About us Login Get email updates
Research
Print

Conservative media campaign to thwart Census from gathering race data needed to enforce laws

March 17, 2010 1:02 pm ET — 150 Comments

In a blog post, Center for Immigration Studies executive director Mark Krikorian advised respondents to the 2010 Census to avoid disclosing their ethnicity by selecting "[s]ome other race" and writing in "American." Other conservative bloggers and radio hosts have followed suit, mounting a campaign to thwart the Census' efforts to gather information on the topic, which the Census says is needed to enforce federal laws.

Please upgrade your flash player. The video for this item requires a newer version of Flash Player. If you are unable to install flash you can download a QuickTime version of the video.

EMBED

Krikorian encourages people to "[p]ass it on"; other bloggers comply

Krikorian pushes "a way for ordinary citizens to express their rejection of unconstitutional racial classification schemes." From Krikorian's March 8 post on National Review Online's The Corner:

[U]ntil we succeed in building the needed wall of separation between race and state, I have a proposal. Question 9 on the census form asks "What is Person 1's race?" (and so on, for other members of the household). My initial impulse was simply to misidentify my race so as to throw a monkey wrench into the statistics; I had fun doing this on the personal-information form my college required every semester, where I was a Puerto Rican Muslim one semester, and a Samoan Buddhist the next. But lying in this constitutionally mandated process is wrong. Really -- don't do it.

Instead, we should answer Question 9 by checking the last option -- "Some other race" -- and writing in "American." It's a truthful answer but at the same time is a way for ordinary citizens to express their rejection of unconstitutional racial classification schemes. In fact, "American" was the plurality ancestry selection for respondents to the 2000 census in four states and several hundred counties.

So remember: Question 9 -- "Some other race" -- "American". Pass it on.

Malkin: "Ditto that!" In a March 9 post headlined "My race is 'American,' " Michelle Malkin wrote, "Mark Krikorian is fighting back against Census form race politics and urging you to do the same," and quoted from Krikorian's post. Malkin then wrote, "Ditto that!" Right-wing bloggers at Power Line, Ace of Spades, and RedState have also embraced Kirkorian's initiative to "pass it on."

Campaign spreads to right-wing radio

Beck: "Do not answer the race question. How dare you? How dare you?" On his March 9 radio show, Glenn Beck asserted that the Census question will result in people getting "more dollars if you are a minority." He further stated:

BECK: The reason why you don't answer a race question is because: one. Everyone counts as one. All men are created equal. If you are offended back in 1790 about slavery and that everyone should count the same, do not answer the race question. How dare you? How dare you?

At least in 1790, they were doing it to slow the South down on slavery, to try to stop it as much as they can. Today, they're asking the race question to try to increase slavery, your dependence on the master in Washington. No way. Don't answer that question.

Limbaugh: "There's a campaign out there ... to get this done, have a little fun with it." On the March 11 edition of his radio show, Rush Limbaugh told a caller, "Let me give you some advice on this thing. I want you to listen up and listen close." Limbaugh further stated, "I want you to check the box that says 'other' and write in 'American.' " Later, he reiterated:

LIMBAUGH: Just don't forget on the Census form, when you check off your race, check the box that says "other" and write -- in all caps -- write in "American." There's a campaign out there -- I guess we just started it -- a campaign out there to get this done, have a little fun with it.

Census: Race data required to implement federal laws

Census: Race data necessary "to monitor compliance with the Voting Rights Act." According to the U.S. Census Bureau, states are required to use race data to comply with the Voting Rights Act, and federal programs rely on race data for implementation:

Race is key to implementing any number of federal programs and it is critical for the basic research behind numerous policy decisions. States require race data to meet legislative redistricting requirements. Also, they are needed to monitor compliance with the Voting Rights Act by local jurisdictions.

Federal programs rely on race data in assessing racial disparities in housing, income, education, employment, health, and environmental risks.

The Census Bureau has included a question on race since the first census in 1790. The Census Bureau Web site has a race overview page with links to data and substantial reference information. Almost all Census Bureau population and housing data sets include data on race.

NY Times: "Counting people by race ... is useful for enforcing civil rights laws." In a March 7 editorial, The New York Times stated that "questions about age, gender, race, Hispanic ethnicity and homeownership are used to help execute and monitor laws and programs that are targeted to specific groups," adding, "Counting people by race and ethnicity, for example, is useful for enforcing civil rights laws, like the Voting Rights Act." From the Times editorial:

Another baseless criticism of the census is that it is unconstitutional to ask anything beyond the number of people living in a residence. Numerous federal and Supreme Court cases have upheld the constitutionality of collecting additional information in the census, provided it is relevant and necessary to good government.

To that end, questions about age, gender, race, Hispanic ethnicity and homeownership are used to help execute and monitor laws and programs that are targeted to specific groups. That is not to downplay legitimate debate fueled by questions that go beyond who is living where. Counting people by race and ethnicity, for example, is useful for enforcing civil rights laws, like the Voting Rights Act. But it also provokes argument about identity and equality in a diverse society. [The New York Times, 3/7/10]

Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by ScienceBuff (March 17, 2010 1:09 pm ET)
      4 1
      I look forward to the time in the future when there are so many "mixed race" people that the categorization becomes too unwieldy. Then we can start to dispense with the artificial divisions known as race and recognize that it's more of a social construct than a biological one.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by clams casino (March 17, 2010 1:20 pm ET)
        5 2
        A social construct in the broad sense, but race is a cultural construct as well, which is something that the Right invests much energy and time into alternately ignoring or demonizing.

        They want a white country, so naturally they don't want to account for the different races and cultures among us, let alone allow that accounting to provide some (gasp!) benefit to these "others."
        Report Abuse
        • Author by southerngal (March 17, 2010 1:25 pm ET)
          4 9
          "They want a white country"

          Tell that to the other races on the "right". They would be interested in your ridiculous assertion.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by clams casino (March 17, 2010 1:33 pm ET)
            7 3
            Because the Right Wing is such a racially diverse group of people, right?
            Report Abuse
            • Author by southerngal (March 17, 2010 1:36 pm ET)
              3 8
              But if they want a white country then they should ban anyone who isn't white from their party, or their ideology, I mean, according to you.

              See how foolish your race baiting victicrat mentality makes you look?
              Report Abuse
              • Author by clams casino (March 17, 2010 1:40 pm ET)
                5 3
                You're just spouting gibberish now. Since you can't rebut my actual words, just keep your "according to you" interpretations to yourself.
                Report Abuse
              • Author by The_Cat (March 17, 2010 1:43 pm ET)
                4 2
                How many Republicans in Congress are not white and male, right ON? Of the total number serving at the moment, I mean.
                Report Abuse
                • Author by southerngal (March 17, 2010 2:05 pm ET)
                  3 5
                  I don't know. Clams Casino said they wanted a white country, not a white Congress. So your question is weird.
                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by Another_Cat (March 17, 2010 2:52 pm ET)
                    4 1
                    It's not a weird question if you recognize that Congress makes the laws that can make the country "white". As far as the other races in the party...ever heard the term "token"?
                    Report Abuse
                    • Author by pongotwistleton (March 17, 2010 3:40 pm ET)
                      2 5
                      It's not a weird question if you recognize that Congress makes the laws that can make the country "white".

