to fill the Presidential pipeline. Both are weak Senators without much in terms of achievement. For a national party with as much advantage that Democrats have this year in taking WH, there is no strong governor with a record or a Senator with some gravitas.

The situation is not much better among Republicans either. A fairly strong Senator but much despised by large sections of his own party makes for a poor showing for a national leader. The others who were governors just couldn’t light a fire.

All points to a difficult problem: in a time of serious national crisis, there is just no leadership available to calm the citizenry.

[bsrsharma]

It is not so much Clinton Vs. Obama politics that puzzles me as much as the clear lack of leadership material to fill the Presidential pipeline. Both are weak Senators without much in terms of achievement. For a national party with as much advantage that Democrats have this year in taking WH, there is no strong governor with a record or a Senator with some gravitas.

The situation is not much better among Republicans either. A fairly strong Senator but much despised by large sections of his own party makes for a poor showing for a national leader. The others who were governors just couldn’t light a fire.

All points to a difficult problem: in a time of serious national crisis, there is just no leadership available to calm the citizenry.

[bsrsharma]

It is not so much Clinton Vs. Obama politics that puzzles me as much as the clear lack of leadership material to fill the Presidential pipeline. Both are weak Senators without much in terms of achievement. For a national party with as much advantage that Democrats have this year in taking WH, there is no strong governor with a record or a Senator with some gravitas.

The situation is not much better among Republicans either. A fairly strong Senator but much despised by large sections of his own party makes for a poor showing for a national leader. The others who were governors just couldn’t light a fire.

All points to a difficult problem: in a time of serious national crisis, there is just no leadership available to calm the citizenry.

[bsrsharma]

It is not so much Clinton Vs. Obama politics that puzzles me as much as the clear lack of leadership material to fill the Presidential pipeline. Both are weak Senators without much in terms of achievement. For a national party with as much advantage that Democrats have this year in taking WH, there is no strong governor with a record or a Senator with some gravitas.

The situation is not much better among Republicans either. A fairly strong Senator but much despised by large sections of his own party makes for a poor showing for a national leader. The others who were governors just couldn’t light a fire.

All points to a difficult problem: in a time of serious national crisis, there is just no leadership available to calm the citizenry.

[Coronita]

deleted.

Sorry, I thought about posting something about this. But i decided it's better not to. I have my opinions on whyy this turned out the way it did.

It stems from some some tensions that exist between some Asians and African Americans, though I must be clear it's not representative of myself. Suffice to say, some asians feel that other ethicities receive unfair preferential treatment, and that there is a greater fear in Obama being elected that Clinton or McCain.Frankly, I'm not surprised why some of the votes ended up the way they did.

I do not want to post any more details, for I don't want to be misconstrued as this being my opinion. (ITS NOT for me or my ancestors or family). But I know people who feel this way, especially in SoCal.

And regarding the comments about asians getting preferential treatment. I beg to differ, we get reverse discriminated quite often.

[Coronita]

deleted.

Sorry, I thought about posting something about this. But i decided it's better not to. I have my opinions on whyy this turned out the way it did.

It stems from some some tensions that exist between some Asians and African Americans, though I must be clear it's not representative of myself. Suffice to say, some asians feel that other ethicities receive unfair preferential treatment, and that there is a greater fear in Obama being elected that Clinton or McCain.Frankly, I'm not surprised why some of the votes ended up the way they did.

I do not want to post any more details, for I don't want to be misconstrued as this being my opinion. (ITS NOT for me or my ancestors or family). But I know people who feel this way, especially in SoCal.

And regarding the comments about asians getting preferential treatment. I beg to differ, we get reverse discriminated quite often.

[Coronita]

deleted.

Sorry, I thought about posting something about this. But i decided it's better not to. I have my opinions on whyy this turned out the way it did.

It stems from some some tensions that exist between some Asians and African Americans, though I must be clear it's not representative of myself. Suffice to say, some asians feel that other ethicities receive unfair preferential treatment, and that there is a greater fear in Obama being elected that Clinton or McCain.Frankly, I'm not surprised why some of the votes ended up the way they did.

I do not want to post any more details, for I don't want to be misconstrued as this being my opinion. (ITS NOT for me or my ancestors or family). But I know people who feel this way, especially in SoCal.

And regarding the comments about asians getting preferential treatment. I beg to differ, we get reverse discriminated quite often.

[Coronita]

deleted.

Sorry, I thought about posting something about this. But i decided it's better not to. I have my opinions on whyy this turned out the way it did.

It stems from some some tensions that exist between some Asians and African Americans, though I must be clear it's not representative of myself. Suffice to say, some asians feel that other ethicities receive unfair preferential treatment, and that there is a greater fear in Obama being elected that Clinton or McCain.Frankly, I'm not surprised why some of the votes ended up the way they did.

I do not want to post any more details, for I don't want to be misconstrued as this being my opinion. (ITS NOT for me or my ancestors or family). But I know people who feel this way, especially in SoCal.

And regarding the comments about asians getting preferential treatment. I beg to differ, we get reverse discriminated quite often.

[Pasadena Broker]

Jeezus, I don’t know why but I had this notion that I was the only asian guy on this board.

Personally, this election is a mess. None of candidates stick out. And whoever wins, well, like another poster added, it’ll be business as usual. Don’t we have Democratic majority in Congress? Didn’t they get shooed in because of their rhetoric against the war in Iraq? WTF happened?

Our one party system is made up of lying bastards in suits with different colored ties all receiving campaign contributions from the same corporate donors. And with Diebold counting our votes…I know some of you are familiar with this quote “Those who vote decide nothing. Those who count the vote decide everything”, but I’m an idiot enough to go and vote for the guy that’s as exciting as boiled broccoli.

On a lighter side note, I had dinner with the in-laws tonight and my mother-in-law who is Taiwanese noted that she won’t vote for Obama because “I don’t want Oprah for vice president”.

[Coronita]

 

On a lighter side note, I had dinner with the in-laws tonight and my mother-in-law who is Taiwanese noted that she won’t vote for Obama because “I don’t want Oprah for vice president”.

 

PB…Actually, you can't imagine how many people I ran into that are worried it would be a Obama / Jesse Jackson ticket or something as simply that JJ would play a bigger role if Obama wins. I'm not even kidding. It's this sort of irrational fear that is why some folks that I talked voted for Clinton, even though they acknowledged potentially she would be more financially damaging to them versus Obama. 

Imho, what would be extremely damaging for Obama is if Jesse Jackson comes out in public swinging with Obama endorsement in the context of furthering the specific cause  for African Americans. I think if it came down to Obama versus McCain, several older generation asians will cross party lines and vote for McCain. Yes, it's pretty screwed up thinking, but it is what it is. I guess one peculiar thing that happened in this primary is that it brought out a lot of older asian voters that I know haven't voted in the past couple of elections…though they felt they "had" to vote in this election against Obama. There is this fear of favortism and inequality if Obama were to be elected.

 

[img_assist|nid=5962|title=selfportrait|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=100|height=80]

—– Sour grapes for everyone!

[Coronita]

 

On a lighter side note, I had dinner with the in-laws tonight and my mother-in-law who is Taiwanese noted that she won’t vote for Obama because “I don’t want Oprah for vice president”.

 

PB…Actually, you can't imagine how many people I ran into that are worried it would be a Obama / Jesse Jackson ticket or something as simply that JJ would play a bigger role if Obama wins. I'm not even kidding. It's this sort of irrational fear that is why some folks that I talked voted for Clinton, even though they acknowledged potentially she would be more financially damaging to them versus Obama. 

Imho, what would be extremely damaging for Obama is if Jesse Jackson comes out in public swinging with Obama endorsement in the context of furthering the specific cause  for African Americans. I think if it came down to Obama versus McCain, several older generation asians will cross party lines and vote for McCain. Yes, it's pretty screwed up thinking, but it is what it is. I guess one peculiar thing that happened in this primary is that it brought out a lot of older asian voters that I know haven't voted in the past couple of elections…though they felt they "had" to vote in this election against Obama. There is this fear of favortism and inequality if Obama were to be elected.

 

[img_assist|nid=5962|title=selfportrait|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=100|height=80]

—– Sour grapes for everyone!

[Coronita]

 

On a lighter side note, I had dinner with the in-laws tonight and my mother-in-law who is Taiwanese noted that she won’t vote for Obama because “I don’t want Oprah for vice president”.

 

PB…Actually, you can't imagine how many people I ran into that are worried it would be a Obama / Jesse Jackson ticket or something as simply that JJ would play a bigger role if Obama wins. I'm not even kidding. It's this sort of irrational fear that is why some folks that I talked voted for Clinton, even though they acknowledged potentially she would be more financially damaging to them versus Obama. 

