Browse By

As Bill O’Reilly Denies White Privilege, Frank Demands Evidence of Racial Discrimination. Here it is.

Bill O'Reilly says he does not believe in white privilege.On the national stage, Fox commentator Bill O’Reilly has taken to the airwaves to assert that white privilege does not exist in the United States.  Black people in America are not being discriminated against, O’Reilly says; they just aren’t finding success because they don’t want success enough.

On the small stage of Irregular Times, we’ve had a visitor named Frank who lately has been issuing a challenge, demanding that someone show him evidence of discrimination against black people in America.  There is no such evidence, he says.

Bill O’Reilly and Frank are wrong.  Ample evidence exists of white privilege, and of discrimination against black people:

  • Economists Nicolas Jacquemet and Constantine Yanellis used correspondence tests to find out. They sent out fictional resumes demonstrating equal skill levels, differing only by the name of the applicant. “Anglo-Saxon” names, “African-American” names and “Foreign” names (as judged by survey respondents) appeared at the top of these to apply for real Chicago jobs. Despite showing no difference in qualifications, resumes with Anglo-Saxon names at the top generated phone calls from interested employers 1/3 more often than resumes with African-American or Foreign names. (Labour Economics, 2012)
  • Behavioral economists Marianne Bertrand and Sendhil Mullainathan also sent fictional resumes out to job listings in Boston and Chicago newspapers. Paired resumes were set to be equivalent with one exception: the use of names perceived to be “highly white” or “highly black” in survey research. Applications with white names generated 50 percent more callbacks than equivalent applications with black names. (National Bureau of Economic Research, 2003)
  • Sociologist Devah Pager sent out trained auditors to apply for jobs posted in the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel. The auditors showed equivalent experience and skill in their applications, and only varied in two aspects: their race (white or black) and the criminal record they fictionally reported to potential employers (felony conviction vs. no criminal record). White auditors with no criminal background were more than twice as likely to be called back by employers after applying than black auditors reporting equivalent experience and skill. White auditors reporting a felony criminal conviction were more likely to receive a callback on their application than black auditors reporting no criminal record. (American Journal of Sociology, 2003)
  • In another study, Pager, Bruce Western and Bart Bonikowski sent out trained auditors to apply for low-wage jobs in New York City. Again, the auditors were taught to use the same modes of communication and made applications with equivalent levels of experience. Black applicants received callbacks from employers at half the rate of equally qualified white applicants. (American Sociological Review, 2009)
  • In yet another study, sociologist S. Michael Gaddis sent out 1,008 fake job applications in which two features varied: the college or university from which an applicant graduated and the name an applicant used. Names were identified as “racialized” if they were strongly associated with black identity (DaQuan, Ebony, Jalen, Lamar, Nia, and Shanice) or white identity (Aubrey, Caleb, Charlie, Erica, Ronny and Lesly). The fake applicants’ alma maters were grouped into two categories: high-prestige universities such as Duke, Harvard or Stanford and “second-tier universities” that are respected but not as well-ranked (University of California-Riverside and University of North Carolina-Greensboro were two such universities). The quality of applicants’ records, and of the applications themselves, were held equal within pairs; only names and university names varied. The results: black applicants received positive employer responses only 75% as often as white applicants graduating from a university of the same status. Applicants with black names graduating from elite universities obtained positive employer responses only about as often as white applicants graduating from second-tier universities. (Social Forces, 2015)
  • Sociologist Raj Ghoshal and Gaddis conducted yet another study in which they sent out more than 1,500 fictitious responses to “roommate wanted” ads in Boston, Chicago and Philadelphia. These responses were created to be equivalent with one exception: the names of the fictional people responding to roommate requests. Ghoshal and Gaddis consulted Census records to find names used especially often by people reported black racial identity and by people reporting white racial identity. The fictitious roommate requests associated with black names received a positive response only two-thirds as often as roommate requests associated with white names. (Social Science Research Network, 2015)

These are just a few instances of evidence of continued discrimination against black people in the United States in the 21st Century. Again and again, in equally-qualified pairs of black and white people, white people are favorably treated. That is white privilege. That is a system of racism.

55 thoughts on “As Bill O’Reilly Denies White Privilege, Frank Demands Evidence of Racial Discrimination. Here it is.”

  1. frank says:

    And now is my turn. First of all Bill was not refuted and not even answered when he questioned his guests on TV. They didn’t know one factual case and, guess what, you also didn’t provide one!! ZERO. Bogus resumes sent to businesses? Which businesses, where? If anything that proves ONLY the damages of the Affirmative action damages inflicted upon minorities. Your sociologist forgot to mention that! And the fact that affirmative action is relentlessly applied in the Federal Government shows only that it reinforces the stereotypes of black minorities and women! Ridiculous. Even more ridiculous is the “roommate wanted” ads. It shows that just people associate mostly with people similar to them, that’s a norma preference and not indicative of discrimination! You want examples of discrimination? Give me some FACTS like the followings:

    1) A New York police officer was awarded $1.35 million dollars this week after he successfully sued the village of Freeport, alleging he was passed over for a promotion because of his race.
    A Long Island jury sided with Lt. Christopher Barrella after he claimed that then-Mayor Andrew Hardwick overlooked him to become chief of police so that he could name a Hispanic candidate to the position instead. Barella’s legal team presented evidence showing that Hardwick moved to change rules to allow Miguel Bermudez, at the time an Hispanic lieutenant, to apply for the chief position. Bermudez at the time did not have enough time in grade as a lieutenant to apply for the position.