                      Elaborate. Please. What laws would the republicans enact to make the country white?
                      Report Abuse
                      • Author by The_Cat (March 17, 2010 3:45 pm ET)
                        3 1
                        Remember way back when the country was founded, pongotwistleton? They decided that even though they believed all men were created equal, they would continue to allow slavery. That enough of an example for you?
                        Report Abuse
                        • Author by southerngal (March 17, 2010 3:49 pm ET)
                          2 5
                          Oh, so slavery has been reimplemented as law? Never knew.
                          Report Abuse
                          • Author by Tbone Slickens (March 18, 2010 7:42 am ET)
                              1
                            It like wrestling with pigs right ON. Their history books only picked up around 1965 and totally glossed over that little event that ended at Appomattox Courthouse in 1865. Close to 700,000 soldiers died in the cause that makes kitty cats argument totally inane.
                            Report Abuse
                      • Author by southerngal (March 17, 2010 3:48 pm ET)
                        1 4
                        Pong, You haven't heard. National Sherwin Williams White Paint Day.
                        Report Abuse
                  • Author by The_Cat (March 17, 2010 3:15 pm ET)
                    5 1
                    Actually, right ON, clams casino mocked you and the Republican Party, or 'those on the Right', for being very much a whites only club. I gave you the chance to prove that you were right about the right wingers by pointing out prominent members of other races serving in Congress. If it's truly as inclusive as you seem to think, they must support and run all colors and genders of candidates, right? Except, they don't, do they? That's why you just say 'I don't know'. Either you know what you will find when you do the research, and you would rather not admit it, or you've already done the research and it does not support your position and you'd rather not admit it.

                    The right wing, and especially the teabaggers, are actually quite racist, just like their leaders Rush and Glenn.
                    Report Abuse
                    • Author by Slow Cowboy (March 18, 2010 3:27 pm ET)
                         
                      How about Michael Steele, kitty? Or Bobby Jindhal? What about JC Watts?

                      Women? Kay Bailey Hutchinson. Susan Collins. Cynthis Lummis. Elizabeth Dole.

                      There's 3 minorities and 4 women, and they are not alone.
                      Report Abuse
              • Author by thaneb (March 17, 2010 1:56 pm ET)
                3  
                Ban from their party? Does not follow from CCs cmmt and makes no sense: A party's electoral power comes from the number of its voting members. It does not necessarily follow that the party benefits all of its members in its acts/policies. There has been no cynical party recruitment?
                Report Abuse
              • Author by wookie (March 17, 2010 2:14 pm ET)
                4  
                They don't ban them but the push things like reparations and La Raza to scare their overwhelming white base.
                Report Abuse
          • Author by pearlene_scott1602 (March 17, 2010 3:43 pm ET)
            4  
            Tell that to the other races on the "right". They would be interested in your ridiculous assertion

            Political Parties by Racial, Ethnic and Ideological

            Republican party:
            Hispanic - 5%
            African American - 2%
            Other race - 4%

            Non-Hispanic White conservative - 63%
            Non-Hispanic White not conservative - 26%
            Republican Base Heavily White, Conservative, Religious...

            Report Abuse
            • Author by southerngal (March 17, 2010 4:18 pm ET)
              1 4
              Well then there isn't as much running around to do if there are only 11% of their constituents to tell that they want a white country.
              Report Abuse
              • Author by clams casino (March 17, 2010 4:53 pm ET)
                3 1
                Gobbledygook. The longer we go on, the more incoherent and pointless your posts become. What exactly are you attempting to argue here?
                Report Abuse
                • Author by southerngal (March 17, 2010 4:55 pm ET)
                  3 5
                  Your stupid baseless lie that the right wants a white country. I know, it's so idiotic and inflammatory and drowning in your tired victim mentality, but you started something so moronic. Without any evidence of course.
                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by clams casino (March 17, 2010 5:13 pm ET)
                    3 1
                    We're bombarded with an avalanche of evidence on a daily basis. From Republican officials calling for more racial profiling, to Fox News propagandists warning of the imminent danger to the white male power structure, to the constant whining from the Right about "our country" being taken over by Mexicans, Muslims and other brown invaders, and on and on and on...

                    What you call a stupid, baseless lie, most of us with eyes and ears call common knowledge.
                    Report Abuse
                    • Author by southerngal (March 17, 2010 5:20 pm ET)
                      1 4
                      In other words you have no proof of your stupid lie except that it feeds into your victicrat, poor me, the country is racist and that is the main reason for all the ills that face minorities, blah blah, race baiting spiel that people like you spew to compensate for your own inadequacies.

                      It's time you grow up, Peter Pan.
                      Report Abuse
                      • Author by clams casino (March 17, 2010 5:32 pm ET)
                        3 1
                        I just gave three verifiable examples, each of which have multiple specific incidents attached to them. Am I supposed to just keep typing examples until you can't deny it anymore?
                        Report Abuse
                        • Author by southerngal (March 17, 2010 5:46 pm ET)
                          1 3
                          Cool. Let's take them then.
                          "Republican officials calling for more racial profiling" - prove that this is first and foremost motivated because they want a white country.

                          "Fox News propagandists warning of the imminent danger to the white male power structure" - besides their opinion talk show hosts and guests, please detail where this is some stated policy and advocated by their news departments.

                          "constant whining from the Right about "our country" being taken over by Mexicans, Muslims and other brown invaders" - other than a yearning for strict border enforcement of our existing laws, what is the other context for your assertion?

                          Let me save you some embarrassment, you will give me a couple of anecdotal examples of some idiot on the right who is a racist and then extrapolate that to back up something so ridiculous as "They want a white country" from an entire political ideology.

                          That is what race baiters do, shamelessly and dishonestly. Racial tension must be burning brightly and actively seething in this country for people like you and your rhetoric to succeed. It needs to be stoked so a good way to do it is by hurling out inflammatory accusations such as this one. I get it. I know your MO. Most here don't see it, but I do.

                          As I said, grow up. You look pathetic, whiny and the victim role isn't cute anymore.
                          Report Abuse
                      • Author by Old_Benjamin (March 17, 2010 5:33 pm ET)
                        4  
                        Emotional much?
                        Report Abuse
                        • Author by southerngal (March 17, 2010 5:49 pm ET)
                          1 3
                          When it comes to race baiters, yep I get a little hot. Because they are one slug above a racist. They do more harm than a blatant racist does because it's all very sinister and harmful. At least a racist wears their prejudice on their sleeve and they can't hide from it. A race baiter is a clever demonic creature who wants a race war. It's the worst kind of human being.
                          Report Abuse
                          • Author by Old_Benjamin (March 17, 2010 6:00 pm ET)
                            1 1
                            Soooo, you are a "liberal" now?
                            Report Abuse
                            • Author by southerngal (March 17, 2010 6:09 pm ET)
                              1 2
                              No, I argue with emotion, not from emotion. The difference that always escapes liberals.
                              Report Abuse
                              • Author by Old_Benjamin (March 17, 2010 6:13 pm ET)
                                1 1
                                Do you mean with passion?

                                You can't keep your lies straight. That's the problem with lying - it's hard to keep track.
                                Report Abuse
                                • Author by southerngal (March 17, 2010 6:15 pm ET)
                                  1 2
                                  Lies? Sure, with passion and emotion and anger and reason and outbursts and calmness and rage and civility and uncivility, all of the above. I just don't argue FROM those emotions.