Imho, what would be extremely damaging for Obama is if Jesse Jackson comes out in public swinging with Obama endorsement in the context of furthering the specific cause  for African Americans. I think if it came down to Obama versus McCain, several older generation asians will cross party lines and vote for McCain. Yes, it's pretty screwed up thinking, but it is what it is. I guess one peculiar thing that happened in this primary is that it brought out a lot of older asian voters that I know haven't voted in the past couple of elections…though they felt they "had" to vote in this election against Obama. There is this fear of favortism and inequality if Obama were to be elected.

 

[img_assist|nid=5962|title=selfportrait|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=100|height=80]

—– Sour grapes for everyone!

[Coronita]

 

On a lighter side note, I had dinner with the in-laws tonight and my mother-in-law who is Taiwanese noted that she won’t vote for Obama because “I don’t want Oprah for vice president”.

 

PB…Actually, you can't imagine how many people I ran into that are worried it would be a Obama / Jesse Jackson ticket or something as simply that JJ would play a bigger role if Obama wins. I'm not even kidding. It's this sort of irrational fear that is why some folks that I talked voted for Clinton, even though they acknowledged potentially she would be more financially damaging to them versus Obama. 

Imho, what would be extremely damaging for Obama is if Jesse Jackson comes out in public swinging with Obama endorsement in the context of furthering the specific cause  for African Americans. I think if it came down to Obama versus McCain, several older generation asians will cross party lines and vote for McCain. Yes, it's pretty screwed up thinking, but it is what it is. I guess one peculiar thing that happened in this primary is that it brought out a lot of older asian voters that I know haven't voted in the past couple of elections…though they felt they "had" to vote in this election against Obama. There is this fear of favortism and inequality if Obama were to be elected.

 

[img_assist|nid=5962|title=selfportrait|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=100|height=80]

—– Sour grapes for everyone!

[Coronita]

 

On a lighter side note, I had dinner with the in-laws tonight and my mother-in-law who is Taiwanese noted that she won’t vote for Obama because “I don’t want Oprah for vice president”.

 

PB…Actually, you can't imagine how many people I ran into that are worried it would be a Obama / Jesse Jackson ticket or something as simply that JJ would play a bigger role if Obama wins. I'm not even kidding. It's this sort of irrational fear that is why some folks that I talked voted for Clinton, even though they acknowledged potentially she would be more financially damaging to them versus Obama. 

Imho, what would be extremely damaging for Obama is if Jesse Jackson comes out in public swinging with Obama endorsement in the context of furthering the specific cause  for African Americans. I think if it came down to Obama versus McCain, several older generation asians will cross party lines and vote for McCain. Yes, it's pretty screwed up thinking, but it is what it is. I guess one peculiar thing that happened in this primary is that it brought out a lot of older asian voters that I know haven't voted in the past couple of elections…though they felt they "had" to vote in this election against Obama. There is this fear of favortism and inequality if Obama were to be elected.

 

[img_assist|nid=5962|title=selfportrait|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=100|height=80]

—– Sour grapes for everyone!

[Pasadena Broker]

Jeezus, I don’t know why but I had this notion that I was the only asian guy on this board.

Personally, this election is a mess. None of candidates stick out. And whoever wins, well, like another poster added, it’ll be business as usual. Don’t we have Democratic majority in Congress? Didn’t they get shooed in because of their rhetoric against the war in Iraq? WTF happened?

Our one party system is made up of lying bastards in suits with different colored ties all receiving campaign contributions from the same corporate donors. And with Diebold counting our votes…I know some of you are familiar with this quote “Those who vote decide nothing. Those who count the vote decide everything”, but I’m an idiot enough to go and vote for the guy that’s as exciting as boiled broccoli.

On a lighter side note, I had dinner with the in-laws tonight and my mother-in-law who is Taiwanese noted that she won’t vote for Obama because “I don’t want Oprah for vice president”.

[Pasadena Broker]

Jeezus, I don’t know why but I had this notion that I was the only asian guy on this board.

Personally, this election is a mess. None of candidates stick out. And whoever wins, well, like another poster added, it’ll be business as usual. Don’t we have Democratic majority in Congress? Didn’t they get shooed in because of their rhetoric against the war in Iraq? WTF happened?

Our one party system is made up of lying bastards in suits with different colored ties all receiving campaign contributions from the same corporate donors. And with Diebold counting our votes…I know some of you are familiar with this quote “Those who vote decide nothing. Those who count the vote decide everything”, but I’m an idiot enough to go and vote for the guy that’s as exciting as boiled broccoli.

On a lighter side note, I had dinner with the in-laws tonight and my mother-in-law who is Taiwanese noted that she won’t vote for Obama because “I don’t want Oprah for vice president”.

[Pasadena Broker]

Jeezus, I don’t know why but I had this notion that I was the only asian guy on this board.

Personally, this election is a mess. None of candidates stick out. And whoever wins, well, like another poster added, it’ll be business as usual. Don’t we have Democratic majority in Congress? Didn’t they get shooed in because of their rhetoric against the war in Iraq? WTF happened?

Our one party system is made up of lying bastards in suits with different colored ties all receiving campaign contributions from the same corporate donors. And with Diebold counting our votes…I know some of you are familiar with this quote “Those who vote decide nothing. Those who count the vote decide everything”, but I’m an idiot enough to go and vote for the guy that’s as exciting as boiled broccoli.

On a lighter side note, I had dinner with the in-laws tonight and my mother-in-law who is Taiwanese noted that she won’t vote for Obama because “I don’t want Oprah for vice president”.

[Pasadena Broker]

Jeezus, I don’t know why but I had this notion that I was the only asian guy on this board.

Personally, this election is a mess. None of candidates stick out. And whoever wins, well, like another poster added, it’ll be business as usual. Don’t we have Democratic majority in Congress? Didn’t they get shooed in because of their rhetoric against the war in Iraq? WTF happened?

Our one party system is made up of lying bastards in suits with different colored ties all receiving campaign contributions from the same corporate donors. And with Diebold counting our votes…I know some of you are familiar with this quote “Those who vote decide nothing. Those who count the vote decide everything”, but I’m an idiot enough to go and vote for the guy that’s as exciting as boiled broccoli.

On a lighter side note, I had dinner with the in-laws tonight and my mother-in-law who is Taiwanese noted that she won’t vote for Obama because “I don’t want Oprah for vice president”.

[Anonymous]

I’m Cuban and I’m wondering about this facination latinos have with Hillary. Since latino’s seem to be scared to support Obama I have a message for you…… You know those crazed gringos (Minute men) watching the US?Mex border protecting us from allowing your cousins here????

I have yet to see one black face in the crowd claiming to be a minute man! Just a thought!

Qbano

[Anonymous]

I’m Cuban and I’m wondering about this facination latinos have with Hillary. Since latino’s seem to be scared to support Obama I have a message for you…… You know those crazed gringos (Minute men) watching the US?Mex border protecting us from allowing your cousins here????

I have yet to see one black face in the crowd claiming to be a minute man! Just a thought!

Qbano

[Anonymous]

I’m Cuban and I’m wondering about this facination latinos have with Hillary. Since latino’s seem to be scared to support Obama I have a message for you…… You know those crazed gringos (Minute men) watching the US?Mex border protecting us from allowing your cousins here????

I have yet to see one black face in the crowd claiming to be a minute man! Just a thought!

Qbano

[Anonymous]

I’m Cuban and I’m wondering about this facination latinos have with Hillary. Since latino’s seem to be scared to support Obama I have a message for you…… You know those crazed gringos (Minute men) watching the US?Mex border protecting us from allowing your cousins here????

I have yet to see one black face in the crowd claiming to be a minute man! Just a thought!

Qbano

[Anonymous]

I’m Cuban and I’m wondering about this facination latinos have with Hillary. Since latino’s seem to be scared to support Obama I have a message for you…… You know those crazed gringos (Minute men) watching the US?Mex border protecting us from allowing your cousins here????

I have yet to see one black face in the crowd claiming to be a minute man! Just a thought!

Qbano

[Anonymous]

I’m Cuban and I’m wondering about this fascination Latinos have with Hillary. Since Latinos seem to be scared to support Obama I have a message for you…… You know those crazed gringos (Minute men) watching the US/Mexican border protecting us from allowing your cousins here????

I have yet to see one black face in the crowd claiming to be a minute man! So you still think you relate more to working class whites? Just a thought!

Qbano

[bsrsharma]

Your observation is interesting, considering that illegal immigration probably hurts African-Americans proportionately more (in terms of wage competition). However, no patriotic US Citizen can describe the minutemen as “crazed gringos”. I don’t support vigilantism, but those folks are armed with … radios and binoculars. They have never hurt an illegal crosser. What’s wrong with a bunch of volunteers becoming the eyes and ears of national borders?

[Ricechex]

Drunkle–good post, so true. I was teaching a diversity class, and one assignment is to complete an ethnic genogram. Focus on your family history, prejudices and who that makes you today. Now, I didn’t have any Asians in the class, but the Hispanics and Whites, revealed that what they learned was to hate blacks. That was the common thread of their prejudice. Every last one of them, except for the black students in the class.

