washington is 3.2%. seattle about 8%

Catholic?

Naw...even Jesse Jackson will cop to doing that. He once said something to the effect of that the saddest moment in his life was when he heard a pack of youths coming up behind him, looked over his shoulder and was relieved to see that they were white.

Good ol' CUA, indeed.

I agree with this 100%. If you switch out "black" for "poor" in Bennett's phrase, the crime drop is going to be even that much more effective (though probably not as immediate as Bennett suggests; infants don't get into too much lawbreaking). It just so happens that the black population as a whole is proportionately poorer than whites. Is that a result of centuries of racism? Probably. I'm guessing that's the case for most minorities though Asians might be an exception. Race is only involved here because it's somewhat correlated to class, which is the main driver for crime and, to lesser degree, educational performance. Bennett's racism is obvious because he chose to use the word "black" in the first place.

[/thread]

Reagan was known to bring kooky people into his administration on a constant basis, and H. W. Bush had Nazis working for him during his campaign, so I'm not too surprised by Bennett's comments.

Racism will always be there. I disagree with whoever said the Freakonomics author was a racist and lacking of moral will. That whole chapter on the crime rate dropping in correlation wioth black mothers aborting their unborn children, was a hypothetical scenario and didn't just apply to poor inner city black people. It applied to any person of any race who is of lower class and can't afford to bring up their children in a home environment where they themselves know their child will ultimately succumb to inner city life:gangs, drugs, a life of crime. The media's representation of the poor always seems to be focussed on black people, and in a negative connotation, and that's largely a fabrication of the truth. The crux of the matter is that black people are seen as scapegoats for the record crime rates in the 70's and 80's, largely because they became impoverished from racism and opression for so many years. Poor black people are also posterchilds of the War on Drygs. That is also very much unfair. It's the underlying circumstances that made a predominant portion of poor black people in urban areas prone to hard drug addiction:racial barriers, racism, discrimination, no higher job oppurtunities, and so forth.
And I don't really see the government doing anything to get them out of that situation.

I don't think I've ever been to the campus, but I know that sign off Rhode Island Avenue that tells you where to turn, and it just seems like a trick to get your ass mugged, raped, carjacked or all three.

Rhode Island Avenue near the red line metro stop wasn't a great neighborhood ten years ago. The CUA/Brookland Metro stop is one stop north of Rhode Island Ave, so you've been in close proximiity to the school.

Catholic has a nice campus, actually--I never had any issues on the school grounds itself (lots of panic phones and campus police around). But a couple blocks off campus....things could get hairy.

JD, I think the Senator was actually accusing William Bennett of being racist and using the Freakonomics study to substantiate his beliefs. I agree the Freakonomics results are class/education based.

that was only because he liked their fashion sense.

plus he wanted the trains to run on time :rimshot:

i was listening to a conservative radio show today, and they were freaking out at the liberal media not giving the whole story here, and not playing the whole interview.

then they played the whole interview and he sounds even MORE racist.

the discussion began as an anti-abortion discussion, and the questioner was trying to prove that if there were no abortions ever then the economy would be better, then Bennet agrees that the freakanomnics is inaccurate and flawed and abortions were not good for the economy BUT if you were to abort black babies, then that would improve the economy.

i'm not sure how pointing out racism is a liberal spin.

All I can say is thank god for morons in the republican party who assure the democrats of the vast majority of black votes by saying stupid crap like this. With idiots like that sticking their foot in their mouth for republicans, its simply amazing that democrats can't win any elections.

On a related note to this thread, it really is a shame that the vast majority of people buy this black vs white thing when it really should be classwarfare rather than racial. If people ever woke up to the idea of fighting not just against whitey, but against those who actually pull the strings, as opposed to your average white guy who has no more power than your average black guy, power would be much less concentrated in the hands of a few rich old men and it would be much less possible to keep running the country in ways which benefit a slim slice of the population at the expense of everyone else.

This is all I have to say:
Taft-Hartley Act

Probably the single most powerful weapon the upper class has used against the poor and the middle class in the last century. Poor people, black and white, are going nowhere until that thing is dismantled. I wouldn't be surprised of Sam Walton read the Act to his children every night before bed.

while i agree that clacism is far more prevelant then racism, racism sure as hell still exists and is in full effect.

So, you are suggesting that poor people can't acquire wealth because of closed shops and right-to-work laws? Are you high?

There are more miliion- and billionaires in this country then ever----a lot of them self made and I'd guarantee that 95% of the self made millionares did so with out having ever joined a union.

Pull yourself up. Stop complaining.

Unions have been obsolete in this country for at least 50 years. They perpetuate cronieism and laziness. Blech.

Your parents/family must have been stealing money from the automobile industry or some other dipshit unionized business.

The only worse than unions are farm subsidies.

farm subsidies are the reason we are all fat.
you can't buy anything in this country without corn hiding somewhere on the ingredient list, all made with government freebies.

I remember those days. We were ambushed once leaving the Brookland/CUA station, but broke through their circle and ran off to safe harbour at Kitty O'Shea's.

I drove through there a few years ago and noticed that area has gentrified quite a bit. Well, except for that Rhode Is. Ave area.

I was waiting to see how long it would be before Bennett would bring up Swift's A Modest Proposal. Not too long-Hannity & Colmes yesterday

Steve

what is it?

You are missing the point entirely. Not everyone is really all that interested in "aquiring wealth" and becomming a millionaire or billionaire. Sure, the money would be nice. But, for many, many working people across the country, just being able to put in your 40 hours and be compensated enough to live comfortably and be secure in your job's future is enough...and is nothing so extravagant that a country with the wealth and resources of the United States shouldn't be able to practically guarentee.

Those who control the means of wealth have the advantages in most all regards except in numbers. Unions allow those masses of the country who outnumber the small number of those in control and strike back in the only way they can, which is to deny cheap, expendable labor to those who would use such to simply accumulate more and more wealth at the expense of common citizens.

I'm not missing shit. You are basically calling for the government to legislate how people can run their businesses. And that sir, is communism.

These battles have been fought, man.

Listen, I'm sorry that Wal-Mart treats their employees like shit, but if Wal Mart didnt exist----where would those people work? Certainly not at the small businesses that Wal Mar has displaced in these communities. Joe's Hardware and Suzie's Sewing dont employee large numbers of people. Industry in this country has moved overseas. No, those people would be on welfare.

If you want more in this country, work harder or move somewhere else and then work harder. Its what immigrants have been doing for 250 years and its what immigrants are doing now. Second generation latinos are acquiring wealth at an unprecedented rate because they were willing to work there asses off at SHIT jobs whent they were first generation and now they are moving into business ownership and higher levels of income and employment. And all without complaining about handouts or needing to unionize. Cazart!

I'm just a lot more concerned about the daily lives of the 99% of people in this country who are not millionaires.

And, I have absolutely NO problem with government regulating businesses. If you'd rather deregulate everything and go back to child labor and sweatshops, mass iliteracy and families of 8 living out of a one room apartment so that business owners can pay what they want and set whatever conditions they like, I'm not so sure you're in the majority there. And, if you don't think that big nusiness in American would go that far if the shackles were taken off them, I think you are sadly mistaken as their exploitation of workers in underdeveloped countries proves. They just do it further from homw now to help deflect the bad press.

Government will always regulate businesses to protect the population. It is only a question of how much they regulate and what exactly the laws are.