                                  If can't understand, I am sorry.
                                  Report Abuse
                                  • Author by Old_Benjamin (March 17, 2010 6:19 pm ET)
                                    2 1
                                    Lies?

                                    Yes - like down thread when you accused CC of posting something he didn't. Like any day you post here and try and change other poster's words.

                                    Thanks you ermotional liar, you.
                                    Report Abuse
                                    • Author by southerngal (March 17, 2010 6:24 pm ET)
                                      1 2
                                      Nice rant. Empty, but nice. What exactly is your contribution here except your obsessive hatred of me and dredging up old arguments when I obliterated your nonsense? I know you're bitter over all that pardner', but come on.

                                      Because I never see much else. Have I missed it?
                                      Report Abuse
                                      • Author by Old_Benjamin (March 17, 2010 6:33 pm ET)
                                        1 1
                                        Have I missed it?


                                        As far as I can see - yes, you have missed just about everything.

                                        And you lie about it to boot. But carry on with your emotional arguments.

                                        See you on some other thread when you try and post more lies. But since it's closing in on quitting time for you, I guess that will be tomorrow.
                                        Report Abuse
              • Author by pearlene_scott1602 (March 17, 2010 6:37 pm ET)
                1 1
                Well then there isn't as much running around to do if there are only 11% of their constituents to tell that they want a white country.

                You wrote:

                Tell that to the other races on the "right". They would be interested in your ridiculous assertion.

                With that statement, you weren't saying the right is made up of a diverse group of individuals?

                I simply showed polling that shows the right is in no way a diverse group of people. Of course one look at the Republican convention, would serve the same purpose.

                Any minority group, that threatens the Republican White majority, guarantees racist, nasty, negative campaigning from Republicans

                Reagan's "welfare queen driving a Cadillac", a campaign geared towards stereotyping African Americans as not working, taking your hard earned money to buy expensive cars.

                Tancredo's Sotomayor-Latino KKK, a campaign geared towards labeling Hispanics as racists for demanding equal rights. Can't have La Raza doing for Hispanics what the NAACP did for African Americans.

                And who can forget Jessie Helms "white hands" against African American Harvey Gantt, a campaign geared towards scaring White folks. Elect that Black man and you'll lose your good jobs to those lazy, affirmative action Black folks.

                Republicans may not come out and say they want a White country, but their actions say it for them.
                Report Abuse
                • Author by clams casino (March 17, 2010 6:43 pm ET)
                  3  
                  Nothing short of government-sanctioned genocide will convince Right ON. And even then, he would somehow find a way to move the goalposts.
                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by southerngal (March 17, 2010 6:49 pm ET)
                      4
                    If I give you a few examples of recent prominent liberals who are crooks or racists, then you would be consistent in saying they, the Democratic party, are advocating for a white anarchy? Otherwise you're blowing race baiting smoke, are you?
                    Report Abuse
                    • Author by pearlene_scott1602 (March 17, 2010 9:12 pm ET)
                      2  
                      If I give you a few examples of recent prominent liberals who are crooks or racists, then you would be consistent in saying they, the Democratic party, are advocating for a white anarchy? Otherwise you're blowing race baiting smoke, are you?

                      Telling the truth is race baiting?

                      Current African American Republican House Members/ZERO
                      Current African American Republican Senate Members/ZERO

                      Last African American Republican House Member - J.C. Watts, 1995

                      Last African American Republican Senate Member - Edward William Brooks, 1967

                      There were 36, out of approximately 2,000, African American delegates at the 2008 Republican National Convention.

                      Current Hispanic Republican House Members/3
                      Current Hispanic Republican Senate Members/ZERO

                      The 3 Hispanic Republican House members, Lincoln Diaz-Balart, Mario Diaz-Balart & Ileana Ros-Lehtinen are all representatives of Florida.

                      Only 2 Hispanic Republican Senators ever, Octavian Ambrosio Larrazolo, New Mexico 1928-1929 & Mel Martinez, Florida 2005 - 2009

                      There were 100, out of approximately 2,000, Hispanic delegates at the 2008 Republican National Convention.


                      Report Abuse
                      • Author by Slow Cowboy (March 18, 2010 3:56 pm ET)
                           
                        I wonder, though, how much Dem policy really represents what blacks and hispanics truly want in the end, and how much has become cultural in and of itself.

                        This is an honest and fair question, because there is a desire to act in a certain manner if you are a part of the given minority. Politics is a part of that culture.
                        Report Abuse
                • Author by southerngal (March 17, 2010 6:44 pm ET)
                    4
                  Perhaps you missed what I said to Clams Casino above;

                  "you will give me a couple of anecdotal examples of some idiot on the right who is a racist and then extrapolate that to back up something so ridiculous as "They want a white country" from an entire political ideology"
                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by pearlene_scott1602 (March 17, 2010 9:58 pm ET)
                    1  
                    Perhaps you missed what I said to Clams Casino above; "you will give me a couple of anecdotal examples of some idiot on the right who is a racist and then extrapolate that to back up something so ridiculous as "They want a white country" from an entire political ideology"

                    Did you know the majority of African Americans used to be Republicans. And that at one time, the Democratic party had to be sued to get them to accept African Americans in their party?

                    It wasn't until FDR and his New Deal, that African Americans starting leaving the Republican party and Republicans started courting a group of voters that never voted for them before, Democratic southern whites.

                    And Republicans, in courting Democratic southern whites, ran campaigns against African Americans using language designed to appeal to southern whites. Words like "states rights, anti affirmative action, pro welfare reform, were used to convince southern Democratic whites, that the Republican party was no longer the "ni**er lovers party", as Democrats and Dixicrats used to call them.

                    The Republican party opened the door for the racist southern Democratic/Dixicrat whites and that's were they found a home.

                    The history of the Republican party IS the example!


                    Report Abuse
                    • Author by Slow Cowboy (March 18, 2010 5:14 pm ET)
                         
                      History of the parties is pretty useless, if you ask me. I am generally one who espouses history as informative in most areas. However, there are a few places where it serves little purpose. The reason why I include political parties in this group is because beleifs change all the time as do platforms. For example, going back even further it was Democrats who wanted to keep slavery and Republicans actually fought to free them. Abe Lincoln was a Republican!

                      How parties have viewed issues like religion, big business, etc have altered through time, and will alter in the future.

                      Looking to put a single party in a perpetual box is simply a bad idea. What you need to look at is what the party beleives now. And the GOP is certainly not racist.

                      You know, I could actually argue that this attempt box a party is itself a political ploy, one that has largely succeeded in capturing the vast majority of certain minority groups.

                      Report Abuse
      • Author by SMTDL (March 17, 2010 1:22 pm ET)
        4  
        But the data is needed now to help make the so called divisions become irrelevant over time with monitoring and following the laws that ensure equal opportunity and protection under the law!!
        I'm afraid we are going backwards with this kind of manufactured controversy on something as basic as the census!!How many people indentifying as Native Americans are in the country right now!? It should be important to know that.If we can count Polar bears surely we can count our diverse American selves!!!
        Isn't some of the demographic data relevant to things like immigration laws or info combinations like geographic/racial distribution.How do we ensure no inadvertent disenfranchisement takes place if we don't know such things?