    2)Two white faculty members at Alabama State University have filed a lawsuit contending that the historically black university is racist toward whites in its hiring and admission practices.
    Steven B. Chesbro, who according to the suit is the only dean at Alabama State not designated as African-American or black, and his partner and fellow ASU faculty member John Garland also contend that ASU passed regulations specifically against same-sex couples and that officials retaliated against the pair for complaining about the university using race as a determining factor for both hiring professors and admitting students.
    Bobby Segall, an attorney representing ASU, said the university categorically denies the contentions.

    3) Officers involved in a 2012 shooting in Cleveland are suing the city and police officials, alleging racial discrimination.
    They claim the defendants have a pattern of treating non-African American officers harsher than African American officers, when it comes to officer-involved shootings of African Americans. The plaintiffs in the federal suit are not African American.
    The incident cited in the suit began when officers saw a car speeding and heard what they thought was a gunshot directed towards them.
    it involved a nearly 25-minute chase and ended in a hail of 137 bullets, killing two people. Both were African American.
    No weapon was ever found in the car.

    4) white teacher who said he suffered years of race-based abuse from his black boss at a Maryland High School was awarded $350,000 this month after he sued the school system for racial bias.
    Former Prince George’s County teacher Jon Everhart claimed that the principal at Largo High School repeatedly called him racist names and constantly told him and others she intended to fire him because he is white.
    “She called me ‘poor white trash’ and ‘white b—-,’ ” Everhart, 65, said of Largo principal Angelique Simpson-Marcus. “Her behavior was so outlandish.”

    5) Mark Pasternak said he lost his state job helping troubled youths because he couldn’t stand working under a black boss who called him racist names like “cracker,” “polack” and “stupid white boy.”
    After a rare reverse racial discrimination trial in Buffalo’s federal court, a jury Tuesday awarded Pasternak $150,000. Jurors found that his former boss, Tommy E. Baines, discriminated against him racially and created a hostile working environment.

    6Twelve white Buffalo firefighters will get an average of $230,430 each in back pay, pension benefits and damages—a total of almost $2.77 million—for emotional distress because the City of Buffalo illegally passed them over for promotions, a state judge has ruled.
    The 12 men sued the city in 2007, contending that the city illegally allowed two promotional lists to expire because minority firefighters had fared poorly on civil service exams.
    The case was affected by a 2009 U.S. Supreme Court decision that said city officials cannot void the results of civil service exams simply because they are afraid of being sued.
    The ruling on damages came 15 months after State Supreme Court Justice John A. Michalek ruled that the city illegally failed to promote based on its 2005 and 2006 tests for racial reasons.

    AND I CAN GO ON AND ON…there is also the other face of the medal pal!
    You can toss your article in the dumpster..just sociological experiments that do not prove nothing. Could have been done with Gays, Lesbians, Tae Party members. Does it mean that discrimination doesn’t exist? Obviously not! But is not a “systematic” pattern or “oppression” or “institutional”. And you call yourself an honest journalist?

  2. frank says:

    Look at this pearl…it shows how “oppressed” are minorities LOL.
    ” Comedian Mindy Kaling’s brother, Vijay Chokalingam, recently revealed that he pretended to be black to get into medical school.
    Chokalingam said St. Louis University (SLU) Medical School accepted him in 1999 after he changed his race from Asian Indian to Black on his application, despite that he had a GPA and test scores below the university’s standards.
    He believes the experience proves affirmative action is discriminatory and doesn’t judge based on merit. However, his “social experiment” holds no substantial evidence—firstly because he never applied to SLU as his own race to compare results.
    Affirmative action levels the playing field for applicants who might not otherwise receive equal consideration—it doesn’t give out “charity education” to people who “don’t work hard enough,” as Chokalingam implies.
    If Chokalingam assumes appropriating a black identity gives him authority to discredit based on biased findings a program that has benefited many black and other minority applicants, he’s missing the point.”

    DISGRACEFUL..and you still talk about “institutionalized” racism or “white privilege”? Really? You can’t even say “white pride” that you are labeled a racist while colleges for blacks, magazines for blacks, TV’s for black, business grants for minorities and all kind of other perks only for minorities pop up from everywhere. Do yourself a favor..change job.
    I have plenty more if you want me to continue: from college admission with “quotas” to job quotas…lowering standards etc. GTFOH.

  3. J Clifford says:

    Frank, are we supposed to be surprised that Bill O’Reilly shouted over the guests of his show? He does it all the time.

    Do you notice the difference between your facts and Jim’s? Yours are individual anecdotes. Jim’s are studies based on large numbers of cases. Do you understand the implications of that?

