nolan, on Mar 3 2005, 06:54 PM, said:
Well, I don't do this very often but I'll have to go back on my word and post one more time on this topic.
Thank you. I am in fact interested in what you have to say on this topic. If nothing else you're helping to keep the debate honest.
Second, I'm not really complaining one way or another that Passion of the Christ didn't get a nomination. I didn't see it, may or may not watch it when it comes on cable, and am not in a position to deem it worthy of awards. You put forth very valid reasons for the picture not being nominated. It may have simply been a lousy movie regardless of how it portrayed Jews, and thus not worthy of a nomination. I don't necessarily feel that a Jewish conspiracy is at fault here.
Quote
As to the percentage of Jews in Hollywood or Congress or anywhere else, so what. Are you suggesting that demographics need to be followed no matter what? If that's the case then you're in trouble. Whites make up only 75% of the US population but I don't hear anyone hear complaining that white corporate America is way over that mark. Are you saying that since Jews are only 1.5% (approx) of the US population that they should never, ever exceed that mark in any profession? Then other groups are in trouble, too.
I've never been one for mindless quotas. In fact quite the opposite. I prefer to have positions filled solely by merit without regard to demographics. However, this also means you must have fair competition for those positions. This is the problem as I see it with the media. Given the quality or rather lack of it in movies, music, news reporting, and so forth I find it difficult to believe that merit played much of a role in filling many of these positions. Rather, I feel nepotism and cronyism played a large part and this is what accounts for the skewed makeup of the media. Granted, if you become an actor or director because someone owes your father a favor, you still require some talent to become good at it. However, there are plenty in the media whose never surpass mediocrity yet retain their positions because of people they know or their friends know. This is my problem with the mass media these days, not the fact that the group involved happens to be largely Jewish in makeup. I hate it when people get jobs they don't deserve, and worse get to keep them, because of who they or their parents know. All the more so when there are plenty of better qualified people waiting in the wings to fill the void. The media suffers from a lack of creativity and more importantly a lack of diversity because of this. It seems on important political issues the Hollywood elite speaks one voice. Those who dissent are quickly silenced. This is counter to everything a free society should be about. And since these same people report the news and shape public opinion, it's downright dangerous.
Quote
Your link to the Catholic News Service web site was intersesting. I note that you make a point of mentioning that Jews make up almost 7% of Congress while only being about 2% of the population. Why didn't you mention, based on numbers from the same site, that Methodists make up 12% of Congress while being only 4.75% of the population? Or why not mention that Presbyterians make up 9% of Congress but only 1.4% of the US population? Or Episcopalians make up 7.5% of Congress while only being 1% of the US population? Or that Catholics are by far the largest group in Congress at 29%? Those numbers are based on the Census Bureaus population count and religious affiliation memberships as reported here (http://www.census.gov/cgi-bin/popclock) and here (http://www.religioustolerance.org/us_rel2.htm) (Sorry, I don't know how to make an easier link like you did.)
And guess why I did that? Simply because I wasn't aware of the percentages of the other groups on the population at large, not because of any bias on my part. Sure, this rings yet more alarm bells. In fact, of even greater concern to me is why we have no admitted non-believers in Congress despite the fact that they may very well make up the majority of the US population. As for Catholics representing 29%, if anything then they may be underrepresented relative to their numbers. Again I don't care. As with the media, it concerns me more if these people were elected based not on merit, but because of media distortion of the facts.
And BTW in order to make the links easier you would do the following: [url*=link]text[/url*] except eliminate the two *'s which I had to put in to keep the formatting from disappearing. If you do it correctly then the two links you gave me would appear like
this and
this.
Quote
What I can't figure out is why are you singling out Jews for special notice when other groups fit in the very same catagory?
As for singling out Jews, it was not intentional but I still have a question to pose to you. If Jews make up less than 7% of Congress and 1.5% of the population then why do we continue to send something like $6 billion to Israel each year? The American public is definitely largely against it. Further, it serves no valid reason. In fact, it destablilizes the Middle East. Without US aid Israel would be forced to make peace with its neighbors in order to continue to exist. Also, the US would gain more friends in the Arab world once it was seen that we weren't taking sides. Think about it for a while. My conclusion, right or wrong, is that the influence of Jews on public policy extends far beyond what the numbers in Congress indicate. I'm against quotas but by the same token when any minority can make policy which negatively affects the other 98.5% of the population I'd say we're in serious trouble. If on the other hand Jews represented 90% of the population, then of course representing Jewish interests benefits the majority. If I seem to be singling out Jews then, it is because they're making policy which doesn't represent my interests very well. For example, right now I see the media trying to stop private Social Security accounts and a national sales tax to replace the income tax. Both measures would benefit me and the economy greatly yet the entrenched senior lobby (AARP), and accountant lobby groups are fighting them. Incidentally, both groups are heavily Jewish in makeup, especially the accountants who would lose much of their work if we ever eliminated the income tax. However, the public would benefit greatly in both cases and to me that is the sole function of repesentative government-to do whatever benefits most of the people most of the time, not to make policy which creates jobs for members of your particular racial/ethnic group.
Quote
How do you edit these posts? I keep thinking I've proofed them only to find
spelling mistakes after I've added a reply.
There's an edit button but it only allows editing for I think one minute. This isn't enough time to read a long post and correct spelling errors.
Average humanity must be, on the intelligence scale, the equivalent of a "low grade moron" compared with wherever this device's design came from.
Sign In
Register
Help
MultiQuote