        Report Abuse
        • Author by ScienceBuff (March 17, 2010 1:43 pm ET)
          2 1
          I'm not disagreeing with you. Maybe I didn't make myself clear. The fact that race is a social construct with little biological basis doesn't make it any less real in today's world. Nor does it make the effects of discrimination and social stratification on its basis any less real. Those things are real and they need to be addressed by a civilized society. That makes the categorization useful and necessary. Blindly saying that it isn't necessary because we don't want to address the problems associated with it is head-in-the-sand ignorance.
          Report Abuse
      • Author by wookie (March 17, 2010 1:39 pm ET)
        3 1
        But so far it is still an issue. There will no doubt be faulty voting machines in black neighborhoods for some time to come so we should keep track of that sort of thing happening.
        Report Abuse
      • Author by LGP (March 17, 2010 2:35 pm ET)
           
        The census workers are, I'm sure, fully aware of the sources of the "don't answer the 'race' question!"; I would not be at all surprised if the policy ends up being marking blank spaces as "caucasian".

        Also, not related to race, but, regarding the people, especially the politicians, telling people to not fill out or return the Census at all because it's "unconstitutional", it's obvious they haven't read the Constitution.
        Report Abuse
      • Author by Pat T (March 18, 2010 10:56 am ET)
           
        I just filled out my census form a few days ago and I marked "Some other race" and wrote in "American".

        Race was a factor do to the 3/5th language of Article 1 Section 2, but it was modified by the 14th Amendment Section 2 of the Constitution which eliminated the need to count the people by race.

        Use of race data to implement federal law is inherently racist. Let's get to a color blind society. I know racism exists but government should not promote it.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by southerngal (March 17, 2010 1:13 pm ET)
      1 8
      The conservative media are right. It only further divides us regarding race. And what exactly does this mean "Federal programs rely on race data in assessing racial disparities in..... environmental risks"

      If someone can explain to me how, I would be interested?
      Report Abuse
      • Author by benjr (March 17, 2010 1:16 pm ET)
        2 1
        Can you provide the full statement instead of editing it?
        Report Abuse
        • Author by southerngal (March 17, 2010 1:20 pm ET)
          1 3
          It's above.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by benjr (March 17, 2010 1:28 pm ET)
               
            Yeah, I somehow missed it when I was reading it earlier. My mistake.
            Report Abuse
          • Author by benjr (March 17, 2010 1:32 pm ET)
            5  
            That being said, I don't understand your confusion. There are still racial disparities in this country, and the Census (assuming idiots like Malkin and Krikorian don't persuade too many people to fabricate results) can provide accurate statistical information regarding the severity of this disparity. What's the problem with that?
            Report Abuse
            • Author by southerngal (March 17, 2010 1:34 pm ET)
              1 6
              I asked for a logical explanation of what the phrase I reprinted exactly means, I don't see that in your response.
              Report Abuse
              • Author by benjr (March 17, 2010 1:39 pm ET)
                5 1
                You're kidding right? The statement is self-explanatory. It means that there are discrepancies in various aspects of society (quality of housing, education, etc., etc.) that are because of racial disparities. The government uses the statistical information regarding those disparities in creating some federal programs.
                Report Abuse
                • Author by southerngal (March 17, 2010 1:43 pm ET)
                  1 6
                  So the government creates some federal programs for just one race and not another?
                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by DellDolly (March 17, 2010 1:46 pm ET)
                    5 2
                    It doesn't CARE what race that victimized race is. It solely cares that there are victims.

                    The federal programs are created for victims who have been discriminated against. If whites become victimized in one neighborhood, then the gov't would work to resolve that problem. The particular race isn't what is protected at all.
                    Report Abuse
                    • Author by southerngal (March 17, 2010 1:52 pm ET)
                      2 6
                      It's out of your league, you don't get it. Forget it Sue.
                      Report Abuse
                      • Author by DellDolly (March 17, 2010 1:56 pm ET)
                        5 4
                        And again we see, when he can't refute the facts, he makes a personal attack.

                        There's never been an instance where you've understood anything better than I have.

                        And I'm still not Sue.

                        All you could do was make baseless ad hominem attacks. Thanks for documenting that you have reached the end of your rope, and thanks for proceeding to hang yourself with it. A smarter person would simply not reply, but your personal animus is so everpresent that you can't resist that urge.

                        Please don't feed this troll post any more.
                        Report Abuse
                  • Author by benjr (March 17, 2010 1:54 pm ET)
                    4  
                    Did I say that?

                    Of course not. What I actually wrote was

                    The government uses the statistical information regarding those disparities in creating some federal programs.


                    Now, with that being said, there are some programs (such as Affirmative Action) that do expressly help some races but not others. The thing is, though, that these programs are designed to help level the playing field, not give someone an unfair advantage over someone else.


                    Also, let's say the census finds that in North Philadelphia, for example (just choosing Philly because I live here), the majority of the population is poor, black, and under-educated. Isn't it beneficial to know that information and use it to help rectify that population's problems? We're not talking about some general, nebulous population, but a specific community with specific problems. How could it be unhelpful to know specific demographics?
                    Report Abuse
                    • Author by southerngal (March 17, 2010 1:58 pm ET)
                        7
                      Poor and uneducated fine, race is not relevant.
                      Report Abuse
                      • Author by benjr (March 17, 2010 2:12 pm ET)
                        3 1
                        Of course it is. North Philly (to continue the example I used before) has a mostly black population. Some of the issues that are present in black America are not present in white America, and simply are not understood fully by those who have not experienced those issues.


                        Or to put it differently, would you send a Buddhist to help Catholics with theological issues?
                        Report Abuse
                        • Author by southerngal (March 17, 2010 2:28 pm ET)
                          2 5
                          So, poor uneducated white areas would be treated differently than poor uneducated black areas?
                          Report Abuse
                          • Author by benjr (March 17, 2010 2:33 pm ET)
                            2  
                            Maybe. Maybe not. The point is not that race is the sole determining factor, but that race is a determining factor. I don't believe I asserted that "poor uneducated white areas" would necessarily be treated differently than "poor uneducated black areas" (who knew areas could be uneducated? I thought only people could be uneducated), only that there are real differences that must be addressed before we can say there are no more racial disparities in this country.
                            Report Abuse
                          • Author by clams casino (March 17, 2010 2:41 pm ET)
                            4  
                            Can you even wrap your mind around the idea that the poor and uneducated are disproportionately black and Hispanic? And can you see how a census could be used to identify this problem?
                            Report Abuse
                            • Author by southerngal (March 17, 2010 2:45 pm ET)
                              1 6
                              So poor and uneducated blacks and hispanics will be treated differently than poor and uneducated whites? If that is the purpose of the census, or its goal, then no. You wrap your mind around it.
                              Report Abuse
                              • Author by benjr (March 17, 2010 2:55 pm ET)
                                4 1
                                So poor and uneducated blacks and hispanics will be treated differently than poor and uneducated whites? If that is the purpose of the census, or its goal, then no.


                                right ON, I've been giving you the benefit of the doubt throughout this conversation, but if you honestly believe that anyone thinks that the Census was commissioned for that purpose I don't think there is any point to continuing. Where has anyone supported that idea? Where did you get it from? Does it even make sense to you?