    1. frank says:

      Mine are facts. Jim’s are just some obscure sociological experiments and we don’t even know the details. Besides, discrimination can occurr in different ways, like i have demonstrated in my REAL stories. And i have plenty more which demonstrates the advantages given by affirmative action ( which is very clearly demonstrated in the case of the indian guy disguising himself as black) FACTS.. If you know what they are. Again.. Alzheimer kicking in…

    2. frank says:

      .. Those are not “large number of cases” just small samples and localized, and we don’t know where the experiments where conducted and which businesses were targeted. The first one, i believe, was conducted in white Maine and is possible that white Maine, not used to have many blacks and minorities, have some obvious tendencies to be suspicious of people that have not a “white” name. Not being exposed to those cultures (.. Low crime rates in Maine.. Did you notice?) can do it. Try to do the same experiment in Atlanta, Detroit, Washington, Newark, Memphis, new Orleans etc and you will have exactly the opposite. Wanna bet?

      1. Jim Cook says:

        Frank,

        Your claims are not accurate. I’ve linked directly to the studies, which describe all of those studies (none of which were carried out in Maine) in great detail.

        As you can tell by reading those studies (or even by fully reading my post here), these studies were indeed carried out in a number of different places, including racially diverse areas.

        I’ve satisfied your challenge. My challenge to you is to read the studies to which I’ve linked and digest them fully with an open mind.

        1. frank says:

          No you have not. I haven’t found the studies first of al, just generic references. If you can point me to a direct link..so i can read the “study” or “studies” and read in detail how were conducted that would be great. Otherwise.. I can do a study as well and tell people that i have seen the sasquatch. Just like the studies on glibal warming.. They are taken as if was Gospel and other studies are willfully ignored. Depends on the political winds and people’s agendas. You have one, obviously not the one that leads to the truth.

          1. Jim Cook says:

            I have provided links with all the necessary information for you to obtain the research articles. I’m not purchasing any articles for you. Many of these articles are free, either directly or through links on Google Scholar (scholar.google.com). Go to your public library and obtain the remainder for free using interlibrary loan.

        2. frank says:

          It’s important for the readers here to read and challenge common liberal myths that in 2015 have no place in a society that claims to be equal. We have a lot of opportunities for people to move up on the ladder of success. Takes hard work, education and will to succeed. Minorities have had disadvantages, no questions about that, but since the civil rights movement we have made enormous progress and giving them the opportunities to catch up. Billions have been spent with little to show for it after decades. Blaming racism or oppression doesn’t work anymore. Time to end this crap and return to a society based on merit and hard work. Plenty are still taking advantage of this alleged bias toward minorities and some are profiting from the dire circumstances in which stupid policies have plunged them into. I am not buying into it and there is no evidence of it other than people laziness in not wanting to do but wanting to be given, just because. Provide me those links, the full studies, free. I am not buying or spending money on them. I see that one of the study was conducted in Chicago.. Oh my… I am curious to see now who were the businesses, hiring managers and their race,.. Be prepared for a surprise .

          1. Jim Cook says:

            Frank, these studies pair individuals in audits in which qualifications, experience and behavior are set equal, so your comments here regarding “merit,” “hard work” and laziness are not germane.

          2. frank says:

            We will see. I’ll try to find these secret SMALL studies. Two studies, which you probably haven’t read, and you define the discussion closed and a whole system biased, without ANY critical examination of the work. Speaking about laziness…
            I’ll do it for you. Are a journalist? Really?

          3. Jim Cook says:

            I’ve listed six studies, not two, and no, I’m not a journalist, and yes, I have read the studies. Please stop making assumptions and read the studies for yourself.

          4. frank says:

            I will.. Will have a lot to laugh.

          5. frank says:

            Predictably the first study i have read, Bertrand/Mullanhaitan, doesn’t show who’s responding to these job applications. How do we know if is the same hr person and which race is the hr person for each employer? Other weaknesses:
            What is the time frame of these responses? May be some resumes took one day to get a response while others a little longer, but got discounted in the analysis because they, the analysts, set a limited time frame to collect these responses! May be the HR office responded to all of them but in alphabetical order for example and took long time to read them all. Some employers are bigger than others and they get thousands of resumes every week! What’s the size of these businesses? Do we know that?
            MORE: The same authors acknowledge that they had to mix up resumes qualifications for obvious reasons. How do we know that the hr person(s) looking at two high quality resumes (or low quality) didn’t chose one over the other just because of one or more slight difference in level of qualifications? More specifically, even though qualified enough for the job, one wasn’t really on “target” for what she/him was looking for. (i.e. G Typing skills vs specific work as stenographer). What about age? Young guy vs older fellow even though with same experience?
            On another note.. Newspaper ads. Really?
            Most of job applications are done online, especially nowadays, and electronic systems scan resumes for key words in order to generate responses.
            One more point: did you expect the responses to be 50/50? Why? Taking into account the numbers of blacks and whites in this Country i think that pretty much the responses reflect that kind of reality even when you examine local cities. If had been 50/50 than it would had been a discrimination case against whites!! And why they didn’t mix all the races but just whites and blacks? Because it must demonstrate “white privilege” right?
            More: what about location of the business and location of applicants? Isn’t it possible that some zip codes were preferred or responded first compared to others just because closer to the job location? The zip codes could have been used with that function instead of underlining
            a racial content.
            I think a more accurate study would be done, if can be done, taking into account these non secondary observations! Summary: BS!!
            Do I need to waste more of my time reading the others? Do i deny that there is bias in hiring? No, but numbers are small and they work both ways. I deny a constant pattern of discrimination and the white privilege bs as endemic and institutional. In its entirety. I have plenty of examples of discrimination perpetrated against whites and many black run cities have questionable hiring practices. But guess what: doesn’t mean you do not have the opportunity to make it, no matter your color. Pull your pants up, make yourself presentable, get an education, work hard.