Here is something interesting I heard on NPR the other day:

Candidates Court Latino Evangelicals

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=18698191

[drunkle]

rice:

that’s interesting about the black students… i saw a program on tv that was discussing attitudes amoung children towards black and white images. the kids were shown cartoon drawings and asked what they thought was going on. the drawings were done in two ways, one with a black character and one with a white. the characters were drawn exactly the same, same facial features, clothing, etc, just their skin tone was different. guess what the prevailing outcome was… even amoung the black children.

i suppose counter culture influences can reverse such early prejudices. but there was another bit about discrimination amoung cops that found black officers to be more discriminating than whites against black suspects.

yeah, that stuff was on the tv so… grain of salt.

the funniest thing about the npr report i found was the general stupidity of the electorate. in this case, the “evangelical latinos”. voting republican on the majority basis of religion rather than social justice. there is a distinction between faith and social justice where there shouldn’t be… the whole point of christianity is social justice. this dicotomy is obviously not limited to hispanic evangelicals…

the other point i had to laugh about was where anti immigration rhetoric becoming xenophobic caused them to lean democrat party. as if the republican party of modern era isn’t already the party of xenophobia, as if latinos haven’t already been subject to generations of discrimination, mulatto/mestizo vs pure caucasian/spanish, as if latinos dont discriminate amoungst themselves, mexican vs salvadoran or nicaraguan, etc.

but in all of that, i think of peru’s ex president, fujimori. for a developing country, they apparently are quite advanced in social attitudes.

anyway, the npr report reminded me of a girl i knew back when the grocery stores were on strike. her father was a butcher and on strike and was pissed at the company for cutting health care benefits and such. i totally sympathized with her until i asked her who she and her father voted for. guess… yep, bush. the irony that a union supporter would vote for the party of union busting upper classmen.

bottom line, you really can’t trust the electorate. no matter what race, religion, culture, economic status. people ragging on hillary based on a paparazzi point of view, for instance. people baying “sheeple” while quietly grazing on their own side of the fence… ugh.

[larrylujack]

Illegals vote all the time.

really? where’s the proof?

Chicago has had a history of corrupt voting in the 60s no doubt, but I have not heard of verified evidence that there is widespread voting of illegals. And no, I don’t consider right wing blogs as evidence. You do need ID to vote (I have always been asked for one) and your anecdotal story does not prove that “Illegals vote all the time.”

I think you just hate immigrants cause your lazy or stupid and can’t compete for the low end jobs they take.

[bsrsharma]

What is the Quid Pro Quo for illegals to vote? Plenty of Citizens don’t care to vote knowing full well they are selecting the national leaders. What does an illegal, who has no clue, probably doesn’t know the language of the ballot or instructions, get by wasting his/her time to engage in a completely meaningless ritual? Unless someone can show there is vote buying for cash/kind, these allegations are red herrings (and probably thinly veiled racism against Hispanic political activism). One can fully be opposed to illegal immigration without becoming an “illegal voting” alarmist.

[bsrsharma]

What is the Quid Pro Quo for illegals to vote? Plenty of Citizens don’t care to vote knowing full well they are selecting the national leaders. What does an illegal, who has no clue, probably doesn’t know the language of the ballot or instructions, get by wasting his/her time to engage in a completely meaningless ritual? Unless someone can show there is vote buying for cash/kind, these allegations are red herrings (and probably thinly veiled racism against Hispanic political activism). One can fully be opposed to illegal immigration without becoming an “illegal voting” alarmist.

[bsrsharma]

What is the Quid Pro Quo for illegals to vote? Plenty of Citizens don’t care to vote knowing full well they are selecting the national leaders. What does an illegal, who has no clue, probably doesn’t know the language of the ballot or instructions, get by wasting his/her time to engage in a completely meaningless ritual? Unless someone can show there is vote buying for cash/kind, these allegations are red herrings (and probably thinly veiled racism against Hispanic political activism). One can fully be opposed to illegal immigration without becoming an “illegal voting” alarmist.

[bsrsharma]

What is the Quid Pro Quo for illegals to vote? Plenty of Citizens don’t care to vote knowing full well they are selecting the national leaders. What does an illegal, who has no clue, probably doesn’t know the language of the ballot or instructions, get by wasting his/her time to engage in a completely meaningless ritual? Unless someone can show there is vote buying for cash/kind, these allegations are red herrings (and probably thinly veiled racism against Hispanic political activism). One can fully be opposed to illegal immigration without becoming an “illegal voting” alarmist.

[bsrsharma]

What is the Quid Pro Quo for illegals to vote? Plenty of Citizens don’t care to vote knowing full well they are selecting the national leaders. What does an illegal, who has no clue, probably doesn’t know the language of the ballot or instructions, get by wasting his/her time to engage in a completely meaningless ritual? Unless someone can show there is vote buying for cash/kind, these allegations are red herrings (and probably thinly veiled racism against Hispanic political activism). One can fully be opposed to illegal immigration without becoming an “illegal voting” alarmist.

[larrylujack]

Illegals vote all the time.

really? where’s the proof?

Chicago has had a history of corrupt voting in the 60s no doubt, but I have not heard of verified evidence that there is widespread voting of illegals. And no, I don’t consider right wing blogs as evidence. You do need ID to vote (I have always been asked for one) and your anecdotal story does not prove that “Illegals vote all the time.”

I think you just hate immigrants cause your lazy or stupid and can’t compete for the low end jobs they take.

[larrylujack]

Illegals vote all the time.

really? where’s the proof?

Chicago has had a history of corrupt voting in the 60s no doubt, but I have not heard of verified evidence that there is widespread voting of illegals. And no, I don’t consider right wing blogs as evidence. You do need ID to vote (I have always been asked for one) and your anecdotal story does not prove that “Illegals vote all the time.”

I think you just hate immigrants cause your lazy or stupid and can’t compete for the low end jobs they take.

[larrylujack]

Illegals vote all the time.

really? where’s the proof?

Chicago has had a history of corrupt voting in the 60s no doubt, but I have not heard of verified evidence that there is widespread voting of illegals. And no, I don’t consider right wing blogs as evidence. You do need ID to vote (I have always been asked for one) and your anecdotal story does not prove that “Illegals vote all the time.”

I think you just hate immigrants cause your lazy or stupid and can’t compete for the low end jobs they take.

[larrylujack]

Illegals vote all the time.

really? where’s the proof?

Chicago has had a history of corrupt voting in the 60s no doubt, but I have not heard of verified evidence that there is widespread voting of illegals. And no, I don’t consider right wing blogs as evidence. You do need ID to vote (I have always been asked for one) and your anecdotal story does not prove that “Illegals vote all the time.”

I think you just hate immigrants cause your lazy or stupid and can’t compete for the low end jobs they take.

[drunkle]

rice:

that’s interesting about the black students… i saw a program on tv that was discussing attitudes amoung children towards black and white images. the kids were shown cartoon drawings and asked what they thought was going on. the drawings were done in two ways, one with a black character and one with a white. the characters were drawn exactly the same, same facial features, clothing, etc, just their skin tone was different. guess what the prevailing outcome was… even amoung the black children.

i suppose counter culture influences can reverse such early prejudices. but there was another bit about discrimination amoung cops that found black officers to be more discriminating than whites against black suspects.

yeah, that stuff was on the tv so… grain of salt.

the funniest thing about the npr report i found was the general stupidity of the electorate. in this case, the “evangelical latinos”. voting republican on the majority basis of religion rather than social justice. there is a distinction between faith and social justice where there shouldn’t be… the whole point of christianity is social justice. this dicotomy is obviously not limited to hispanic evangelicals…

the other point i had to laugh about was where anti immigration rhetoric becoming xenophobic caused them to lean democrat party. as if the republican party of modern era isn’t already the party of xenophobia, as if latinos haven’t already been subject to generations of discrimination, mulatto/mestizo vs pure caucasian/spanish, as if latinos dont discriminate amoungst themselves, mexican vs salvadoran or nicaraguan, etc.

but in all of that, i think of peru’s ex president, fujimori. for a developing country, they apparently are quite advanced in social attitudes.

anyway, the npr report reminded me of a girl i knew back when the grocery stores were on strike. her father was a butcher and on strike and was pissed at the company for cutting health care benefits and such. i totally sympathized with her until i asked her who she and her father voted for. guess… yep, bush. the irony that a union supporter would vote for the party of union busting upper classmen.

bottom line, you really can’t trust the electorate. no matter what race, religion, culture, economic status. people ragging on hillary based on a paparazzi point of view, for instance. people baying “sheeple” while quietly grazing on their own side of the fence… ugh.