                                You seem like you are posting here just for the argument. If that is true, fine. Just let me know so that I can avoid you.

                                If that is false, explain to me where you get these ideas from.
                                Report Abuse
                                • Author by southerngal (March 17, 2010 3:00 pm ET)
                                    6
                                  If all you can do is dodge it and tell me I don't understand, a typical response around here from those who just post platitudes and meaningless theoretical nonsense, go ahead. Still no answer.
                                  Report Abuse
                                  • Author by benjr (March 17, 2010 3:01 pm ET)
                                    5  
                                    I answered your question with a more applicable one. Where has anyone said that the purpose of the Census is to treat poor whites differently than poor blacks? Still no answer.
                                    Report Abuse
                              • Author by Another_Cat (March 17, 2010 3:00 pm ET)
                                2  
                                If that's what the data shows. If, on the other hand, the poor of this country are a perfect mix of races, one could determine that race is not a factor in the poverty of the group. If it shows what has been typical over the years, however, what we find is that in some cases race is the only factor different between the haves and have-nots, indicating that a disparity in policies regarding race is causing the poverty of that group. Correction to such a policy will lift those from poverty or level the playing field; but only if the race data is collected in the first place.
                                Report Abuse
                                • Author by southerngal (March 17, 2010 3:05 pm ET)
                                    5
                                  If there is some policy regarding race that is discriminatory then that should be done away with. We don't need the census to tell us that.
                                  Report Abuse
                                  • Author by benjr (March 17, 2010 3:13 pm ET)
                                    4  
                                    I notice that you chastised me for supposedly not answering your questions, but proceeded to ignore mine in your next post. I'll ask you again:

                                    Where has anyone said that the purpose of the Census is to treat poor whites differently than poor blacks?
                                    Report Abuse
                                    • Author by southerngal (March 17, 2010 3:16 pm ET)
                                        5
                                      If there is no purpose to treat anyone differently based on race, then is not necessary to have that information.
                                      Report Abuse
                                      • Author by benjr (March 17, 2010 3:21 pm ET)
                                        6  
                                        Dodge, dodge, dodge. Answer my question.


                                        Your assertion in the previous post, however, needs to be rewritten. Nobody has said to treat specific individuals differently because of race. Instead of re-writing what others have before me, I'll just point you towards Another_Cat's post above, and add that he/she was not writing about racist policies, but about a general social mode that is not equal for different races and ethnicities.
                                        Report Abuse
                                  • Author by Chameo (March 17, 2010 3:31 pm ET)
                                       
                                    Try it this way. In that mythical county, evenly divided among blacks, whites and Hispanics, all the whites and Hispanics from families with $xxxx income graduate from high school, but only 65% of the blacks whose families are in the same income level reach graduation. All other factors being the same in that mythical country, there is something attached to race that keeps blacks from graduating from high school. It may be a policy issue, it may be a health issue, it may be an environmental issue, it may be an educational issue... the information gathered in the census highlights a disparity so that it can be looked at more closely to see if there IS a policy problem or an underlying issue that can be addressed with a policy change or a program.
                                    Report Abuse
                                  • Author by Another_Cat (March 18, 2010 5:06 pm ET)
                                       
                                    And how would you know if it is discriminatory unless you have data telling you that; hence the information required by the census.
                                    Report Abuse
      • Author by DellDolly (March 17, 2010 1:19 pm ET)
        6 1
        We are already divided regarding race. You can't be black one day and white the next and Asian the next day. You are the race you are. I am the race I am. We are already divided that way. Recording those differences does not further divide us. It simply acknowledges and records differences that are already there.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by southerngal (March 17, 2010 1:21 pm ET)
          1 8
          But we shouldn't be designated or treated differently because of it by the government, that is the point.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by DellDolly (March 17, 2010 1:36 pm ET)
            4 1
            Yes, some SHOULD be treated differently because of those differences.

            If we determine that a group is currently disadvantaged because of previous prejudices, then things should be done to rectify those current disadvantages. If we determine that a group is currently suffering prejudice or inferior treatment because of current mistreatment, then fixes should be created to remove those barriers/rectify those problems too.

            And we won't KNOW if a neighborhood, community or region which is disadvantaged and which is mostly populated by a particular race unless we SURVEY that neighborhood, community or region via the US Census to find OUT what the racial makeup is of that community.

            You don't have a leg to stand on in this argument, RightON. Time to haul out the personal attacks I guess - oh, wait, you already made a baseless personal attack on Clams Casino when you couldn't legitimately refute his point about your previously-expressed views on how recognizing different races/cultures is divisive/racist!
            Report Abuse
            • Author by southerngal (March 17, 2010 1:41 pm ET)
              2 6
              "Yes, some SHOULD be treated differently because of those differences"

              And therein lies the naive simple response, naturally coming from you. Because when you treat one group differently you automatically engage in reverse discrimination. Think about it, google it if you can't figure it out.
              Report Abuse
              • Author by DellDolly (March 17, 2010 1:53 pm ET)
                3  
                Yeah, I should google it, because I have shown some inability or unwillingness to do research and speak from facts?

                Are you really this crazy, that you don't know that readers here SEE who was willing to do research and who has been spouting baseless talking points that have been repeatedly debunked?

                And no, rectifying previous injustices is NOT bad. It's NOT reverse discrimination either. That's what oppponents call it to demonize it.

                The term affirmative action refers to policies that take race, ethnicity, physical disabilities, military career, sex, or a person's parents' social class into consideration in an attempt to promote equal opportunity or increase ethnicity or other forms of diversity. The focus of such policies ranges from employment and education to public contracting and health programs. The impetus towards affirmative action is twofold: to maximize diversity in all levels of society, along with its presumed benefits, and to redress perceived disadvantages due to overt, institutional, or involuntary discrimination. Opponents argue that it promotes reverse discrimination.

                Affirmative action is a term coined in the United States. Matching procedures in other countries are also known as reservation in India, positive discrimination in the United Kingdom and employment equity in Canada.
                Report Abuse
                • Author by southerngal (March 17, 2010 1:56 pm ET)
                  1 5
                  You keep repeating stuff from somebody else that does nothing to make your case. I know it makes more sense than your own independent thought, but it still is not convincing, sorry Sue.
                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by DellDolly (March 17, 2010 2:57 pm ET)
                    3  
                    Yes, I guess you really ARE this crazy that you think that people don't see your previous posts and don't KNOW who has demonstrated a love for facts and evidence and who has repeatedly demonstrated distain for facts and research.

                    Please, keep making a fool of yourself. Keep showing us how disconnected from reality you are, and how your personal animus so controls you.
                    Report Abuse
            • Author by MagCynic (March 17, 2010 1:58 pm ET)
              1 7
              If we determine that a group is currently disadvantaged because of previous prejudices
              Name one group in this country that is at a disadvantage due to some previous prejudice. You might have had an argument 30-40 years ago. You have none now.
              Report Abuse
              • Author by bintx (March 17, 2010 2:08 pm ET)
                4 1
                lordy, you are just as thick-headed as your duplicate.

                It's easy to say that when you are a pasty-faced, blue-eyed blonde male who makes $25 million a year or more and live in a $4 million dollar home.