          6. Jim Cook says:

            Under “MORE,” read the study. The strength of the audit study method is that it can hold constant all other factors besides the dependent variables of interest.

            This study satisfies your challenge, which was to produce ONE piece of evidence of white privilege. You didn’t ask for a perfect study, which is good, because obviously there is no such thing as a perfect study. This is, however, a piece of careful, systematic research which demonstrates a statistically and substantively significant difference in how otherwise equivalent resumes are treated when indicators of race vary.

            I would be amused by your efforts to twist away from the obvious, repeated patterns found in these studies if the stakes weren’t so important.

          7. frank says:

            Read it and I outlined my points, which are more than valid and probably you didn’t bother reading. This study does NOT demonstrate white privilege but alleges it. It’s flaws are evident, the others pretty much will be on the same pattern i expect . I asked some cases, real cases, proven in the court of law. I provided some, you have none. Just a flawed so called “study”. Just… Bullshit, as expected.

          8. frank says:

            I AM very amused by your attempt to disregard some obvious flaws like outlined in my comment. Pathetic.

          9. frank says:

            And if i were you i would read Ella’s comment.. You’ll learn soney, hopefully. Question: what the stakes are here? Let’s have more fun..

          10. Joe says:

            I am a sr. process control engineer that works at a manufacturing plant – i.e. a daily user of statistics to make sure the system meets product specs. If the product does not, we lose market share, and eventually end up closing down the plant.

            That being said, “Lies, damned lie, and statistics” – Mark Twain.

            Frank you are correct and Jim you are really wrong. The quote above basically states that statistics can fit whatever the person wants them to fit.

            Jim your examples are badly flawed. Where available, the sample sizes and populations are skewed to provide results that fit a certain template. To explain myself,

            Let us assume I believe Bush lied about the war in Iraq, and I want to prove that most Americans feel the same. I would run a poll providing statistics of yes or no to my question. First, if I am really devious, I would simple poll people in Berkely, CA. I am sure to get 90+ percent in my favor.

            Now let us assume I believe Bush did not lie about the war in Iraq. I could prove that most Americans agreed with me if I only sampled areas that supported my belief, I could get 90+ to agree with me

            However, if I want to be more stealth, I have to word the question in a way to fit my results, or manipulate the data. Man-induced global warming is a great example. So I run a poll that asks scientists like me, “Do you believe the Earth is warming.” well of course most scientists believe that, because all systems fluctuate and do not remain constant. So, when I do my poll i get 80% of scientists believe we are experiencing global warming. Now I write an article stating that, but inserting man-induced.. to mislead people to believe that most scientists believe that man is responsible for global warming.

            Jim, Frank is right. You have not provided proof of your arguments. Frank is also right that in the 90’s the government changed how it calculated crime statistics… so please provide that the criteria used for calculating crimes stats was the same in versus 1990’s verses the 2000’s

            Finally, I agree that reported crime basically drooped except for assaults and robberies. Also, as a white person that grew up poor in the ghettos of a major city in the 1960s and 1970s. I was beaten, had to fight, and verbally abused – none of those incidents were ever recorded in crime records.

            Finally, White privilege is BS. I am white and NEVER had white privilege. I saw blacks skipping school.. beating up teachers… parents never home to mentor the kids. I went to those schools in the ghetto and I was able to learn – I SHOWED UP – enter Ben Carson. Oh. my mother was a single mother, so no I did not have parents home to help me. She had to work. I saw first hand how the welfare system DESTROYED families. We had truant officers back then, so many had to show up for school; however, they did nothing to learn.

            Liberals destroyed poor families in the 1960s – YOU destroyed poor families starting in the 1960s. So yes! You should feel guilty.

          11. Jim Cook says:

            Joe,

            You clearly haven’t read the research articles. The research I have cited is not based around a methodology that involves sampling. It’s also meaningless in research methodology to say that you’ve skewed populations with “skewed” used as a verb as you use it here. Finally, the research methodology used in the research I’ve cited is not polling. Try reading the research, understanding what it does, and saying something germane. I’m not saying this to be a meanie, but you’re really not engaging with the substance here.