[drunkle]

rice:

that’s interesting about the black students… i saw a program on tv that was discussing attitudes amoung children towards black and white images. the kids were shown cartoon drawings and asked what they thought was going on. the drawings were done in two ways, one with a black character and one with a white. the characters were drawn exactly the same, same facial features, clothing, etc, just their skin tone was different. guess what the prevailing outcome was… even amoung the black children.

i suppose counter culture influences can reverse such early prejudices. but there was another bit about discrimination amoung cops that found black officers to be more discriminating than whites against black suspects.

yeah, that stuff was on the tv so… grain of salt.

the funniest thing about the npr report i found was the general stupidity of the electorate. in this case, the “evangelical latinos”. voting republican on the majority basis of religion rather than social justice. there is a distinction between faith and social justice where there shouldn’t be… the whole point of christianity is social justice. this dicotomy is obviously not limited to hispanic evangelicals…

the other point i had to laugh about was where anti immigration rhetoric becoming xenophobic caused them to lean democrat party. as if the republican party of modern era isn’t already the party of xenophobia, as if latinos haven’t already been subject to generations of discrimination, mulatto/mestizo vs pure caucasian/spanish, as if latinos dont discriminate amoungst themselves, mexican vs salvadoran or nicaraguan, etc.

but in all of that, i think of peru’s ex president, fujimori. for a developing country, they apparently are quite advanced in social attitudes.

anyway, the npr report reminded me of a girl i knew back when the grocery stores were on strike. her father was a butcher and on strike and was pissed at the company for cutting health care benefits and such. i totally sympathized with her until i asked her who she and her father voted for. guess… yep, bush. the irony that a union supporter would vote for the party of union busting upper classmen.

bottom line, you really can’t trust the electorate. no matter what race, religion, culture, economic status. people ragging on hillary based on a paparazzi point of view, for instance. people baying “sheeple” while quietly grazing on their own side of the fence… ugh.

[drunkle]

rice:

that’s interesting about the black students… i saw a program on tv that was discussing attitudes amoung children towards black and white images. the kids were shown cartoon drawings and asked what they thought was going on. the drawings were done in two ways, one with a black character and one with a white. the characters were drawn exactly the same, same facial features, clothing, etc, just their skin tone was different. guess what the prevailing outcome was… even amoung the black children.

i suppose counter culture influences can reverse such early prejudices. but there was another bit about discrimination amoung cops that found black officers to be more discriminating than whites against black suspects.

yeah, that stuff was on the tv so… grain of salt.

the funniest thing about the npr report i found was the general stupidity of the electorate. in this case, the “evangelical latinos”. voting republican on the majority basis of religion rather than social justice. there is a distinction between faith and social justice where there shouldn’t be… the whole point of christianity is social justice. this dicotomy is obviously not limited to hispanic evangelicals…

the other point i had to laugh about was where anti immigration rhetoric becoming xenophobic caused them to lean democrat party. as if the republican party of modern era isn’t already the party of xenophobia, as if latinos haven’t already been subject to generations of discrimination, mulatto/mestizo vs pure caucasian/spanish, as if latinos dont discriminate amoungst themselves, mexican vs salvadoran or nicaraguan, etc.

but in all of that, i think of peru’s ex president, fujimori. for a developing country, they apparently are quite advanced in social attitudes.

anyway, the npr report reminded me of a girl i knew back when the grocery stores were on strike. her father was a butcher and on strike and was pissed at the company for cutting health care benefits and such. i totally sympathized with her until i asked her who she and her father voted for. guess… yep, bush. the irony that a union supporter would vote for the party of union busting upper classmen.

bottom line, you really can’t trust the electorate. no matter what race, religion, culture, economic status. people ragging on hillary based on a paparazzi point of view, for instance. people baying “sheeple” while quietly grazing on their own side of the fence… ugh.

[drunkle]

rice:

that’s interesting about the black students… i saw a program on tv that was discussing attitudes amoung children towards black and white images. the kids were shown cartoon drawings and asked what they thought was going on. the drawings were done in two ways, one with a black character and one with a white. the characters were drawn exactly the same, same facial features, clothing, etc, just their skin tone was different. guess what the prevailing outcome was… even amoung the black children.

i suppose counter culture influences can reverse such early prejudices. but there was another bit about discrimination amoung cops that found black officers to be more discriminating than whites against black suspects.

yeah, that stuff was on the tv so… grain of salt.

the funniest thing about the npr report i found was the general stupidity of the electorate. in this case, the “evangelical latinos”. voting republican on the majority basis of religion rather than social justice. there is a distinction between faith and social justice where there shouldn’t be… the whole point of christianity is social justice. this dicotomy is obviously not limited to hispanic evangelicals…

the other point i had to laugh about was where anti immigration rhetoric becoming xenophobic caused them to lean democrat party. as if the republican party of modern era isn’t already the party of xenophobia, as if latinos haven’t already been subject to generations of discrimination, mulatto/mestizo vs pure caucasian/spanish, as if latinos dont discriminate amoungst themselves, mexican vs salvadoran or nicaraguan, etc.

but in all of that, i think of peru’s ex president, fujimori. for a developing country, they apparently are quite advanced in social attitudes.

anyway, the npr report reminded me of a girl i knew back when the grocery stores were on strike. her father was a butcher and on strike and was pissed at the company for cutting health care benefits and such. i totally sympathized with her until i asked her who she and her father voted for. guess… yep, bush. the irony that a union supporter would vote for the party of union busting upper classmen.

bottom line, you really can’t trust the electorate. no matter what race, religion, culture, economic status. people ragging on hillary based on a paparazzi point of view, for instance. people baying “sheeple” while quietly grazing on their own side of the fence… ugh.

[Ricechex]

Drunkle–good post, so true. I was teaching a diversity class, and one assignment is to complete an ethnic genogram. Focus on your family history, prejudices and who that makes you today. Now, I didn’t have any Asians in the class, but the Hispanics and Whites, revealed that what they learned was to hate blacks. That was the common thread of their prejudice. Every last one of them, except for the black students in the class.

Here is something interesting I heard on NPR the other day:

Candidates Court Latino Evangelicals

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=18698191

[Ricechex]

Drunkle–good post, so true. I was teaching a diversity class, and one assignment is to complete an ethnic genogram. Focus on your family history, prejudices and who that makes you today. Now, I didn’t have any Asians in the class, but the Hispanics and Whites, revealed that what they learned was to hate blacks. That was the common thread of their prejudice. Every last one of them, except for the black students in the class.

Here is something interesting I heard on NPR the other day:

Candidates Court Latino Evangelicals

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=18698191

[Ricechex]

Drunkle–good post, so true. I was teaching a diversity class, and one assignment is to complete an ethnic genogram. Focus on your family history, prejudices and who that makes you today. Now, I didn’t have any Asians in the class, but the Hispanics and Whites, revealed that what they learned was to hate blacks. That was the common thread of their prejudice. Every last one of them, except for the black students in the class.

Here is something interesting I heard on NPR the other day:

Candidates Court Latino Evangelicals

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=18698191

[Ricechex]

Drunkle–good post, so true. I was teaching a diversity class, and one assignment is to complete an ethnic genogram. Focus on your family history, prejudices and who that makes you today. Now, I didn’t have any Asians in the class, but the Hispanics and Whites, revealed that what they learned was to hate blacks. That was the common thread of their prejudice. Every last one of them, except for the black students in the class.

Here is something interesting I heard on NPR the other day:

Candidates Court Latino Evangelicals

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=18698191

[bsrsharma]

Your observation is interesting, considering that illegal immigration probably hurts African-Americans proportionately more (in terms of wage competition). However, no patriotic US Citizen can describe the minutemen as “crazed gringos”. I don’t support vigilantism, but those folks are armed with … radios and binoculars. They have never hurt an illegal crosser. What’s wrong with a bunch of volunteers becoming the eyes and ears of national borders?

[bsrsharma]

Your observation is interesting, considering that illegal immigration probably hurts African-Americans proportionately more (in terms of wage competition). However, no patriotic US Citizen can describe the minutemen as “crazed gringos”. I don’t support vigilantism, but those folks are armed with … radios and binoculars. They have never hurt an illegal crosser. What’s wrong with a bunch of volunteers becoming the eyes and ears of national borders?

[bsrsharma]

Your observation is interesting, considering that illegal immigration probably hurts African-Americans proportionately more (in terms of wage competition). However, no patriotic US Citizen can describe the minutemen as “crazed gringos”. I don’t support vigilantism, but those folks are armed with … radios and binoculars. They have never hurt an illegal crosser. What’s wrong with a bunch of volunteers becoming the eyes and ears of national borders?

[bsrsharma]

Your observation is interesting, considering that illegal immigration probably hurts African-Americans proportionately more (in terms of wage competition). However, no patriotic US Citizen can describe the minutemen as “crazed gringos”. I don’t support vigilantism, but those folks are armed with … radios and binoculars. They have never hurt an illegal crosser. What’s wrong with a bunch of volunteers becoming the eyes and ears of national borders?

[Anonymous]

Why asked when you already know the answers why Latinos vote for Hillary. The illegal crossing will end when America deploy Black out to patrol the borders.