                Clueless.
                Report Abuse
        • Author by clams casino (March 17, 2010 1:21 pm ET)
          6 2
          Right ON/Tommy has always held that recognizing different races/cultures is divisive and/or racist.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by southerngal (March 17, 2010 1:26 pm ET)
            1 6
            Make your own points and leave your dishonest lying assertions out of it, unless you have nothing else.

            You have nothing else.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by clams casino (March 17, 2010 1:29 pm ET)
              5  
              What exactly was dishonest about that statement? You just got through saying that the census question was racially divisive, did you not?
              Report Abuse
              • Author by southerngal (March 17, 2010 1:33 pm ET)
                1 6
                Are you stupid? Yes, gathering such info on a census divides us along those lines. However, recognizing different races and cultures within our society does not divide us. We should all celebrate our diversity, but I don't need the government to distinguish or designate or treat citizens differently because of it, or track it somehow through the census.

                If that is too nuanced of an answer for you, forget it.
                Report Abuse
                • Author by clams casino (March 17, 2010 1:46 pm ET)
                  5  
                  Too nuanced? That's rich. What you're failing to wrap your mind around here is that racial divisions already exist and the census is being used to repair those divisions. How is it that every time you discuss race you somehow manage to erase hundreds of years of racial oppression and disparity from your mind? The census isn't about "treating citizens differently." They are already treated differently. The census is a measure taken toward identifying those problems and fixing them.
                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by southerngal (March 17, 2010 1:53 pm ET)
                    2 5
                    "How is it that every time you discuss race you somehow manage to erase hundreds of years of racial oppression and disparity from your mind"

                    Because unlike race baiters, I am not invested in keeping hundreds of years of racial oppression front and center. Figure it out.
                    Report Abuse
                    • Author by clams casino (March 17, 2010 2:16 pm ET)
                      7  
                      So you're invested in pretending that racial disparity doesn't exist? You're invested in keeping, for instance, a disproportionate lack of green space in the black neighborhoods (just to point out one example of an environmental concern that had you so baffled earlier)?
                      Report Abuse
                      • Author by southerngal (March 17, 2010 2:23 pm ET)
                        1 5
                        So the purpose of finding out the race of a certain neighborhood is so there can be adequate green space there? Exactly how would you implement the course to rectify this? Buy up homeowners property, demolish it to build a park? Or buy up businesses? How exactly will this incredibly useful information for you work to alleviate the disproportionate lack of green space?

                        Please, enlighten us.
                        Report Abuse
                        • Author by clams casino (March 17, 2010 2:46 pm ET)
                          4  
                          That's one example, you nitwit. I'm supposed to explain how city planning works for you now because I used that one example? You're only confirming that you have absolutely no clue what you're talking about.
                          Report Abuse
                          • Author by southerngal (March 17, 2010 2:58 pm ET)
                              5
                            In other words you have no idea what you meant or anything about what you said about "disproportionate lack of green space in the black neighborhoods". No surprise.
                            Report Abuse
                            • Author by clams casino (March 17, 2010 5:01 pm ET)
                              3  
                              I know precisely what I meant. It's simply a fact that predominately black neighborhoods have less green space than predominately white neighborhoods. This is an environmental concern that can affect health and general quality of life. For instance, this study shows that more green space in a neighborhood can decrease childhood obesity.

                              Exactly what part of all this is giving you trouble?
                              Report Abuse
                            • Author by clams casino (March 17, 2010 5:01 pm ET)
                              2  
                              I know precisely what I meant. It's simply a fact that predominately black neighborhoods have less green space than predominately white neighborhoods. This is an environmental concern that can affect health and general quality of life. For instance, this study shows that more green space in a neighborhood can decrease childhood obesity.

                              Exactly what part of all this is giving you trouble?
                              Report Abuse
                              • Author by southerngal (March 17, 2010 5:06 pm ET)
                                  3
                                Fine, so I already asked you what is your plan to rectify it? You said you weren't a city planner so you dodged it that way. I want to know how you are going to increase green space in black neighborhoods. If it's the problem you claim, then pony up and tell us how to fix it.

                                Otherwise you moan and whine just to hear yourself.
                                Report Abuse
                                • Author by clams casino (March 17, 2010 5:18 pm ET)
                                  4  
                                  Great debate tactic there. I provide an example that you asked for, but it apparently isn't valid until I provide a solution to the problem? You are ridiculous.
                                  Report Abuse
                                  • Author by southerngal (March 17, 2010 5:24 pm ET)
                                      4
                                    Well, if you're proud of the fact that you needed a study to tell you that the lack of exercise leads to childhood obesity, and then felt that you needed to link to it here, go for it.

                                    I kinda knew that.
                                    Report Abuse
                                • Author by DellDolly (March 17, 2010 5:21 pm ET)
                                  2  
                                  Oh, I've seen THIS trick before - demand that we come up with a solution to a problem, as though we're obligated to do that if we identify a problem that needs solving in order to have some credibility.

                                  A clear sign of a troll post.
                                  Report Abuse
                                  • Author by clams casino (March 17, 2010 5:23 pm ET)
                                    3  
                                    But first he denies the problem. It's only when it's shoved in his face that he resorts to this. When he can't deny any longer, he snaps back with this idiocy.
                                    Report Abuse
                                    • Author by southerngal (March 17, 2010 5:28 pm ET)
                                        3
                                      Really, I asked you many posts back to tell us how'd you rectify it and you haven't touched it, because all you have is a government study telling you it's a problem. You are as worthless as the study itself. No wonder you felt it made your case.

                                      It didn't.
                                      Report Abuse
                                • Author by Old_Benjamin (March 17, 2010 5:30 pm ET)
                                  2  
                                  You said you weren't a city planner so you dodged it that way.


                                  Lying again? Let's scroll up and see what CC actually posted...

                                  That's one example, you nitwit. I'm supposed to explain how city planning works for you now because I used that one example? You're only confirming that you have absolutely no clue what you're talking about.


                                  He said he wasn't going to explain it to you. He may or may not be a city planner. But that is not what was posted.
                                  Report Abuse
                                  • Author by southerngal (March 17, 2010 5:31 pm ET)
                                      2
                                    Another irrelevant contribution. Thanks for clearing that up.

                                    Point stands.
                                    Report Abuse
                                    • Author by Old_Benjamin (March 17, 2010 5:38 pm ET)
                                      3  
                                      Too funny. In conserv-o-world, lying is irrelevant. Thanks for clearing that up, liar.
                                      Report Abuse
                    • Author by SMTDL (March 18, 2010 12:51 pm ET)
                      1  
                      I bet you didn't have any ancestors enslaved or lynched either!
                      Report Abuse
      • Author by DellDolly (March 17, 2010 1:29 pm ET)
        4  
        Here's one link about WHY they might do this. The US Census is the best way to determine the racial makeup of a region, community or neighborhood.

        The US Census bureau also has an FAQ about what they do and why.

        Information on race is required for many federal programs and is critical in making policy decisions, particularly for civil rights. States use these data to meet legislative redistricting principles. Race data also are used to promote equal employment opportunities and to assess racial disparities in health and environmental risks.

        If you're really interested in why they might determine if an area dominated by one race might be detrimentally affected by an environmental concern, then you can google and figure it out. I doubt you're really interested.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by southerngal (March 17, 2010 1:30 pm ET)
          1 7
          Nice try, but you didn't answer it except to reprint more vague government doublespeak.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by DellDolly (March 17, 2010 1:43 pm ET)
            3 1
            Troll post. Please ignore.