          12. frank says:

            Why do you waste time trying to convince, with reasonable arguments, a liberal. For them it is all “i am right” and “you are wrong”..no matter the evidence! Just like in “hands up don’t shoot” or “keep your doctor if you like your doctor”..or “institutionalized racism”. You have to believe ifvthey say it! Just like you ought to believe the Gospel if you’re Christian..or the Quran if you’re Muslim. Liberalism is a faith, doesn’t presuppose reason.

          13. Jim Cook says:

            Hilarious, Frank.

          14. frank says:

            Clownish Jim!

  4. Tom says:

    There’s racism on both sides (of course), but in the larger social context it’s impossible to assert that it isn’t disproportionately a burden for blacks and other minorities. Incarceration numbers, poverty, educational opportunities, pay, and other statistics illustrate this. Of course there’s black racism as a reaction to their long history of involvement with white folks. Ask the Native Americans, the Maori and other cultures how they’ve been treated and the pattern repeats. It’s not just here.

    i agree with some of what Frank says too (awful policies like ‘affirmative action’ e.g.), but it’s not an argument that can be won by looking at these “recent” attempts to correct the severe disadvantages blacks (and others, who aren’t being addressed) have suffered since even before the founding of the country.

    Not that any of this matters any more – the human race is going extinct before mid-century due to loss of habitat that sustains us.

    1. frank says:

      Total nonsense. You talk about “larger social context” and name some like: incarceration rate, educational opportunities etc. Here are the facts:
      1) incarceration: very simple. You commit a crime, you go to jail or prison. Period. Are we going to excuse people based on skin color now? THAT is racist!. Tge myth of excessive bkack incarceration rates? Duh.. They commit more crimes!!! Look at the stats.. Will you? Harsher sentences thsn whites? Bull.. Liberals and black activists (agitators) keep repeating that over and over like was Gospel, without being able to provide one single case, real case. If you can.. I am here. They do it without taking in account recidivism and past criminal history. Like i said.. Bullshit!!
      2) Educational opportunities. Super bull. Billions of dollars have been spent on poor neighborhoods for schools and social programs. They just fail, all of them, and how’s that my fault? Latest example.. Baltimore where 1.8 billion dollars have been dumped into this dump.. and we have seen the results: minorities still underperform in schools, and crime is rampant. There is no lack of opportunities but lack of a culture that uses them. Facts not words.
      3) pay? Prove it. Cases. Just another myth.. Like women get paid less than men for the same job. Words.. No evidence. Give me a case comparison.. Same degree, same years of experiencee, same quality of education etc. Until you can prove it.. Just bull!
      Then you talk about “severe disadvantages”. If you are referring to the past, few decades ago, agree. The last 20/30 absolutely disagree. The government, local and state, and educational institutions have plenty of programs and perks for minorities to the limits of constitutionality and equality … Super bull.
      Anything else?

    2. Joe says:

      Really? “…larger social context it’s impossible to assert that it isn’t disproportionately a burden for blacks and other minorities…” Prove it. Straw man arguments do not work, because they are fact-less. “Oh, i have no empirical evidence, but i FEEL that minorities are disproportionately burdened” Feelings are NOT facts. If you feel so guilty, there are plenty of programs to which you can volunteer and provide lots of money to help you coop with your feelings. BTW. Asians, Pakistanis, Indians, minorities seem to be doing very well from my optic – as well as blacks – PRESIDENT obama, Oprah winfrey, sports figures… high level private sector leaders. I have worked for them. They are paid much more then me… drive really nice cars.. live in really nice homes.. much better than this “privileged white”. I do not believe in envy. I am happy these minorities are doing great, and I strive to be like them.

      This country is the smartest, most educated generation in history, yet they have no discernment or critical thinking skills.

    3. thedogfacedboy says:

      “…Not that any of this matters any more – the human race is going extinct before mid-century due to loss of habitat that sustains us….”

      This is quite a relief. I was worried about the long-term debt we were leaving our grandchildren with, but now I am not worried; we will all be gone by mid-century.

      to paraphrase: I’m gonna party like it’s 2049!

  5. frank says:

    Let me briefly pointing to you, before reading this bs, that what probably i will NOT FIND in any of these “studies” is the race of the person responding or selecting the candidates. That per se destroys your “white privilege” assertion even though might show biases in choices. But without knowing who makes the choices… But I’ll make you happy and read them anyways.

  6. ella says:

    First, this is without reading what has already been said. I will read it but… This example is concerning the oldest complaint, the jobs market.
    1. Since it began, many businesses have been taken over or started by people of African descent. Has anyone checked to see how many’white’ people are hired by ‘black’ people?
    2. How many prospective employers made background checks before calling a prospective employee? False applications usually are rejected when discovered. It is possible that employers checked sporadically, leaning more heavily on ‘black sounding names’ than other races, thereby rejecting more found false on a racial basis.
    3. Is there a single community in the United States that allows ‘white’ people to refuse land ownership or rental to ‘black’ people?
    4. Tuskegee, Alabama is a totally owned and operated, incorporated city of nothing but ‘blacks’ as ordered by the Federal Government. All businesses and government positions are ‘black’, by demand of ‘blacks’ that they could have communities without having to run out white people. Which they did in Tuskegee.
    5. It is natural for people of different races and cultural backgrounds to prefer being around people of the same culture.
    6. The United States government entered into an experiment to force both ‘blacks’ and ‘whites’ into an ‘integrated’ culture. It is one thing to allow people the right to live as they chose, that is allow people of either race to live and worship, to be educated and inter-marry, to integrate cultures, and another to force it.
    7. Basically ‘blacks’ do not want to live with ‘whites’, some do want to integrate and do. ‘White’ people feel the same way.
    8. The Federal Government forced employers to hire people that were not qualified, educated, or even interested in being educated, to do the job. This was very common in the South. “Black people were as bored with doing nothing for money as the employers were upset at having to hire double to get the job done.