.. zzzzzzzz …

[Anonymous]

Why asked when you already know the answers why Latinos vote for Hillary. The illegal crossing will end when America deploy Black out to patrol the borders.

.. zzzzzzzz …

[Anonymous]

Why asked when you already know the answers why Latinos vote for Hillary. The illegal crossing will end when America deploy Black out to patrol the borders.

.. zzzzzzzz …

[Anonymous]

Why asked when you already know the answers why Latinos vote for Hillary. The illegal crossing will end when America deploy Black out to patrol the borders.

.. zzzzzzzz …

[Anonymous]

Why asked when you already know the answers why Latinos vote for Hillary. The illegal crossing will end when America deploy Black out to patrol the borders.

.. zzzzzzzz …

[Anonymous]

I’m Cuban and I’m wondering about this fascination Latinos have with Hillary. Since Latinos seem to be scared to support Obama I have a message for you…… You know those crazed gringos (Minute men) watching the US/Mexican border protecting us from allowing your cousins here????

I have yet to see one black face in the crowd claiming to be a minute man! So you still think you relate more to working class whites? Just a thought!

Qbano

[Anonymous]

I’m Cuban and I’m wondering about this fascination Latinos have with Hillary. Since Latinos seem to be scared to support Obama I have a message for you…… You know those crazed gringos (Minute men) watching the US/Mexican border protecting us from allowing your cousins here????

I have yet to see one black face in the crowd claiming to be a minute man! So you still think you relate more to working class whites? Just a thought!

Qbano

[Anonymous]

I’m Cuban and I’m wondering about this fascination Latinos have with Hillary. Since Latinos seem to be scared to support Obama I have a message for you…… You know those crazed gringos (Minute men) watching the US/Mexican border protecting us from allowing your cousins here????

I have yet to see one black face in the crowd claiming to be a minute man! So you still think you relate more to working class whites? Just a thought!

Qbano

[Anonymous]

I’m Cuban and I’m wondering about this fascination Latinos have with Hillary. Since Latinos seem to be scared to support Obama I have a message for you…… You know those crazed gringos (Minute men) watching the US/Mexican border protecting us from allowing your cousins here????

I have yet to see one black face in the crowd claiming to be a minute man! So you still think you relate more to working class whites? Just a thought!

Qbano

[jficquette]

Its because Democrats actually want the illegals here so they can vote and the immigrants know it.

John

[jficquette]

Its because Democrats actually want the illegals here so they can vote and the immigrants know it.

John

[jficquette]

Its because Democrats actually want the illegals here so they can vote and the immigrants know it.

John

[jficquette]

Its because Democrats actually want the illegals here so they can vote and the immigrants know it.

John

[jficquette]

Its because Democrats actually want the illegals here so they can vote and the immigrants know it.

John

[larrylujack]

Its because Democrats actually want the illegals here so they can vote and the immigrants know it.

wow, that’s pretty ignorant considering you need to be a US citizen to vote.
you sound like a loser skin head.
lotsa luck, and btw, George Bushs’ army needs persons in Iraq so feel free to join the military and be a hero.

[patientrenter]

Wow! A (mostly) civilized political thread. What a pleasant surprise.

I am European (born and raised), but I’ll chime in with FLU and others that Asians suffer from racial discrimination slightly more than Europeans or people of European descent. I am familiar with big-company corporate policy and practice as a manager, and that’s what I’ve seen consistently. And everyone knows the college admission biases.

Others have said this, and it rings true to me: The reason Clinton got most Hispanic votes is probably plain racism amongst many Hispanics; and the reason she got most Asian votes is that many Asians don’t want more discrimination against them.

It’s really odd that these ‘findings’ aren’t broadcast on the media. It’s not that hard to find out. As someone sorta said, maybe it messes up the world-view of the media managers that some important racists are not (Euro) white, and that some important victims of racism are not black. I hate subscribing to conspiracy theories, but I tend to believe that a lot of media people know this, but want to suppress it. They are doing it for ‘good’ reasons, to keep all of us dumb unwashed masses focused on our main sins, but that doesn’t mean I have to accept their simplified version of the truth.

Patient renter in OC

[patientrenter]

Wow! A (mostly) civilized political thread. What a pleasant surprise.

I am European (born and raised), but I’ll chime in with FLU and others that Asians suffer from racial discrimination slightly more than Europeans or people of European descent. I am familiar with big-company corporate policy and practice as a manager, and that’s what I’ve seen consistently. And everyone knows the college admission biases.

Others have said this, and it rings true to me: The reason Clinton got most Hispanic votes is probably plain racism amongst many Hispanics; and the reason she got most Asian votes is that many Asians don’t want more discrimination against them.

It’s really odd that these ‘findings’ aren’t broadcast on the media. It’s not that hard to find out. As someone sorta said, maybe it messes up the world-view of the media managers that some important racists are not (Euro) white, and that some important victims of racism are not black. I hate subscribing to conspiracy theories, but I tend to believe that a lot of media people know this, but want to suppress it. They are doing it for ‘good’ reasons, to keep all of us dumb unwashed masses focused on our main sins, but that doesn’t mean I have to accept their simplified version of the truth.

Patient renter in OC

[patientrenter]

Wow! A (mostly) civilized political thread. What a pleasant surprise.

I am European (born and raised), but I’ll chime in with FLU and others that Asians suffer from racial discrimination slightly more than Europeans or people of European descent. I am familiar with big-company corporate policy and practice as a manager, and that’s what I’ve seen consistently. And everyone knows the college admission biases.

Others have said this, and it rings true to me: The reason Clinton got most Hispanic votes is probably plain racism amongst many Hispanics; and the reason she got most Asian votes is that many Asians don’t want more discrimination against them.

It’s really odd that these ‘findings’ aren’t broadcast on the media. It’s not that hard to find out. As someone sorta said, maybe it messes up the world-view of the media managers that some important racists are not (Euro) white, and that some important victims of racism are not black. I hate subscribing to conspiracy theories, but I tend to believe that a lot of media people know this, but want to suppress it. They are doing it for ‘good’ reasons, to keep all of us dumb unwashed masses focused on our main sins, but that doesn’t mean I have to accept their simplified version of the truth.

Patient renter in OC

[patientrenter]

Wow! A (mostly) civilized political thread. What a pleasant surprise.

I am European (born and raised), but I’ll chime in with FLU and others that Asians suffer from racial discrimination slightly more than Europeans or people of European descent. I am familiar with big-company corporate policy and practice as a manager, and that’s what I’ve seen consistently. And everyone knows the college admission biases.

Others have said this, and it rings true to me: The reason Clinton got most Hispanic votes is probably plain racism amongst many Hispanics; and the reason she got most Asian votes is that many Asians don’t want more discrimination against them.

It’s really odd that these ‘findings’ aren’t broadcast on the media. It’s not that hard to find out. As someone sorta said, maybe it messes up the world-view of the media managers that some important racists are not (Euro) white, and that some important victims of racism are not black. I hate subscribing to conspiracy theories, but I tend to believe that a lot of media people know this, but want to suppress it. They are doing it for ‘good’ reasons, to keep all of us dumb unwashed masses focused on our main sins, but that doesn’t mean I have to accept their simplified version of the truth.

Patient renter in OC

[patientrenter]

Wow! A (mostly) civilized political thread. What a pleasant surprise.

I am European (born and raised), but I’ll chime in with FLU and others that Asians suffer from racial discrimination slightly more than Europeans or people of European descent. I am familiar with big-company corporate policy and practice as a manager, and that’s what I’ve seen consistently. And everyone knows the college admission biases.

Others have said this, and it rings true to me: The reason Clinton got most Hispanic votes is probably plain racism amongst many Hispanics; and the reason she got most Asian votes is that many Asians don’t want more discrimination against them.

It’s really odd that these ‘findings’ aren’t broadcast on the media. It’s not that hard to find out. As someone sorta said, maybe it messes up the world-view of the media managers that some important racists are not (Euro) white, and that some important victims of racism are not black. I hate subscribing to conspiracy theories, but I tend to believe that a lot of media people know this, but want to suppress it. They are doing it for ‘good’ reasons, to keep all of us dumb unwashed masses focused on our main sins, but that doesn’t mean I have to accept their simplified version of the truth.

Patient renter in OC

[jficquette]

Illegals vote all the time. 2006 elections the democrat running for Cunnigham seat was caught on tape telling Illegals that they didn’t need ID to vote.

Democrats are experts on cheating in elections. They elected JFK by vote rigging and they tried to steal the 2000 election.

Immigrants with illegal parents don’t want to vote for people who run on kicking illegals out and I can’t blame them.

You shouldn’t post while drunk you fucking moron.

John

[jficquette]

Illegals vote all the time. 2006 elections the democrat running for Cunnigham seat was caught on tape telling Illegals that they didn’t need ID to vote.

Democrats are experts on cheating in elections. They elected JFK by vote rigging and they tried to steal the 2000 election.