            I DID provide one example of exactly WHY they might do it. I then exposed that his question likely wasn't an honest one, which he proved with later responses to other posts. And all he did here was make an ad hominem attack, claiming that my citing of a specific example and highlighting how that specific example (among many others RightON could find if he truly wanted to), and discussing how the US Census is the ONLY tool to complete efforts like this, as "vague"? Really?

            Do you really think that people don't READ what the previous poster actually wrote, so that you can brazenly distort it without worry that you'll be caught in your dishonest, disreputable and dishingenuous portrayal of another's words?

            Please don't feed this troll any more.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by foghornleghorn (March 17, 2010 1:53 pm ET)
              5  
              Whenever Tommy says you didn't answer the question, what he really means is he didn't read the answer and just wants to prolong an inane argument. It's what he does.
              Report Abuse
            • Author by southerngal (March 17, 2010 1:54 pm ET)
                5
              You failed again Suzy. Feed yourself some knowledge and try again.
              Report Abuse
      • Author by ScienceBuff (March 17, 2010 2:28 pm ET)
        3  
        The conservative media are right. It only further divides us regarding race. And what exactly does this mean "Federal programs rely on race data in assessing racial disparities in..... environmental risks"
        If someone can explain to me how, I would be interested?
        - right ON


        Environment could be a factor in the higher incidence of diabetes in African Americans. Census data would be a tool in determining and quantifying that.

        There are links between race, income and illness from environmental hazards. Census data would be a tool in determining and quantifying that.

        There appears to be an environmental component to the higher incidence of lupus in African Americans. Census data would be a tool in determining and quantifying that.

        There are similar situations with breast cancer.

        There are many others. They weren't that hard to find.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by southerngal (March 17, 2010 2:35 pm ET)
            4
          Thank you for the info. It is thought provoking and does shed light on the environmental risks. I am not sure my mind is completely changed on the necessity of the race question on the census but it makes a stronger argument.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by Old_Benjamin (March 17, 2010 4:14 pm ET)
            2  
            LOL! You really did know this stuff?

            How many tries did that take? You should try thinking for yourself for once rather than expecting everyone else to do it for you.
            Report Abuse
          • Author by clams casino (March 17, 2010 5:04 pm ET)
            2  
            Proving once again that you just react without having a clue as to what you're talking about.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by southerngal (March 17, 2010 5:10 pm ET)
                3
              No, proving that I don't inhale liberal platitudes for reasons given for government involvement and intrusion hook line and sinker like you apparently do. Just because a study is commissioned and some conclusion is drawn doesn't mean anything unless there is a workable, reasonable plan to fix it. Results, not rhetoric. It works for you because if the government tells you something, being the simple being that you are, you swallow it whole. I don't.
              Report Abuse
              • Author by clams casino (March 17, 2010 5:22 pm ET)
                2  
                Keep moving those goalposts. You got the examples that you demanded, but now they don't count because nobody here has workable solutions to each and every problem? We can't make observations about racial disparity and its effects without actually fixing those problems ourselves? What an idiotic argument. You are a child.
                Report Abuse
                • Author by southerngal (March 17, 2010 5:52 pm ET)
                    3
                  "We can't make observations about racial disparity and its effects without actually fixing those problems ourselves?"

                  Because you don't want them fixed. Because if they are you and your race baiting rhetoric becomes useless. That is your dirty little secret, which you don't want exposed.

                  Sorry, just did.
                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by clams casino (March 17, 2010 6:21 pm ET)
                    2  
                    I do want them fixed, which is exactly why I'm giving my race on my Census form.
                    Report Abuse
                    • Author by southerngal (March 17, 2010 6:26 pm ET)
                        2
                      I don't expect some contrite admission. What would you do then except begin to heal? Can't have that.
                      Report Abuse
                  • Author by DellDolly (March 17, 2010 6:46 pm ET)
                    1  
                    Nonsense.

                    There's no evidence that we want them fixed, and it's irrelevant to boot whether or not we want them fixed, how we would fix them or how important they are on the scale of problems that need to be remedied.

                    You haven't exposed ANYTHING but your own lack of character and paid troll behavior.

                    Please don't feed this paid troll any more.

                    Oops, sorry, it's his quitting time anyway, so he won't be replying anymore.
                    Report Abuse
                    • Author by southerngal (March 17, 2010 6:51 pm ET)
                        2

                      "There's no evidence that we want them fixed"

                      Nope, there sure isn't. Thanks for the brief shred of honesty Sue.
                      Report Abuse
                      • Author by jeffro (March 17, 2010 7:21 pm ET)
                        1  
                        Wow. The Shill is workin' OVERTIME!
                        Report Abuse
                      • Author by jeffro (March 17, 2010 7:20 pm ET)
                        1  
                        Wow. The Shill is workin' OVERTIME!
                        Report Abuse
                        • Author by juliajayne1 (March 17, 2010 10:05 pm ET)
                          1  
                          He's on California time. If he works until 5 PM he's still good to go.
                          Report Abuse
                      • Author by DellDolly (March 17, 2010 11:05 pm ET)
                           
                        There's no evidence that we DON'T want them fixed is clearly what I meant.

                        Thanks for yet again showing the paucity of your character, that you'd take advantage of that missing word to totally distort the rest of my post. You had said that we don't want them fixed, and I was clearly totally disagreeing with your assertion that we don't want them fixed. So I was saying that there's no evidence that we don't want them fixed.

                        And you knew that.

                        I always appreciate when someone like you destroys your own credibility!

                        Oops. But you have no credibility left. Everyone laughs at you. You're a joke. You used to be somebody. Now you're only a paid troll.
                        Report Abuse
      • Author by SMTDL (March 18, 2010 11:34 am ET)
        1  
        There have been cases of high cancer rates and other diseases in neighborhoods adjacent to chemical plants,landfills and factories.Complaints were in some cases ignored when neighborhoods were predominantly minority.Minorities may not be aware of citizens' rights and venues for dealing with these type issues and may need support to protect the health of their famillies.Another example is the issue of lead paint exposure in crumbling tenements and housing populated by poor and/or minorities.
        These issues should not be assumed to cause divisiveness without knowing more about them! Glad you asked!
        Report Abuse
    • Author by aerdna (March 17, 2010 1:37 pm ET)
         
      How xenophobic do you have to be to list 'American' as your race? And stupid, too. That could be Canadian, or any other nation in the Americas, including (gasp!) Latin America!

      The thing that I didn't like was having to choose 'white' as my race. I selected 'white' but also 'other' and listed 'human' with a not that white was not a race. I know no one will care about what I wrote, and it won't make a difference, but it made me feel better.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by MagCynic (March 17, 2010 2:01 pm ET)
        7
      I guess I'll fill out two pieces of information now.