    Time changed, and education improved the desire to learn, and jobs began to mean something. The government continued to feed, house, and clothe those who did not have jobs and in many cases those who do, now of any race. It was too late to save some businesses and now there is a cycle of small businesses trying to start up and failing because they hire people who want a pay check for ‘as long as it lasts’. Big business is all that can survive these loses and categorized monopolies are coming back.

    Who is more racist? The one who believes if you are ‘white’ “You owe me!” and wants to live in their own neighborhood and keep their own law. Or the one who has become leery of the other one, the one they felt sorry for over a period of years. The one who gave away the barn to help the ‘others’ get educated and employed – at their own expense? Ever think about the people who had to train someone else, just because they were of another race and/or nationality, to take a job they were doing well and had been for years?

    A lot has been asked of and given by the ‘white’ community to the ‘black’ community. Have you heard any ‘blacks’ talking about what they can do for the ‘white’ community? Other than loot and burn to get what they want right now – because the ‘white’ community “…owes us.” Seek a reason and then a solution.

    1. frank says:

      Well said. Hope this Cook dude reads and learns something…

      1. Joe says:

        He will not. I have met people like him. They ignore facts, look for poorly run studies that fit their beliefs, use straw-man arguments to make their points, and try to guilt people into accepting their points. They are to most intolerant, tolerant people I have ever met. They are bigots and racists to the highest order. They truly believe that “the masses” (nancy pelosi term) cannot take care of themselves, so they need progressives telling them what to do. They want to raise taxes on the “rich” (something I am not), yet the “rich” are always defined as those that make more then they do. Their politicians believe that they OWN all American’s labor, and are gracious to let us have some of the fruits of our labor. Listen to them when they speak… They push their failure policies in other neighborhoods or on other people, but when those failed polices migrate near their neighborhoods or to them (taxes, restrictions), they move to a conservative state and start over – example: progressives have destroyed California, so they move to Colorado and push the same policies that destroyed California. They are a cancer to societies. Look at California, Detriot, Chicago, New Orleans, Baltimore, Washington DC, to name a few. They are parasites that suck the life out of societies, by forcing their failed policies on them. Then the parasites move to another society and destroy it. They live on envy of people that have what they do not have. They live off victimism. They push diversity, but live in gated communities, isolated from “the masses” They demand “the masses” lower their “carbon footprint”, but fly everywhere in private jets, and live in mansions that uses more electricity than the average person living in Tennessee uses in a year. They do not pay their taxes. Hide their money in overseas accounts, and profit from breeding envy and violence of one group against another. They want “the masses” to live in small 400 sq foot apartments in the city, while they by up hundreds of acres of land outside the city. They state that people that want to keep the wages of their labor greedy, while claiming those that want to forcible take that same person’s labor not greedy. They promote and ultimately cripple troubled humans, by allowing them to change their sex simply by getting some surgery and taking some hormones, or claim that they are black and not white. All the time, FACTS state that the person has a “XY” or “XX” chromosome, or has the physical characteristics of a white, but claims they are black

        1. Joe says:

          typo – typing too fast. ingorning some typing errors.. context error

          live in mansions that uses more electricity IN ONE MONTH than the average person living in Tennessee uses in a year. — al Gore

          All these examples can be referenced to people like Al Gore, Nancy Pelois, harry Reed, Mayor Bloomberg, Ted Kennedy, the Clintons, Tim Gietner, Gruber, Charlie Wrangle, Obama, Sharpton, Jackson, etc.

        2. Jim Cook says:

          Your words speak volumes, Joe.

          I’ll point out one claim of yours: that places with progressive policies are wrecked by them. Given your equation of progressive with Democratic party politician in your comments, that’s a really easy claim to test. And guess what: your claim turns out to be false. See here: http://irregulartimes.com/2015/01/15/republican-districts-democratic-districts-how-are-they-different-how-are-they-not/ .

          1. frank says:

            More nonsense after the “study” or “studies” which, allegedly, prove white privilege and instead are very flawed. On the matter ot this furthervstudy on Congressional districts, which i won’t waste my tine on, i have one simple question: point out to me just one conservative run city that turned into a shit hole like Detroit …or Chicago…or Atlanta..or Memphis…or St. Louis..or New Orleans..or Camden…or Newark…or Baltimore..or Los Angeles…and on on. Democrat run and for decades.