Immigrants with illegal parents don’t want to vote for people who run on kicking illegals out and I can’t blame them.

You shouldn’t post while drunk you fucking moron.

John

[jficquette]

Illegals vote all the time. 2006 elections the democrat running for Cunnigham seat was caught on tape telling Illegals that they didn’t need ID to vote.

Democrats are experts on cheating in elections. They elected JFK by vote rigging and they tried to steal the 2000 election.

Immigrants with illegal parents don’t want to vote for people who run on kicking illegals out and I can’t blame them.

You shouldn’t post while drunk you fucking moron.

John

[jficquette]

Illegals vote all the time. 2006 elections the democrat running for Cunnigham seat was caught on tape telling Illegals that they didn’t need ID to vote.

Democrats are experts on cheating in elections. They elected JFK by vote rigging and they tried to steal the 2000 election.

Immigrants with illegal parents don’t want to vote for people who run on kicking illegals out and I can’t blame them.

You shouldn’t post while drunk you fucking moron.

John

[jficquette]

Illegals vote all the time. 2006 elections the democrat running for Cunnigham seat was caught on tape telling Illegals that they didn’t need ID to vote.

Democrats are experts on cheating in elections. They elected JFK by vote rigging and they tried to steal the 2000 election.

Immigrants with illegal parents don’t want to vote for people who run on kicking illegals out and I can’t blame them.

You shouldn’t post while drunk you fucking moron.

John

[larrylujack]

Its because Democrats actually want the illegals here so they can vote and the immigrants know it.

wow, that’s pretty ignorant considering you need to be a US citizen to vote.
you sound like a loser skin head.
lotsa luck, and btw, George Bushs’ army needs persons in Iraq so feel free to join the military and be a hero.

[larrylujack]

Its because Democrats actually want the illegals here so they can vote and the immigrants know it.

wow, that’s pretty ignorant considering you need to be a US citizen to vote.
you sound like a loser skin head.
lotsa luck, and btw, George Bushs’ army needs persons in Iraq so feel free to join the military and be a hero.

[larrylujack]

Its because Democrats actually want the illegals here so they can vote and the immigrants know it.

wow, that’s pretty ignorant considering you need to be a US citizen to vote.
you sound like a loser skin head.
lotsa luck, and btw, George Bushs’ army needs persons in Iraq so feel free to join the military and be a hero.

[larrylujack]

Its because Democrats actually want the illegals here so they can vote and the immigrants know it.

wow, that’s pretty ignorant considering you need to be a US citizen to vote.
you sound like a loser skin head.
lotsa luck, and btw, George Bushs’ army needs persons in Iraq so feel free to join the military and be a hero.

[Coronita]

You know. This probably sounds insensitive. But I have some advice for folks who felt they were discriminated against, whether they are asian, black, white, hispanic, gay, etc…. Take a number… In life, you're not dealt an equal hand. Deal with it. Vote based on what you think will benefit you, and be done with it. Discrimination isn't something that's going away, it happens at all sorts of levels, intentional or not. There's really no point in crying the "victim" game, because if everyone stop and thinks about it, they probably are a victim of something unfortunate.

Me…I'm still looking to qualify under an affirmative action plan into the NBA. But when that happens, I think our basketball teams won't be able to compete at the international level…Oh wait…let me think about that 🙂

 

[img_assist|nid=5962|title=selfportrait|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=100|height=80]

—– Sour grapes for everyone!

[boyle_heights]

Nice one fat_lazy_union. haha.

[boyle_heights]

Nice one fat_lazy_union. haha.

[boyle_heights]

Nice one fat_lazy_union. haha.

[boyle_heights]

Nice one fat_lazy_union. haha.

[boyle_heights]

Nice one fat_lazy_union. haha.

[bsrsharma]

Vote based on what you think will benefit you, and be done with it.

Hmm.. Isn't that a rather minimalist practice of good Citizenship? I am pretty sure most people won't benefit significantly differently, individually, based on who becomes the next President. But the overall direction of our Civilization can change dramatically – as the last 8 years have demonstrated forcefully. I think being a little more concerned about the future of Community/State/Nation is not entirely useless.

 

[Coronita]

 Hmm.. Isn't that a rather minimalist practice of good Citizenship? I am pretty sure most people won't benefit significantly differently, individually, based on who becomes the next President. But the overall direction of our Civilization can change dramatically – as the last 8 years have demonstrated forcefully. I think being a little more concerned about the future of Community/State/Nation is not entirely useless.

 

Yes, this would be minimalist..But for some, motivating to be a "minimist" to effect change is better than being do-nothing-and-play-victim-ist. And yes, i feel sometimes you need to think about yourself first before you can take care of others.

For example: tax issues: If I give 30-40% of my income to say the under a robin-hood bailout plan, for example, I jeopardize my own  family and self livelihood, not to mention, no one learns from this who gets bailed out. If  I can decide keep and decide to down with the 30-40%, I could use it to start a company (for example), which if successful, would create jobs. Perhaps this is a very narrowminded and naive-thinking. 

 

[img_assist|nid=5962|title=selfportrait|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=100|height=80]

—– Sour grapes for everyone!

[Ex-SD]

Re. Illegals voting in the USA….

Found this via Google. http://www.diggersrealm.com/mt/archives/001982.html

[larrylujack]

ah yes, the right wing blogsite.

Harris county TX had a 2006 population of almost 4 million people. If we are to assume the article is accurate (bearing in mind that this is an anti-immigrant blogsite) 35 people were removed from voter roles in 2005 as non-citizens, even if all of them voted (there has never been an election with 100% turnout), this is a miniscule number relative to the total population and hardly constitutes illegals voting all the time. Or, again assuming the accuracy of the information, if over 15 years 3742 were removed, than that still amounts to an average of 250 or so a year, again even if all of them voted, which I am sure is not the case, this does not imo rise to llegals voting all the time when the population is almost 4 million.
Also, keep in mind that voting districts in Texas are gerrymandered to favor Republicans anyway, so Hispanic populations typically are split up to reduce their influence, thus negating the effect of illegals voting as well.
Surely, illegals voting occurs, but there is no evidence that it occurs on a meaningful scale.
I think Bsrsharma put it best “What does an illegal, who has no clue, probably doesn’t know the language of the ballot or instructions, get by wasting his/her time to engage in a completely meaningless ritual?”
LL

[Ex-SD]

New York Post article:

‘SUPER’ LATINO SLAMS CLINTON
By MAGGIE HABERMAN

February 12, 2008 — A prominent member of the national Democratic Party has circulated a sharp e-mail saying the removal of Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton campaign manager Patti Solis Doyle was disloyal to Hispanics and should give “pause” to superdelegates and voters.

The e-mail from, Steven Ybarra, a California superdelegate who heads the voting-rights committee of the DNC Hispanic Caucus, was sent to fellow caucus members in the hours after word broke that Solis Doyle – the most prominent Latina in Clinton’s campaign – would be replaced by another close Clinton loyalist, Maggie Williams, who is black.

The e-mail noted that Clinton, who is looking to Latino voters for a boost in the Texas and Ohio primaries on March 4, scored heavily with Hispanics in her California win.

“Apparently, loyalty is not a two-way street,” he wrote. “Latino superdelegates like myself . . . will have cause to pause.”

Ybarra told The Post yesterday that the loss of Solis Doyle, a child of Mexican immigrants, just weeks before the Texas primary, where 36 percent of the population is Hispanic, was “dumb as a stump.”

Contacted for comment, the typically press-shy Solis Doyle told The Post that Ybarra was writing on “false information,” and confirmed she’s staying on as an adviser.

Team Clinton insisted that the decision to switch from Solis Doyle to Williams, revealed on Sunday afternoon, was amiable.

[Ex-SD]

New York Post article:

‘SUPER’ LATINO SLAMS CLINTON
By MAGGIE HABERMAN

February 12, 2008 — A prominent member of the national Democratic Party has circulated a sharp e-mail saying the removal of Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton campaign manager Patti Solis Doyle was disloyal to Hispanics and should give “pause” to superdelegates and voters.

The e-mail from, Steven Ybarra, a California superdelegate who heads the voting-rights committee of the DNC Hispanic Caucus, was sent to fellow caucus members in the hours after word broke that Solis Doyle – the most prominent Latina in Clinton’s campaign – would be replaced by another close Clinton loyalist, Maggie Williams, who is black.

The e-mail noted that Clinton, who is looking to Latino voters for a boost in the Texas and Ohio primaries on March 4, scored heavily with Hispanics in her California win.

“Apparently, loyalty is not a two-way street,” he wrote. “Latino superdelegates like myself . . . will have cause to pause.”

Ybarra told The Post yesterday that the loss of Solis Doyle, a child of Mexican immigrants, just weeks before the Texas primary, where 36 percent of the population is Hispanic, was “dumb as a stump.”

Contacted for comment, the typically press-shy Solis Doyle told The Post that Ybarra was writing on “false information,” and confirmed she’s staying on as an adviser.

