First... What is my "theory"...? Second, point to the cherries I picked and make sure you didn't overlook things do the same thing. It would be easy to show how you have, so you know I'm considering the source on this one.


That's a different statement from what you tried to say. You said AA IS RACE-BASED and tried to argue that it wasn't BASED ON ALL THE ABOVE CONSIDERATIONS. In fact, you said all those factors/considerations DON'T MATTER:

What is the basis of AA? It does not matter if white women benefit or black people benefit or white men benefit or Asian people benefit. The concept is BASED on RACE.

Now, if you didn't know, now you... KNOW HOW I DO.

On the question of: What is the basis of AA?

Rodog answers: The concept is BASED on RACE. It does not matter if white women benefit or black people benefit or white men benefit or Asian people benefit.

Rodog changes his mind then says: AA is based on the application of race and gender and other factors

SO WHICH ONE IS IT, RODOG? Is AA based on race? Or is it based on race AND gender AND other factors? WHICH ONE IS IT?

You wanted to argue. You wanted to differ. You wanted to disagree with me saying: AA is BASED on all those things and not any one particular criteria. Then that's when you closed fist and punched yourself hard in the face.

Trying to be cute, you messed around and got POSTERIZED (I told you I SLAM DUNK!):

Can a tv show not be based on drama and comedy? Dramedy?
Sure. But a TV show with both drama and comedy as PRINCIPAL components is noted as such, whether it's called a "dramedy" or not. TV shows can also be based on one or the other. It would be inaccurate to say that a Drama - Comedy film is "based" on Comedy when it is based on and categorized as BOTH.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Categor...dy-drama_films


Now >>> WHAT DID I MISCONSTRUE? The Wiki reference is right there for you to view. Comedy-Dramas are indeed CATEGORIZED as I said and are named and said to be BASED on not one but BOTH (all) component parts, not one or the other.

So your assertion (The concept is BASED on RACE) is counter to the reality and the analogies you tried to put up to 'block' what I said.

You just got POSTERIZED!!!



How come it doesn't? The idea of a RACE being discriminated against conveys the idea that said RACE is being EXCLUDED. That's what race-based discrimination is. (See Slavery & Jim Crow)

Whites via WHITE WOMEN (described/said to be the main beneficiaries of AA) by definition DISPROVE the claim, especially given how much they have benefitted.



There has to be a RACE that's EXCLUDED for it to accurately be described and proven to be


Ha! Ha!

Double... Ha! Ha!!

And this from someone who wanted to mention INFLAMMATORY comments.


You mentioned "breakdown".... TELLING!

Now, I was wondering.... I was wondering if someone gave this speech to Colin Powell. Now that would be nice. That would show the sure lunacy of the LOGICAL FALLACY of trying to associate a position someone takes on a social/political issue, conveniently, with some motive-failing the person has. Anything to make people who don't have the skills to sustain debate and present sound arguments feel good, I guess.

I also guess that, at some point, Colin Powell needed to GET OFF HIS ASS and denounce his support for AA. There was no way he could be SOS and support AA. People who support AA (or, in this case, people who argue that there is no substantive argument against AA), do so, because they don't want to work, according to RODOG and other assorted posters.




Thanks, RODOG. Thanks for openly admitting defeat.


*