          2. Jim Cook says:

            Lovely, just what I’ve learned to expect. You’ve issued another empirical challenge: find just one city run by a Republican that is a “shithole.” That is literally what you just asked for. I’ll post on that later today…

            … And then you’ll head over there to proclaim that I just can’t live up to your standards. You are a precious jewel, Frank. Smooches.

          3. frank says:

            ..and you’ll lose this one too. Smooches back baby!

          4. Joe says:

            Interesting study. I have not dug into how they did the study yet, or the margin of error. What is also interesting is when the author did not see a major difference in the 4 criteria, they found two that indicates that GOP has less diversity and immigrants. This actually makes sense, given immigrants do not enter the country via “fly over country” areas, but enter the country via the southern border and port cities – run by democrats – such as baltimore, new york, la and san francisco.

            I would like to see a legitimate study on what counties have the highest crime rates; the most people participating in the welfare state; the most government corruption; number of citizens leaving the state — all normalized of course

  7. ella says:

    Still Cook did do some research to find this piece of attempted influence pedaling that someone else called research. It looks like either a student or lawyer who was looking to make waves back in the day when the gig was getting sympathy from the ‘whites’ so they could collect even more money, real estate, and power.

    1. frank says:

      the most stupid “research” liberal style. On top of that, all these Companies that received these “resumes”, did receive ONLY those resumes? What about OTHER resumes, real ones, sent by real people? How did they know how many resumes each Company received during the week? Isn’t possible that 10 bogus resumes sent to a Company were piled up into 100’s more resumes? Isn’t possible that in those 100 resumes…70 were by white applicants and the rest other races, which explains the difference in percentages of responses? What about other races? Hispanics and Asians? Companies receive hundreds of resumes every day.
      Totally useless and flawed “studies”.

      1. Jim Cook says:

        Why don’t you read the methods sections of those papers to find the answers to some of those questions?

        1. frank says:

          Because there is no answer to those questions!!!

          1. Jim Cook says:

            Frank, there are answers to those questions in the published, peer-reviewed articles. Understanding the answers may require you to have some understanding of experimental method. For instance, none of what you say in your 1:36 pm article explains why otherwise-equivalent resumes with only racialized-name differences would receive a statistically significantly different response. Since a fair amount of this work is behavioral economics, try reading Daniel Friedman’s Experimental Methods: A Primer for Economists to get some background: http://www.amazon.com/Experimental-Methods-A-Primer-Economists/dp/0521456827 .

          2. frank says:

            Look, doesn’t take a genius to understand that these “audits” are not perfect and have flaws. The big flaw of these audits is the fact that the counterpart doesn’t know about being audited! That means we don’t know who’s behind the HR office door that reads or not resumes!! We don’t know the race of the HR person, so you CANNOT assume that automatically he/she/ is white!!! More, most HR department use applicant-tracking system that scans resumes for key words and since every resume is different, you don’t know how that particular resumes has been chosen. Also, once again, we don’t know who these companies are and even if we knew how do they fucking know how many resumes they receive every week? The few bogus resumes are mixed up with the total of he ones that particular business receives and we can make the accurate assumption that most of the resumes are from white applicants, some from hispanic, some from African Americans, but not in the same numbers!! Therefore if you have 1000 resumes (including 10 bogus gets mixed up) of which, 60% are red, 15% are blue, 20% are yellow and the rest others what is wrong with the 60% getting more responses? Please spare me your college and academic BS. It’s the MAster degrees and College graduates that are fucking up our Nation up in Washington DC. A waste of money and school time!

          3. Jim Cook says:

            Also read Pager and Western’s review of the audit study/field experimental approach: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3807133/ .

    2. Jim Cook says:

      Ella, could you please critique these multiple points of research specifically? The method of an audit study is recognized broadly and is compatible with experimental method. If you read the research you will see your characterization of date and profession are off.

  8. ella says:

    Jim, this type of research is considered legitimate. After reading some of the articles given, I still find that they are loaded, predetermined outcomes planned.
    1. One of the studies appears to have sent an equal number of each types (negative and positive response expected) applications, but then sent 3 instead of 4 groups. Do you see what I mean?
    2. But I readily admit the date and profession stamp I give it is a continuing subject not a thing of the past. And there is discrimination against poor, violent, ignorant people of all races.
    3. The problem of education integration of the 60’s and 70’s though is a reverse situation now and it is in hiring. The research is allowing the prospective employer to actually make a choice of which he/she would hire to compliment the given work environment without seeing the person. 4. 4. Granted, by taking raw numbers of persons who have entered prison and equating them to an inmate population – so many black to so many white – an apparent imbalance can be derived.

    I cannot flaw the innocent(or not) thought behind this type of research. It is no doubt accurate. You would not have bothered with it if it had not been. My contention is that, although statistics can make an outcome that reflects a factual circumstance, they do not frame the entire circumstance. You have found experiments that prove statistically the appearance of discrimination based on race. I challenge the findings based on incomplete evidence.

