We were unable to load Disqus. If you are a moderator please see our troubleshooting guide.

Guest • 6 years ago
Guest • 6 years ago
Richard Cook • 6 years ago

That is the only thing he has done well.

Pied Piper • 6 years ago

More like 20 pieces. Women against men. Black against white. Gay against straight. Lazy nonworking freeloaders against hard workers. Foreigners against Americans. Unions against the right to work crowd. Government workers against regular workers. The young against the old. Low information voters against the people who really keep up with what's really going on. Muslim against the Jew and Christian. I believe that is 20. Oh its 22 pieces because I just read wmct and forgot the income disparity. Don't know why I forgot that one.

Belayneh Getahun • 6 years ago

before Obama, killing blacks was either normal or heroic

elissalf • 6 years ago

Really? From where I've been sitting, it looks like this splitting has been going on for a couple decades.

How much money and time was spent trying to oust Clinton? Eventually It came down to an apology that he didn't call a BJ "sex"and that he lied to his wife.

And a lot of animosity.

Mike Backfat • 6 years ago

I love when liberals make assumptions in emotional outbursts out of conjecture... The frothing at the mouth is amusing

AnyIPWillDo • 6 years ago

By doing what?

Chr1st1an • 6 years ago

It's more like 97% of us normal people and 3% of the mentally ill liberals who support obamanation.

Aziza Al Ameena El Khadir • 6 years ago

Obama didn't do this. Just like he didn't destroy this country. Republicans did that and Donald Trump is fueling all kinds of hatred. George W. Bush was the worst president in history....or at least one of them

August_Spies • 6 years ago

Yep, he splits 'em into racists and non-racists, and I can guess which camp you are in!

nohbdy123 • 6 years ago

Not exactly in half. Looks like about 4/5 to 1/5. And you're the bad part. So long.

Katie B. • 6 years ago

Oh please, Obama's no prize, but Bush and Cheney were far worse and had already divided the country, started two wars, created a global recession and destroyed the middle class before Obama even took over. But sure, statistics on police shootings is far worse, so let's impeach Obama.

Matt • 6 years ago

Yep! You should be able to comfortably pretend a problem doesn't exist

Ezrad Lionel • 6 years ago

Because he's half white?? :D

Guest • 6 years ago
Kneeling • 6 years ago

What, did he put white against white or something? I thought George W. did that with his war and killing of so many American lives. Innocent American lives.....What fairly land are you two living in, ? When has American every been together or seeing a Black Man in the White House make you feel your country has been lost. That is pretty sad.

Guest • 6 years ago
Guest • 6 years ago
Honest Abe • 6 years ago

I never said I was for Mr. Trump. President 0bama is The President of the United States of America, as such he has a responsibility to try to solve the problems in our country. His stance on race relations has always been to blame "whitey", even when he was an Ilinois State Senator!

Guest • 6 years ago
Equipman • 6 years ago

To the contrary, now a days the systems are unfairly biased to favor the black. Have you not heard of the recent Supreme court decision to uphold the idea of singling out minority students for admittance to U. of Texas displacing whites of higher academic standing. What is fair about that? Or minorities preference points for many municipal jobs across this country. If it were the other way around well, business owners better make sure their fire insurance is current.

fujimo1 • 6 years ago

Also if you're a business and have a city contract, your supplier base has to be a certain percentage minority owned businesses. Doesn't matter if you can get your product or service from another supplier cheaper - you're forced to deal with the minority business. The cost gets passed on to the customer and makes said company less competitive.

Michael Cash • 6 years ago

I take it you haven't read City of Richmond v. J. A. Croson Co. If so, you would know that you are spreading BS.

fujimo1 • 6 years ago

Then somebody needs to sue the city of houston because we had to let the contract go once it ran out.

Michael Cash • 6 years ago

The SCOTUS did not say that a city could not have a minority set aside in letting contracts, it said that it must have EVIDENCE of past discrimination sufficient to warrant such a set aside. The set aside is a remedy for past discrimination, and some may get caught up in that remedy.

WellNowDear • 6 years ago

How long ago do they consider past discrimination? I mean do the go back 50 years? A hundred years? Seems to me that the policy punishes people who had nothing to do with the past discrimination.

