In response to:

Liberalism Versus Blacks

cjrian Wrote: Jan 15, 2013 1:35 AM
When Liberal policies (antics) fail, they claim that it was insufficient, wrongly implemented, or sabotaged. It never occurs to them that their basic premise was incorrect. Affirmative action, for example, shortchanges those denied (jobs, school admisssion, etc), to put the unprepared into an environment the "beneficiaries" are likely to fail (at great expense to them), and shortchanges the funders/customers. But the claim is that given enough time (as if 40 years were insufficient) or a greater emphasis on AA, that AA WILL succeed. It never occurs to AA proponents that preparing the underprivileged to succeed withOUT AA would be more effective over the long haul.
Larry in Texas Wrote: Jan 15, 2013 11:09 AM
See my previous post on Rules For Radicals. The answer is there.
There is no question that liberals do an impressive job of expressing concern for blacks. But do the intentions expressed in their words match the actual consequences of their deeds?

San Francisco is a classic example of a city unexcelled in its liberalism. But the black population of San Francisco today is less than half of what it was back in 1970, even though the city's total population has grown.

Severe restrictions on building housing in San Francisco have driven rents and home prices so high that blacks and other people with low or moderate incomes have been driven out of the city....