NAACP Prez: No more 'victim-like thinking'

vraiblonde

Board Mommy
PREMO Member
Patron
Can someone explain what's so important about the Voting Rights Act? I mean, if it's not reauthorized or whatever, are blacks going to really no longer have the right to vote?

How does that work?
 
B

Bruzilla

Guest
I think his comments were best summed up in the line ""Voting is choosing how we live and who we elect to help us," he said." That shows that the NAACP still has the Us Vs Them mentality that's doing nothing but spreading the racial divide, thus keeping them gainfully employed.
 

Coaster

New Member
harleygirl said:
I wonder what Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton have to say about this? I can picture them now...... :lalala:

I'm reading a book about Jesse Jackhole er..... Jackson, it's called "Shakedown", very interesting.
 

vraiblonde

Board Mommy
PREMO Member
Patron
vraiblonde said:
Can someone explain what's so important about the Voting Rights Act? I mean, if it's not reauthorized or whatever, are blacks going to really no longer have the right to vote?

How does that work?
Okay, you slackers forced me to look it up myself. :mad:

They're lucky I'm not the one who makes the voting requirements because you would not only have to pass a literacy test, but it would be in English exclusively.

Then there would be my basic civics test, so you could prove you were knowledgeable enough about the issues to cast a vote that affects the rest of us.

Welfare recipients wouldn't be allowed to vote.

Convicted felons wouldn't be allowed to vote.

And saying that this would only affect blacks is racist horsecrap - the NAACP should be ashamed of itself.
 

Coaster

New Member
vraiblonde said:
Welfare recipients wouldn't be allowed to vote.

Convicted felons wouldn't be allowed to vote.

And saying that this would only affect blacks is racist horsecrap - the NAACP should be ashamed of itself.

I thought once convicted of a felony, you lose the right to vote.
English test? Good luck.
 

hvp05

Methodically disorganized
Sorry to change topic, but...

I am going to address another aspect of Gordon's speech. There was an article in today's Times stating that he wants blacks to "avoid" Target, among other retailers, because the company has refused to answer a survey about their financial and employment inclusion of blacks.

I could not find the article on the Times site (I only did a quick search), but the NAACP posted its own article.
After a decade of tracking and observing how some of the nation's largest companies and industries treat consumers of color, the NAACP reports that while positive change is occurring, companies across all industries need to commit to continuous improvements in order to break through to the next level of performance. ... Sears Holdings Corp., Dillard’s Inc., Kohl’s Department Stores and Target all earned Fs by refusing to respond to the survey.

I was interested in this not just to learn what the NAACP is talking about, but also as a Target employee.

The Waldorf store has 8 E-TLs (managers) and 15 TLs (sub-managers). Of the 8 top-level managers, 5 are black, 2 are white and 1 Middle Eastern. Of the next group, 6 are black and 9 are white. From what I've heard about other stores, this is not uncommon.

Target claims it gives over $2 million a week to community charities, and it's not BS. Donations are based mostly on need, and, although diversity is important, there is no quota.

I think it is ridiculous for the NAACP to request its members avoid any retailer just because the company does not employ X number of black executives. Simply because black executives are present does not necessarily indicate "fairness". The proof - to the positive or negative - should be in a company's actions.

I am hardly writing this as a Target Cheerleader, but I do commend them for refusing to respond to the NAACP's survey... because it should be obvious that the company works with everyone's best welfare in mind. Not one side or the other, not quotas, etc. Apparently, that kind of level-headed thinking goes right over the NAACP's head.
 

MMDad

Lem Putt
hvp05 said:
I think it is ridiculous for the NAACP to request its members avoid any retailer just because the company does not employ X number of black executives. Simply because black executives are present does not necessarily indicate "fairness". The proof - to the positive or negative - should be in a company's actions.
The way I heard it is that Target's stance is that diversity is not a black issue, it is about including everyone. For them to respond to the NAACP would single out their policy on blacks, not their diversity polocies for all.

The NAACP boycott has nothing to do with Target's policies or anything, they just refused to fill out the stupid survey.
 
Top