      # of adults in household: 2
      Race: American-American

      That is all.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by southerngal (March 17, 2010 2:06 pm ET)
          7
        Exactly, and that is enough. Why not ask if we are gay or straight then?
        Report Abuse
        • Author by clams casino (March 17, 2010 2:12 pm ET)
          5 1
          What exactly is it about an accurate census that makes you two so afraid? What do you think is going to be done with this information concerning race?
          Report Abuse
          • Author by southerngal (March 17, 2010 2:20 pm ET)
            1 5
            Let's be more exact then, gay/straight, fat/thin. In order for you to be consistent about the disparity and discrimination facing certain groups based on their identifiable qualities, this should also be included. You wouldn't be afraid of that would you?
            Report Abuse
          • Author by MagCynic (March 17, 2010 2:23 pm ET)
            1 5
            I don't know exactly. I simply have my doubts that the government truly needs to know whether I'm black, white, asian, or hispanic. If you truly have no racist tendencies at all, then it truly doesn't matter. And I don't mean racist as in KKK or white supremacy. I simply mean racist as in segregating, dividing, grouping, promoting, or demoting a select group of people. I'm a cynic when it concerns the government. What else is there to say?
            Report Abuse
            • Author by southerngal (March 17, 2010 2:26 pm ET)
              1 5
              You're absolutely right. The government has no business knowing it because they should, as an institution at every level, maintain racial neutrality in all aspects of governance. Anyone that thinks otherwise wants some sort of preference over one race or another.
              Report Abuse
              • Author by ScienceBuff (March 17, 2010 2:38 pm ET)
                3  
                The census is performed as a matter of Constitutional requirement. Adding the accumulation of that data is a simple matter of efficiency. Once it's collected, it becomes public information available for all sorts of scientific research such as I linked to above, public and private social programs, and many other uses. None of them need be seen as discriminatory, one way or the other. Collection of all of that data by other means would be very expensive for private concerns or research bodies limiting their ability to do their core programs. It's a simple efficiency providing very wide-spread benefits.

                Curb your paranoia. Not everything is some nefarious plot.
                Report Abuse
                • Author by southerngal (March 17, 2010 2:48 pm ET)
                    4
                  Because as far as government services or programs are concerned, race should be irrelevant. The US Census is not for some social research gathering effort, that is not its function, and you know it.
                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by ScienceBuff (March 17, 2010 3:05 pm ET)
                    3  
                    First, I disagree about government programs. When societal discrimination is a reality, as it indisputably is, government would be failing to serve its citizens by ignoring it.

                    However, let's put that issue aside. There is a great deal of benefit to American society in many ways, including economically, by having a broad set of demographic data available. Race is only one small aspect of that, but it's an emotional hot-button that some conservatives are jumping on. Using the census to gather that demographic data is an extremely efficient and accurate method of obtaining it. It's used all the time by state, local and federal governments. It's also used by charitable organization, grass roots movements, research organizations and many, many many private businesses.

                    There really isn't anything sinister about it.
                    Report Abuse
                    • Author by MagCynic (March 17, 2010 3:15 pm ET)
                        3
                      There really isn't anything sinister about it.
                      Re
                      There is probably not anything sinister about it. I'm not trying to claim there are no benefits to a comprehensive census like we have now. Off the top of my head - without doing any research whatsoever - I can list gerrymandering as a concern with this sort of census. A group of people in power - if they so choose - could easily move the district lines based on what the census shows to keep them in power longer than they should be. More likely than not though there's no inherent danger of telling somebody your race, age, sex, etc. And more than likely by the time the census gets to my mail I'll forget all this and fill the darn thing out anyways. At the very least though we should be cautious with what our government does. Prudence isn't just a Beatles song after all.
                      Report Abuse
                      • Author by ScienceBuff (March 17, 2010 3:25 pm ET)
                        2  
                        The origin of the term gerrymandering dates back to the early 1800s, before the US Census began collecting such detailed demographic data. The practice will exist whether that data is collected or not.
                        Report Abuse
                  • Author by DellDolly (March 17, 2010 3:10 pm ET)
                    1  
                    Once again, you're wrong. Get over it. You can't defend a single argument you've made on this thread today. You've devolved every argument into a personal attack after your bogus talking points have been shot down.

                    The US Census has FAQ's about why they collect data, and it also explains that they can and SHOULD collect that data. The OMB has been doing this for years and years - saying that collecting this data is right, proper, and necessary.

                    "The Census Bureau collects race data in accordance with guidelines provided by the U.S. Office of Management and Budget."

                    The data being USED, including data about racial makeup of regions, communities or neighborhoods, by some other group or some other governmental agency, is perfectly legit and appropriate.
                    Report Abuse
              • Author by SMTDL (March 18, 2010 12:48 pm ET)
                   
                You think there is racial neutrality? Now? Consistently? Everywhere?
                Polling has shown about 20 -25% of voters that said the race of the candiate would influence their vote.How many aren't going to even answer that question honestly?How many more do it when they vote or judge people but they don't/can't/won't see it!!
                How can you begin to assess grievances/complaints of discrimination with out some demographic data?This is beyond cynical to malign the Government for conducting a census in the same way it has been done for centuries.Go back and check;race was always included along with age, names,sex,etc.State of birth was also included long ago.The 1st time names were listed for Blacks was in 1870 census!You know why ..right?
                Report Abuse
    • Author by John Paradox (March 17, 2010 2:13 pm ET)
         
      Race: Skrull.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by LittleFuzzy (March 17, 2010 3:06 pm ET)
        2
      Civil Disobedience means refusing to comply with a law that is unjust. It also means possible arrest, trial and fines and/or jail time. The prospect of having a criminal record due to adherence to one's principals is daunting.

      People who willingly accept this prospect are to be admired.

      People who loudly proclaim their willingness but continue to comply with the law are despicable.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by SMTDL (March 19, 2010 1:24 pm ET)
           
        What is unjust about the Government asking for a few personal details about EVERY person.No one is singled out!!!
        Race is included in lots of places like Driver's License,Passports,etc..Why the census paranoia??
        Report Abuse
    • Author by Jeremy Danials (March 17, 2010 5:48 pm ET)
      3  
      If it's not important what race you are, what possible problem would you have in truthfully filling this out? Remember, if you don't fill it out completely, the Government will come to your door.

      I'm a brown-haired, brown-eyed, short-as-all-crap German-descended American, and I don't care who knows it. Whatever you are, that's awesome too. But if you feel like THIS is where you have to make a principled stand, well, you're priorities are SORELY misplaced.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by toxicshock (March 17, 2010 7:03 pm ET)
         
      Jeeze, now conservatives have a problem with the CENSUS? What DON'T they have a problem with?
      Report Abuse
    • Author by JSWeathers (March 17, 2010 7:13 pm ET)
         
      Just to let you all know, if you're interested in supporting this campaign, go to CheckAmerican.org and sign the pledge stating that you are tired of being classified as a hyphenated American and that when you receive your 2010 Census form, you will check "Other race", and write in "American" as your race.

      It’s time we stop thinking of people in terms of ethnic and racial groups and starting thinking of people as individuals. This is a great way to send the message that we are tired of being classified as hyphenated Americans.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by ryno3151 (March 18, 2010 11:18 am ET)
         
      Why are Hispanics categorized any differently from Italians or Poles or Irish? Hispanic is not a race.
      Report Abuse

my.MediaMatters.org

Login  Sign Up

Push Back

Phone calls, emails and letters from the public do make a difference. Remember that to be effective you must be polite, and professional. Express your specific concerns regarding that particular news report or commentary, and indicate what you would like the media outlet to do differently in the future.