Team Clinton insisted that the decision to switch from Solis Doyle to Williams, revealed on Sunday afternoon, was amiable.

[Ex-SD]

New York Post article:

‘SUPER’ LATINO SLAMS CLINTON
By MAGGIE HABERMAN

February 12, 2008 — A prominent member of the national Democratic Party has circulated a sharp e-mail saying the removal of Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton campaign manager Patti Solis Doyle was disloyal to Hispanics and should give “pause” to superdelegates and voters.

The e-mail from, Steven Ybarra, a California superdelegate who heads the voting-rights committee of the DNC Hispanic Caucus, was sent to fellow caucus members in the hours after word broke that Solis Doyle – the most prominent Latina in Clinton’s campaign – would be replaced by another close Clinton loyalist, Maggie Williams, who is black.

The e-mail noted that Clinton, who is looking to Latino voters for a boost in the Texas and Ohio primaries on March 4, scored heavily with Hispanics in her California win.

“Apparently, loyalty is not a two-way street,” he wrote. “Latino superdelegates like myself . . . will have cause to pause.”

Ybarra told The Post yesterday that the loss of Solis Doyle, a child of Mexican immigrants, just weeks before the Texas primary, where 36 percent of the population is Hispanic, was “dumb as a stump.”

Contacted for comment, the typically press-shy Solis Doyle told The Post that Ybarra was writing on “false information,” and confirmed she’s staying on as an adviser.

Team Clinton insisted that the decision to switch from Solis Doyle to Williams, revealed on Sunday afternoon, was amiable.

[Ex-SD]

New York Post article:

‘SUPER’ LATINO SLAMS CLINTON
By MAGGIE HABERMAN

February 12, 2008 — A prominent member of the national Democratic Party has circulated a sharp e-mail saying the removal of Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton campaign manager Patti Solis Doyle was disloyal to Hispanics and should give “pause” to superdelegates and voters.

The e-mail from, Steven Ybarra, a California superdelegate who heads the voting-rights committee of the DNC Hispanic Caucus, was sent to fellow caucus members in the hours after word broke that Solis Doyle – the most prominent Latina in Clinton’s campaign – would be replaced by another close Clinton loyalist, Maggie Williams, who is black.

The e-mail noted that Clinton, who is looking to Latino voters for a boost in the Texas and Ohio primaries on March 4, scored heavily with Hispanics in her California win.

“Apparently, loyalty is not a two-way street,” he wrote. “Latino superdelegates like myself . . . will have cause to pause.”

Ybarra told The Post yesterday that the loss of Solis Doyle, a child of Mexican immigrants, just weeks before the Texas primary, where 36 percent of the population is Hispanic, was “dumb as a stump.”

Contacted for comment, the typically press-shy Solis Doyle told The Post that Ybarra was writing on “false information,” and confirmed she’s staying on as an adviser.

Team Clinton insisted that the decision to switch from Solis Doyle to Williams, revealed on Sunday afternoon, was amiable.

[Ex-SD]

New York Post article:

‘SUPER’ LATINO SLAMS CLINTON
By MAGGIE HABERMAN

February 12, 2008 — A prominent member of the national Democratic Party has circulated a sharp e-mail saying the removal of Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton campaign manager Patti Solis Doyle was disloyal to Hispanics and should give “pause” to superdelegates and voters.

The e-mail from, Steven Ybarra, a California superdelegate who heads the voting-rights committee of the DNC Hispanic Caucus, was sent to fellow caucus members in the hours after word broke that Solis Doyle – the most prominent Latina in Clinton’s campaign – would be replaced by another close Clinton loyalist, Maggie Williams, who is black.

The e-mail noted that Clinton, who is looking to Latino voters for a boost in the Texas and Ohio primaries on March 4, scored heavily with Hispanics in her California win.

“Apparently, loyalty is not a two-way street,” he wrote. “Latino superdelegates like myself . . . will have cause to pause.”

Ybarra told The Post yesterday that the loss of Solis Doyle, a child of Mexican immigrants, just weeks before the Texas primary, where 36 percent of the population is Hispanic, was “dumb as a stump.”

Contacted for comment, the typically press-shy Solis Doyle told The Post that Ybarra was writing on “false information,” and confirmed she’s staying on as an adviser.

Team Clinton insisted that the decision to switch from Solis Doyle to Williams, revealed on Sunday afternoon, was amiable.

[larrylujack]

ah yes, the right wing blogsite.

Harris county TX had a 2006 population of almost 4 million people. If we are to assume the article is accurate (bearing in mind that this is an anti-immigrant blogsite) 35 people were removed from voter roles in 2005 as non-citizens, even if all of them voted (there has never been an election with 100% turnout), this is a miniscule number relative to the total population and hardly constitutes illegals voting all the time. Or, again assuming the accuracy of the information, if over 15 years 3742 were removed, than that still amounts to an average of 250 or so a year, again even if all of them voted, which I am sure is not the case, this does not imo rise to llegals voting all the time when the population is almost 4 million.
Also, keep in mind that voting districts in Texas are gerrymandered to favor Republicans anyway, so Hispanic populations typically are split up to reduce their influence, thus negating the effect of illegals voting as well.
Surely, illegals voting occurs, but there is no evidence that it occurs on a meaningful scale.
I think Bsrsharma put it best “What does an illegal, who has no clue, probably doesn’t know the language of the ballot or instructions, get by wasting his/her time to engage in a completely meaningless ritual?”
LL

[larrylujack]

ah yes, the right wing blogsite.

Harris county TX had a 2006 population of almost 4 million people. If we are to assume the article is accurate (bearing in mind that this is an anti-immigrant blogsite) 35 people were removed from voter roles in 2005 as non-citizens, even if all of them voted (there has never been an election with 100% turnout), this is a miniscule number relative to the total population and hardly constitutes illegals voting all the time. Or, again assuming the accuracy of the information, if over 15 years 3742 were removed, than that still amounts to an average of 250 or so a year, again even if all of them voted, which I am sure is not the case, this does not imo rise to llegals voting all the time when the population is almost 4 million.
Also, keep in mind that voting districts in Texas are gerrymandered to favor Republicans anyway, so Hispanic populations typically are split up to reduce their influence, thus negating the effect of illegals voting as well.
Surely, illegals voting occurs, but there is no evidence that it occurs on a meaningful scale.
I think Bsrsharma put it best “What does an illegal, who has no clue, probably doesn’t know the language of the ballot or instructions, get by wasting his/her time to engage in a completely meaningless ritual?”
LL

[larrylujack]

ah yes, the right wing blogsite.

Harris county TX had a 2006 population of almost 4 million people. If we are to assume the article is accurate (bearing in mind that this is an anti-immigrant blogsite) 35 people were removed from voter roles in 2005 as non-citizens, even if all of them voted (there has never been an election with 100% turnout), this is a miniscule number relative to the total population and hardly constitutes illegals voting all the time. Or, again assuming the accuracy of the information, if over 15 years 3742 were removed, than that still amounts to an average of 250 or so a year, again even if all of them voted, which I am sure is not the case, this does not imo rise to llegals voting all the time when the population is almost 4 million.
Also, keep in mind that voting districts in Texas are gerrymandered to favor Republicans anyway, so Hispanic populations typically are split up to reduce their influence, thus negating the effect of illegals voting as well.
Surely, illegals voting occurs, but there is no evidence that it occurs on a meaningful scale.
I think Bsrsharma put it best “What does an illegal, who has no clue, probably doesn’t know the language of the ballot or instructions, get by wasting his/her time to engage in a completely meaningless ritual?”
LL

[larrylujack]

ah yes, the right wing blogsite.

Harris county TX had a 2006 population of almost 4 million people. If we are to assume the article is accurate (bearing in mind that this is an anti-immigrant blogsite) 35 people were removed from voter roles in 2005 as non-citizens, even if all of them voted (there has never been an election with 100% turnout), this is a miniscule number relative to the total population and hardly constitutes illegals voting all the time. Or, again assuming the accuracy of the information, if over 15 years 3742 were removed, than that still amounts to an average of 250 or so a year, again even if all of them voted, which I am sure is not the case, this does not imo rise to llegals voting all the time when the population is almost 4 million.
Also, keep in mind that voting districts in Texas are gerrymandered to favor Republicans anyway, so Hispanic populations typically are split up to reduce their influence, thus negating the effect of illegals voting as well.
Surely, illegals voting occurs, but there is no evidence that it occurs on a meaningful scale.
I think Bsrsharma put it best “What does an illegal, who has no clue, probably doesn’t know the language of the ballot or instructions, get by wasting his/her time to engage in a completely meaningless ritual?”
LL

[Ex-SD]

Re. Illegals voting in the USA….

Found this via Google. http://www.diggersrealm.com/mt/archives/001982.html

[Ex-SD]

Re. Illegals voting in the USA….