Dan50thAE • 6 years ago

So what, the lawyers didn't want the money? You had such a solid case that no lawyer wanted to waste their time with an easy win?

scotsims • 6 years ago

If that's true then we'd be seeing multi-million dollars go out of business it would be reported on. Blaming minority hiring mandates sure hides a lot of stupidity of management.

fujimo1 • 6 years ago

Im only blaming mandates on not biding on a city contract again because it wasnt profitable to do business with them.

scotsims • 6 years ago

I disagree, but let's leave it here.

scotsims • 6 years ago

How many times does this happen? I'd be interested in seeing a fact. Again, it's easier to blame the Government than themselves.

fujimo1 • 6 years ago

Happened ln a daily basis and its been more than ten years probably since we've done business with the city.

Open a business and bid on city contracts. See for yourself.

scotsims • 6 years ago

"It happened to me but I can't post any proof."


Equipman • 6 years ago

Damn, I didn't know that one. That is so undeniably UNFAIR.

mal • 6 years ago

Life is unfair you cry baby. But suck it up and move on. Thank yourself lucky you weren't born black.

Equipman • 6 years ago

Who’s crying B*tch? Don’t make this personal or you will get the same. I have accepted that life can be unfair on many levels. Doesn’t mean I won’t call BS when I hear it, and you’re full of it. And why should I think myself “lucky” I was not born black? That is a very racist statement to make.

Michael Cash • 6 years ago

Do you make things up a lot or just when it is convenient? The supreme court did not just decide "to uphold the idea of singling out minority students for admittance to
U. of Texas displacing whites of higher academic standing." Read the decision. And "minority preference points?" What stuff are you smoking these days?

Equipman • 6 years ago

How about you look into this before you make a bigger fool of yourself. See Abigail Fisher who brought her case to the SCOTUS because she felt she was unfairly denied admittance in favor of affirmative action. It was simply upholding racial preferences in public university admissions. Decided June 23, 2016. You must know since you told me to read the decision that she lost her case right? But in this upside down world we live in today maybe yes is no and no is yes. In judge Alito’s dissenting argument he explained; “Even though UT has never provided any coherent explanation for its asserted need to discriminate on the basis of race, and even though UT’s position relies on a series of unsupported and noxious racial assumptions, the majority concludes that UT has met its heavy burden. This conclusion is remarkable—and remarkably wrong. Because UT has failed to satisfy strict scrutiny, I respectfully dissent”. I am pointing out that “the system” as Scott talked about is NOT unfairly biased against minorities and in some cases it’s quite the opposite.

Michael Cash • 6 years ago

The SCOTUS did not uphold "racial preferences." It held that race could be ONE of many factors used in deciding who to admit when one of the goals of admission is racial diversity for the sake of educating a diverse society. Ms. Fisher was not more qualified than any of the black students who got admitted. Race CANNOT be the sole criteria for admission, i;e. racial preference.

Mike Backfat • 6 years ago

Why should race be a factor in a system based in academic merit?

Bruce • 6 years ago

Because race was used before Discrimination as ruled against in Public Institutions. Affirmative Action was to level a Field set against Blacks & Brown in these Institutions for CENTURIES.

People please remember, the US Constitution was not set up with Blacks & Browns in mind, or for success in the Birth Defect Created Nation.

America is Nation set up for Old White Slave Holding me, for Old White Slave holding me and the original Constitution, less the Amendment Proves that.

Mike Backfat • 6 years ago

That discrimination was from many generations ago and has been adequately rectified. Time to grow up and move on... Get a job and stop complaining and living in the past. Stop demanding free stuff and special treatment from others you havent earned. Thanks

Michael Cash • 6 years ago

Because as many Universities have found out, educating folks is only partially based on academic merit. There are several other factors that the admissions offices consider besides academic achievement.

Chr1st1an • 6 years ago

Howard Wainer in a study "Sex Differences in Performance on the Mathematics Section of the Scholastic Aptitude Test: A Bidirectional Validity Study", published in the Harvard Educational Review; v62 n3 p323-36 in the Fall 1992, which included 47,000 college men and women, found that women were awarded letter grades in college which were two to four letter grades higher than men with equivalent math skills:

Men who got A's scored higher than 592 while women who got A's scored between 549 and 574, an average of 31 points lower, in the same range as men who got C's, a two letter grade penalty for men.

Men who got D's scored in the same range as women who got B's, between 532 and 548, a two letter grade penalty for men.