    1. frank says:

      ..waste of time trying to explain that. Discrimination does exist and always will but certainly we are making progress in trying to be a more just society. But apparently, according to the Jim Cooks of the world, whites only have the prerogative of discriminating and oppressing!! Unfortunately, the reality out there doesn’t show so. “whites” are the only one group that has constantly been making progresses in every damn field and IS tsill being asked MORE. The other can fail, but its “whites” that bear the fault for it! What a bunch of bS.

      1. ella says:

        Now you are talking about reality situations in society. Racial discrimination among ‘blacks’ is rampant. They play on the ignorance and good nature/giving nature of ‘whites’ in general. That has worn thin, as is evidenced by your comments. But that is becoming obvious throughout society. “White” people are tired of giving to people who then accuse them of not giving enough. Especially when the ‘givers’ are living with much less than those who are given to. The ‘poor’ ‘black’ children go to school in shoes that cost more than their ‘white’ counterparts entire outfits, in many cases. It is getting to the point that parents as well as children are beginning to resent the implications that ‘whites’ living today are to blame for the slavery of Africans that were brought to the US well over 150 years ago. It is also difficult to swallow, that when ‘blacks’ ask for ‘white’ assistance in the law, they turn around with violence and theft to complain when they get it. And not only that, but the people in authority say ‘blacks’ have the right to destroy ‘white’ businesses and steal everything in them. That has gotten to be a habit. No group of ‘whites’ would be allowed that for of civil disobedience. Reverse racial discrimination is rampant today and those who have gained so much off the generosity of ‘whites’, and are complaining still, will continue to do so. It has always paid for them. The word discriminate is a very useful word. It is something we should all strive to utilize. A race used it to turn a good practice, a good word into a ‘dirty’ word for their own purposes. They did have legitimate complaints, but they want, and I stress want, for their entire race to have everything given to them and everyone else to lay down at their feet. That is jungle law. Pull the wool over ‘white’ eyes, degrade them (whites), weaken them ‘whites’, push them ‘whites’ aside. Discrimination. Someone always wants to start a fight and there is always someone to oblige them. “Whites’ came to the ‘Americas’ and displaced many nations to take it over and they were mostly peaceful until pushed hard enough.

        1. frank says:

          Love this girl!

      2. Jim Cook says:

        Look up “straw man,” Frank. I hope that someday you reverse your decision to not bother reading all the studies before passing judgement.

        1. frank says:

          …the studies that want to prove discrimination..will “find” discrimination, no matter what. Read the nice piece that Ella wrote. If this BS will continue there will be consequences. People have a breaking point. The Roman Empire fell for the excessive stupidity of Government, expansion, and extension of citizenship to Barbarians. Rome fell under that pressure. In 2015, the age of internet, airplanes..America will fall faster thanks to insane progressive policies. Unfortunately we have a short life span, so we/I won’t be able to see the next civil war. Cloward-Piven strategy is in progress…..

  9. ella says:

    (Just call me Dorothy) I think what is being called discrimination here is really animosity. Both sides believe they are justified. Right now one side feels like it has won a war of political conquest. If we really delve into who benefits most from the discrimination agenda, it once again is the few. At the root of any sustained political issue, there is a larger motive.
    But the subject is the presence of academic studies that illustrate a form of bias/discrimination based on race, not one specific race. That in itself is, to me, an unfortunate form of ‘discrimination’ (based on race). Still, the one study found and illustrates the natural tendency of employers, who have a natural desire to hire who they want to with their own money, to be discriminate in the their hiring practices. I find no fault with that, other than no personal contact was made with the rejected persons. But again, that was not possible, they were fake. Is there any follow up with the prospective employers to justify why those applicants were rejected? The 2015 study is interesting and more realistic, in my opinion. Craigslist is notorious for having people that scam, trick and otherwise are not sincere, place ads. Again, though it exists, the root causes of mistrust and greed and power mongering are not going away.

    frank, time will tell what happens next. People have a way of leveling the grounds when they tip too far. Not all people are alike, but some are more organized, as a whole. The few are standing on all sides of issues that are and are not apparent. Finding research that illustrates NO discrimination would be an amazing thing! I wouldn’t trust that at all. Not until… I’ll let you fill in the blanks.
    1. Here is an example of the law at work against racial discrimination: http://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/HUD?src=/program_offices/fair_housing_equal_opp/14race (notice the collage of faces represent different races)

    1. frank says:

      Agree on everything you said. Dorothy. Studies that are aimed to “to find” something..will find it, like you said, we don’t know what employer was doing by his side, once the resumes were received. It’s 50% of the whole issue! I’ll look at the link uou provided, but being a government organization…you know what they think about this “discrimination” . it’s a business to them. Lawyers and “civil rights ” organizations make a living out of it.

  10. ella says:

    By the way, Jim Cook, here is a site that, if you want to read it, will give you a lot of information on this subject and possibly some interesting studies. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racism_in_the_United_States
    You have made it to a search engine again.

  11. thedogfacedboy says:

    I’ll point out that in the list of articles above, 50% are at least six to twelve years old.

    Twelve years ago is pretty darn long for quoting as a relevant social study. You know that.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Psst... what kind of person doesn't support pacifism?

Fight the Republican beast!