Previous Story Next Story View Comments Send This Page Date Archives Category Archives

Ariz. House Panel Backs Ballot Measure On Bias

More news stories on Racial Preferences in Education

AP, June 10, 2009

A state House committee has endorsed new legislation to have Arizona voters decide whether to amend the Constitution to generally prohibit discrimination and favorable treatment by state and local government based on sex, race, ethnicity, color and national origin.

The Government Committee’s 6-3 vote Wednesday sends the resolution calling for the ballot measure proposed for the 2010 general election ballot to the full House following a legal review.

The measure is a retooled version of an initiative proposal that failed to qualify for the 2008 ballot. It is championed by former California educator Ward Connerly.

That proposed amendment to the Arizona Constitution was described as being intended to dismantle state and local government preferential programs for women and minorities.

Original article

(Posted on June 15, 2009)

Previous story Next Story Post a Comment Send This Page Search

Comments

1 — Istvan wrote at 6:34 PM on June 15:

One set of rules for everybody. If you can’t cut the mustard perhaps you should study more, work harder and try again. Life isn’t even-steven folks.

2 — Bobby wrote at 6:44 PM on June 15:

It’s about time. The policy is so unfair to have whites carry an undue burden in taxes, and yet receive nothing in return.

3 — GA Peach wrote at 8:17 PM on June 15:

“…dismantle state and local government preferential programs for women and minorities.”

Articles like this make me sick because they insinuate that somehow “white” woman are included in this. NO THEY’RE NOT EITHER. Unless they are openly gay.

4 — SKIP wrote at 10:00 PM on June 15:

3 — GA Peach wrote at 8:17 PM on June 15:
“…dismantle state and local government preferential programs for women and minorities.”
Articles like this make me sick because they insinuate that somehow “white” woman are included in this. NO THEY’RE NOT EITHER. Unless they are openly gay.

I totally agree with GA Peach here, “minorities & women” DOES NOT INCLUDE WHITE women, read anything relative to AA as black only.

5 — Elrey Jones wrote at 11:14 PM on June 15:

Who were the 3 racist anti-white judges? Isn’t this America or is it the Bolshevik Shyster Mugabe Kingdom?

6 — Bobby wrote at 1:45 AM on June 16:

Skip,#4 I totally agree with you and Georgia Peach. I’ve pointed out often on this forum that affirmative action, despite what some people claim, is not for white women. Thus, the constant use of phrases like, “minorities and women” etc. I have personally known a good many white women who have applied for federal, state, county jobs in California, and almost all of them have never even gotten a reply back.

One women got a reply to take a test at 8 A.M. in the morning, yet the letter arrived at her residence on the day of the test at 4:00 P.M. Was it Government inanity or purposely planned? Who knows, because the carrying out by the government of quotas, affirmative action, and other devious programs designed for “protected groups” are always obscure by their very nature. I’m sure there’s some tome published by the government numbering a thousand pages or so, that explains it all.

7 — Anonymous wrote at 8:56 AM on June 16:

Darn! You mean Uncle Sam is lowering incentives to people who want to destroy my race and my country? How ‘racist’!

8 — Anonymous wrote at 3:22 PM on June 16:

If this gets rid of the racist affirmative action policies that infects most of our nation, than by all means vote for it.

Home Top Previous story Next Story Send This Page Search