Found this via Google. http://www.diggersrealm.com/mt/archives/001982.html

[Ex-SD]

Re. Illegals voting in the USA….

Found this via Google. http://www.diggersrealm.com/mt/archives/001982.html

[Ex-SD]

Re. Illegals voting in the USA….

Found this via Google. http://www.diggersrealm.com/mt/archives/001982.html

[Coronita]

 Hmm.. Isn't that a rather minimalist practice of good Citizenship? I am pretty sure most people won't benefit significantly differently, individually, based on who becomes the next President. But the overall direction of our Civilization can change dramatically – as the last 8 years have demonstrated forcefully. I think being a little more concerned about the future of Community/State/Nation is not entirely useless.

 

Yes, this would be minimalist..But for some, motivating to be a "minimist" to effect change is better than being do-nothing-and-play-victim-ist. And yes, i feel sometimes you need to think about yourself first before you can take care of others.

For example: tax issues: If I give 30-40% of my income to say the under a robin-hood bailout plan, for example, I jeopardize my own  family and self livelihood, not to mention, no one learns from this who gets bailed out. If  I can decide keep and decide to down with the 30-40%, I could use it to start a company (for example), which if successful, would create jobs. Perhaps this is a very narrowminded and naive-thinking. 

 

[img_assist|nid=5962|title=selfportrait|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=100|height=80]

—– Sour grapes for everyone!

[Coronita]

 Hmm.. Isn't that a rather minimalist practice of good Citizenship? I am pretty sure most people won't benefit significantly differently, individually, based on who becomes the next President. But the overall direction of our Civilization can change dramatically – as the last 8 years have demonstrated forcefully. I think being a little more concerned about the future of Community/State/Nation is not entirely useless.

 

Yes, this would be minimalist..But for some, motivating to be a "minimist" to effect change is better than being do-nothing-and-play-victim-ist. And yes, i feel sometimes you need to think about yourself first before you can take care of others.

For example: tax issues: If I give 30-40% of my income to say the under a robin-hood bailout plan, for example, I jeopardize my own  family and self livelihood, not to mention, no one learns from this who gets bailed out. If  I can decide keep and decide to down with the 30-40%, I could use it to start a company (for example), which if successful, would create jobs. Perhaps this is a very narrowminded and naive-thinking. 

 

[img_assist|nid=5962|title=selfportrait|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=100|height=80]

—– Sour grapes for everyone!

[Coronita]

 Hmm.. Isn't that a rather minimalist practice of good Citizenship? I am pretty sure most people won't benefit significantly differently, individually, based on who becomes the next President. But the overall direction of our Civilization can change dramatically – as the last 8 years have demonstrated forcefully. I think being a little more concerned about the future of Community/State/Nation is not entirely useless.

 

Yes, this would be minimalist..But for some, motivating to be a "minimist" to effect change is better than being do-nothing-and-play-victim-ist. And yes, i feel sometimes you need to think about yourself first before you can take care of others.

For example: tax issues: If I give 30-40% of my income to say the under a robin-hood bailout plan, for example, I jeopardize my own  family and self livelihood, not to mention, no one learns from this who gets bailed out. If  I can decide keep and decide to down with the 30-40%, I could use it to start a company (for example), which if successful, would create jobs. Perhaps this is a very narrowminded and naive-thinking. 

 

[img_assist|nid=5962|title=selfportrait|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=100|height=80]

—– Sour grapes for everyone!

[Coronita]

 Hmm.. Isn't that a rather minimalist practice of good Citizenship? I am pretty sure most people won't benefit significantly differently, individually, based on who becomes the next President. But the overall direction of our Civilization can change dramatically – as the last 8 years have demonstrated forcefully. I think being a little more concerned about the future of Community/State/Nation is not entirely useless.

 

Yes, this would be minimalist..But for some, motivating to be a "minimist" to effect change is better than being do-nothing-and-play-victim-ist. And yes, i feel sometimes you need to think about yourself first before you can take care of others.

For example: tax issues: If I give 30-40% of my income to say the under a robin-hood bailout plan, for example, I jeopardize my own  family and self livelihood, not to mention, no one learns from this who gets bailed out. If  I can decide keep and decide to down with the 30-40%, I could use it to start a company (for example), which if successful, would create jobs. Perhaps this is a very narrowminded and naive-thinking. 

 

[img_assist|nid=5962|title=selfportrait|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=100|height=80]

—– Sour grapes for everyone!

[bsrsharma]

Vote based on what you think will benefit you, and be done with it.

Hmm.. Isn't that a rather minimalist practice of good Citizenship? I am pretty sure most people won't benefit significantly differently, individually, based on who becomes the next President. But the overall direction of our Civilization can change dramatically – as the last 8 years have demonstrated forcefully. I think being a little more concerned about the future of Community/State/Nation is not entirely useless.

 

[bsrsharma]

Vote based on what you think will benefit you, and be done with it.

Hmm.. Isn't that a rather minimalist practice of good Citizenship? I am pretty sure most people won't benefit significantly differently, individually, based on who becomes the next President. But the overall direction of our Civilization can change dramatically – as the last 8 years have demonstrated forcefully. I think being a little more concerned about the future of Community/State/Nation is not entirely useless.

 

[bsrsharma]

Vote based on what you think will benefit you, and be done with it.

Hmm.. Isn't that a rather minimalist practice of good Citizenship? I am pretty sure most people won't benefit significantly differently, individually, based on who becomes the next President. But the overall direction of our Civilization can change dramatically – as the last 8 years have demonstrated forcefully. I think being a little more concerned about the future of Community/State/Nation is not entirely useless.

 

[bsrsharma]

Vote based on what you think will benefit you, and be done with it.

Hmm.. Isn't that a rather minimalist practice of good Citizenship? I am pretty sure most people won't benefit significantly differently, individually, based on who becomes the next President. But the overall direction of our Civilization can change dramatically – as the last 8 years have demonstrated forcefully. I think being a little more concerned about the future of Community/State/Nation is not entirely useless.

 

[Coronita]

You know. This probably sounds insensitive. But I have some advice for folks who felt they were discriminated against, whether they are asian, black, white, hispanic, gay, etc…. Take a number… In life, you're not dealt an equal hand. Deal with it. Vote based on what you think will benefit you, and be done with it. Discrimination isn't something that's going away, it happens at all sorts of levels, intentional or not. There's really no point in crying the "victim" game, because if everyone stop and thinks about it, they probably are a victim of something unfortunate.

Me…I'm still looking to qualify under an affirmative action plan into the NBA. But when that happens, I think our basketball teams won't be able to compete at the international level…Oh wait…let me think about that 🙂

 

[img_assist|nid=5962|title=selfportrait|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=100|height=80]

—– Sour grapes for everyone!

[Coronita]

You know. This probably sounds insensitive. But I have some advice for folks who felt they were discriminated against, whether they are asian, black, white, hispanic, gay, etc…. Take a number… In life, you're not dealt an equal hand. Deal with it. Vote based on what you think will benefit you, and be done with it. Discrimination isn't something that's going away, it happens at all sorts of levels, intentional or not. There's really no point in crying the "victim" game, because if everyone stop and thinks about it, they probably are a victim of something unfortunate.

Me…I'm still looking to qualify under an affirmative action plan into the NBA. But when that happens, I think our basketball teams won't be able to compete at the international level…Oh wait…let me think about that 🙂

 

[img_assist|nid=5962|title=selfportrait|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=100|height=80]

—– Sour grapes for everyone!

[Coronita]

You know. This probably sounds insensitive. But I have some advice for folks who felt they were discriminated against, whether they are asian, black, white, hispanic, gay, etc…. Take a number… In life, you're not dealt an equal hand. Deal with it. Vote based on what you think will benefit you, and be done with it. Discrimination isn't something that's going away, it happens at all sorts of levels, intentional or not. There's really no point in crying the "victim" game, because if everyone stop and thinks about it, they probably are a victim of something unfortunate.

Me…I'm still looking to qualify under an affirmative action plan into the NBA. But when that happens, I think our basketball teams won't be able to compete at the international level…Oh wait…let me think about that 🙂

 

[img_assist|nid=5962|title=selfportrait|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=100|height=80]

—– Sour grapes for everyone!

[Coronita]

You know. This probably sounds insensitive. But I have some advice for folks who felt they were discriminated against, whether they are asian, black, white, hispanic, gay, etc…. Take a number… In life, you're not dealt an equal hand. Deal with it. Vote based on what you think will benefit you, and be done with it. Discrimination isn't something that's going away, it happens at all sorts of levels, intentional or not. There's really no point in crying the "victim" game, because if everyone stop and thinks about it, they probably are a victim of something unfortunate.

Me…I'm still looking to qualify under an affirmative action plan into the NBA. But when that happens, I think our basketball teams won't be able to compete at the international level…Oh wait…let me think about that 🙂

 

[img_assist|nid=5962|title=selfportrait|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=100|height=80]

—– Sour grapes for everyone!

[Author]

Posts