Men who flunked scored between 524 and 531, an average of 20 points higher than women who scored between 493 and 523 and got C's, a three letter grade penalty for men.

Women who got D's scored between 476 and 492, 30 points lower than men who scored between 524 and 531 and flunked, a four letter grade penalty for men.

Even after decades of invidious discrimination against White men under thee guise of affirmative action, also known by the more descriptive and honest phrase "affirmative discrimination" in England and India, no woman has an understanding of math which is higher than a male who gets a C in math. The 28% of the boys in this study who got B's had better math skills than all of the girls and the 22% who got A's had even better math skills than them. This means that each year, tens of thousands of male college students who get B's, and tens of thousands more who get A's, have an understanding of math which no female college student has ever has demonstrated on credible and objective tests in spite of being awarded A's and B's by our vaunted college math professors.

Such a level of demonstrated math skills is far too low to justify the expenditure of hundreds of thousands of dollars for a college degree in "STEMS", as there cannot possibly be any return on the investment, much less will they ever be able to earn enough to pay off those student loans. To encourage women to go into these fields is the height of hypocrisy--making women feel good about their math skills just for the sake of getting their education dollars is FRAUD.

The REAL fraud, though, is against males [not to mention we the taxpayer who is on the hook for trillions of dollars in defaulted student loans] who COULD HAVE benefitted from a college education, because almost two thirds of college admissions are females who CANNOT benefit.

Mike Backfat • 6 years ago

Everybody with any intellectual honesty knows that because of male and female biological brain differences that on average men are better in math and females are better in verbal aptitude, except socialist progressive/regressive liberals who demand fantasy equality that doesnt exist due to scientific and natural biology. Why do you think they want to normalize transexual confusion and behavior?..lol...The liberal lawyers and liberal minded artists who have no math and science skills naturally defer to femininity and false equality because they have second tier intellect and as a result they desperately want false parity. This political correct nonsense is not only false but it is destroying our country's wealth, not only due to bad diversity programs that have no ROI, but also because when you let second tier lawyer intellect run a country you get academic central bankers who also have second tier intellect and their fragile ego's and narcissism lack realism and mathematical reasoning. Hence are current QE and negative interest rate fiasco where the belief is more new debt can get rid of old debt and this has never worked historically going back to Ancient Rome. Its not only insane and completely ridiculous but they keep doing more of it to keep their political hack jobs and fool the idiotic public with their constant and feminine verbal "speeches" that give a false sense of everything is fine. The problem is there is zero to no production growth because these idiots, because of false equality through diversity and political correctness, havent used merit as a standard and that means the 19 trillion debt bomb is going to grow and will explode on our future posterity.

Chr1st1an • 6 years ago

Excellent points.

We should add that this study found that even the top 25% of the women who were awarded A's who had the math skills of men who were awarded C's, were outnumbered by men by 33%. iow, the top scoring 25% of the women not only did not have the math skills of the 50% of the males who got A's and B's, but they also were a small subset of both males and females with a C level lunderstanding of math.

iow, it could be EXPECTED that males with this level of understanding of math SHOULD earn more than females with this level of understanding.

If we were to establish that only those with a male A level understanding of math could improve their skills and income by going to college, or to vote, then only men would go to college and vote. If we were to establish that this required at least a male B level understanding of math, then also only men would go to college or vote. If we were to set the limit at a male C level/female A level, then men would be 80% and women would be 20% of those going to college or voting.

Mike Backfat • 6 years ago

All you say is why socialistic and false diversity and equality will destroy this country as we are presently seeing in all areas from economics to politics...Equality without merit is akin to running a marathon without water. I feel bad for kids though as they were brainwashed and spoiled by liberal hippie metros who were nothing but girls that ran away from Vietnam and now they run the country into the ground with their cowardice and fear of the truth in every area...sad

Chr1st1an • 6 years ago

Except you speak as of though their damages are yet to come, while I see 50 years of their "progress" as something not even Trump may be able to reverse.

Otherwise, 100% agreed.

Mike Backfat • 6 years ago

Actually I dont think the damages are yet to come I think they are already here but I am specifically referring to the final economic collapse like Ancient Rome. The genesis has been magnified the last 50 years by the spoiled brat baby boomers but its the last 100 years of central bank command and control fascism that is the root cause of our future economic desolation. Trump can make a good economic gamble but I think the problem is a glut of worldwide excess in many areas causing the lack of production.