Posted on April 27 at 1:42 p.m.Suggest removal

Right, we should honor those who drink and drive if we're going to honor those who have fought for our country and died. Almost the same thing, right?

On

Posted on April 12 at 3:11 a.m.Suggest removal

The majority does not mean the most. Majority means a number or percentage equaling more than half of a total. That's why the constitution says that if no candidate recieves the majority, the top candidates have a runoff election. And to answer your question, NO. 48%+43%+5%+5% does not equal 100 percent. It equals 101%.

On

Posted on April 5 at 3:19 p.m.Suggest removal

"Less-exceptional students who aren’t willing to sacrifice for a more rigorous education should not be welcomed to drag down OU’s reputation and average test scores"

Does "less-exceptional" mean "poor?"
If you want a better reputaion, then raise the academic standards to get in, not the financial standards.

On

Posted on September 30 at 12:17 p.m.Suggest removal

He's right, arguing the pro-life stance based on religion is stupid. You can't make something illegal just because its against your religion. You have to present better reasoning than that because the whole world doesn't necessarily agree with your religion. And if they did, then you would have to make EVERYTHING illegal that's against you're religion. Idols, women not submitting to men, premarital sex, using God's name in vain, etc. I'm pro-life because I believe in human rights and personal responsibility, and I don't believe that we should add the "choice" of killing another human to someone's list of options to cover up a bad "choice" that they made. So please, to give the rest of us pro-lifers some legitimacy, drop the religion when it comes to politics.

On

Posted on September 10 at 10:55 p.m.Suggest removal

"I am absolutely stunned at the blatant racism in this country."
"You white folks who are hell bent on destroying this country because you are loosing the majority, be afraid. Be very afraid. Because we are coming at you with the power of God on our side. The side of the righteous"

Does anybody see the contradiction here?
Especially considering Mr West didn't mention a particular race that frightened him. If a black student had written this, would it be that big of a deal? Why is it ok for African Americans to not want to be around gang activity, but if a white kid is fearful of gang activity he is racist? But saying that black people are more righteous than "you white folks who are hell bent on destroying this country" is supposed to be so awesome that you have a free ticket to heaven? This is complete ignorance at best. And as much as you'd like to pull the race card and say that i'm calling you ignorant because you're black, let me just clarify that I'm calling you ignorant because of your clearly racist remarks following your statement saying that you are stunned at the blatent racism in this country.

On

Posted on September 2 at 9:56 p.m.Suggest removal

yeah it seems reasonable to me. I mean what if the ticket office screwed up and accidnetaly sent every student a ticket to a game, and you couldn't find a seat that you paid for because all of those students didn't wanna give up their reward for someone else's mistake? I know I'd be pissed. As long as they've given them plenty of time. But maybe they should get some sort of compensation, like a discount on the permits or something for the mistake.

On

Posted on September 2 at 9:46 p.m.Suggest removal

It would be a perfect world if we didn't define each other by the color of our skin, but we can't control the thoughts of others. And we can't expect others to stop defining us by skin color, if thats still the way we define ourselves. If someone calls some people who have bad teeth and beat their kids white trash, should I be offended because I'm white? No. Because I'm more than just a white person. Them insulting someone of my skin color isn't a direct attack at me. Nobody wants to be held accountable for everything a person of their skin color does. When an African American gang commits a drive-by and kills someone do you feel like that reflects on you because you are African American? No. Are all white people feeling guilty because of all the people Timothy McVeigh killed? Just because they did something bad it doesn't mean that everyone of that skin color is like that. So then when someone calls a few people gangsters, why then does that reflect on you? It doesn't. That is playing the victim. It seems people only want to be defined by their skin color when they feel that someone of their skin color is being treated unfairly, so that they can be a victim. But nobody wants to link themselves to that skin color when someone of that group has done something wrong. "He called them gangsters and they're black, which means he's calling all black people gangsters" is a perfectly reasonable assumption but "they killed someone and they're black so all black people killed someone" is not? I think Neither one of those statements is reasonable. You can make an assumption about a person of color without it having anything to do with their skin color. You are more than a color. So look past it.

