http://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2007/09/what-ahmadinaja.html

It was quite a performance. If this were a presidential debate, I would judge him the winner based on rhetorical skill and coolness under fire.

It is a totalitarian ideology. It peppers our universities and colleges with “victims” and has managed to create social constructs and turned them into degree conferring legitimacy. This is where truth is suppressed since the realities that are under consideration contradict the reality of history. Political Correctness is living the life of a lie. Thus this ideology is creating a totalitarian state.

Thus with admissions and other administrative areas, affirmative action is an exercise in the system of expropriation. It is theft. The methods used are deconstructionist in that they remove all meaning and insert desired meanings.

Affirmative action is part of an official state ideology enforced against the people. This is terrorism. The terrorism of Political Correctness. It seeks to destroy freedom and culture.

Perhaps I was unclear. When I said “you have the choice to ignore it” I meant that to explicitly exclude you workplace or educational institution where you do not have that choice. The first sentence of the paragraph refers to workplace/educational institution where you can be held accountable. I think we are in agreement on what is/is not protected speech. Workplace actions are different.

Elliot

I said “generally”. Single incident cases do exist as I understand it, but there is a requirement that said incident has to be extraordinarily “severe”. In the cases I’ve seen, such incidents often involve physical contact.

Quid pro quo harrassment is a different case, however, I believe.

Sorry, Elliott, I think you make some good points, but you’re quite wrong on the law - derogatory or offensive speech is clearly sufficient to create an illegally hostile work environment.

And Aaron, it is also not correct that a single instance is insufficient. I’m sure you can imagine examples of single instances of derogatory or offensive “expression” (remember, this is not limited to speech, and includes forms such as cartoons, signs, photos, etc.) so odious as to permanently handicap an employee’s work performance or intimidate him/her, which would meet legal criteria for a hostile work environment.

Elliot

Now who is insulting the intelligence of blacks. If the overwhelming majority (approx 90%) support Democrats are they simply stupid not to see what a land of opportunity the GOP will afford them.

Elliot

That’s a bit like saying that from a social perspective, Barny Frank is a woman. So what?

Your statement is irrelevant to the point: anti-Black racism is negligible in the Republican party. This is in contradistinction to the Left, where Blacks, women, and members of other historically oppressed groups are herded like children into metaphorical reservations, where well-meaning liberals guard them even from potentially offensive speech by, for example, dis-inviting Larry.

Count Iblis,

Only by idiots.