On

Posted on September 2 at 9:15 p.m.Suggest removal

Even if that part of town is predominantly African American,I still don't see how this is racist. He didn't express fear of the fact that they were black. He expressed fear because of the violence and because they looked like gangsters. Yes, we shouldn't judge people based on appearance, but as a society we depend on those judgements. It's amazing that we finally have an African American president. But do you think he would have been elected (or any of our previous presidents for that matter) if he had presented himself as a thug. If he went around wearing oversized t-shirts and jeans that sag to his knees? He would not have been elected. THAT is the image that people are afraid of. Not necessarily his skin color. If you look like that of a job interview you won't be hired. Everyone's aware of the way "gangstas" usually dress. And if you intentionally dress as such, its sending the message that you want people to consider you a gangster. Just like we all have some sort of idea of what the typical uniform of a prostitute is. So if you walk down the street in such clothing, you're sending a message that you want people to percieve you that way. That's why employers care what you wear to an interview. They want to know that you want them to percieve you as professional. If you go into an interview looking like a redneck, gangster, prostitute, slacker, etc, you probably won't get the job. I don't agree with it, but thats how we distinguish people as a society. If you want people to think your baby is a girl, you dress it in pink. If you want people to think you are in a gang, you'll wear that uniform. Its an unfortunate fact of life. But you can't call someone racist if they think you are what you're dressed up as. Just like you can't really be pissed at someone for calling your baby girl a boy when you've dressed her in blue. If you don't want to be considered a gangster, pull your pants up. If you don't want to be considered a redneck, put some clean pants on, and a shirt. Calling someone racist isn't going to change the way that you are letting others percieve you.

On

Posted on September 2 at 12:46 p.m.Suggest removal

"Kolsrud and McConnell said their trouble with the parking permit situation makes them wish there were more priority housing parking spaces."

Yikes! I remember freshman year living in the dorms and I would look for a spot for HOURS. It was pretty annoying, but the worst part was all of the EMPTY priority housing spots. Maybe there are more priority housers to fill them now, but I know there wasn't when I was in the dorms.

On

Posted on September 2 at 12:40 p.m.Suggest removal

I am not African American but I would be completely offended at this. Not at the article itself, but that the entire school reads an article about someone being scared of gangsters, and everyone automatically thinks that that word can only refer to African Americans.
The only way you can possibly see this article as racist is if you draw from your own stereotypes to support your argument. If you are quite sure that by "gangstas" and "shady cars" and "rap music" that he meant black people, then aren't YOU the one using stereotypes? People of ALL races can join a gang. As someone who is not part of a gang, coming in contact with any gang member, regardless of color, is scary.
Think about what a gang is about. It's a lot of violence to protect members of the gang. So if anything, he was stereotyping all gang members here, or even all people who dress like gang members, not just ones of a particular race.
Also, there are white people, mexicans, etc who listen to rap music and drive "shady cars." To think that those words are obviously referring to African Americans, and are therefore racist seems pretty racist.
And if a drive-by happened involving a gang that injured people, a person has every right to be scared. By calling this article racist, we are implying that anytime anyone says "gang" or "shady" or "bad neighborhood" that it automatically means black people, which is stereotyping. Maybe the author WAS thinking of a particular race, or maybe he doesn't play into the stereotypes and didn't think of those words as racist. He obvisouly is scared of "gangstas." Do you honestly think that if someone asked him to go hang out with a gang he would decline, but then if they said "it's a white gang" he'd be ok with it? Probably not. But it isn't our place to analyze what he writes using our own stereotypes. Let us not turn into the school who cried "racist" when we really should be re-evaluating our own stereotypes. Just something to think about.

On