Hello, newcomer... Welcome to this pale blue dot called ... "EARTH".

For most of the history of the United States.

cite?

The Mormons were severely persecuted during their early days, which is why they decided to head West.

I assumed you meant the executive order itself.

If you gonna keep insisting I didn't read it, please do tell me just what exactly is the policy in the order besides "let's add another office in DoEducation and have it do... uh... something."

I am well aware the term "reverse racism" by itself is a nonsensical phrase but you, and just about everyone who's read about race relations in America, know the phrase and its usual context.

I'm guessing ban in less than 20 posts.

I think it's racist to compare/equate persecution of a cult to widespread owning of one particular race of people. But that's just me.

It being always wrong makes if benign? That makes no sense.

If you don't agree with someone else's belief, just call them a liar. That's not at all scummy.

Yeah 300 of them are you and your ilk calling everyone who disagrees racist and the rest is people trying to explain to you that they are not

If you think it is racist to have a government office that studies and recommends solutions to the specific problems of African American school children, then you are almost certainly a racist.

African American children face specific challenges. It is not racist to recognize this fact and attempt to do something about it. It is utterly amazing that this needs to be explained when we live in a four digit year beginning with a 2.

I wonder if any of you have actually seen a school that is all black in a poor neighborhood or dealt with any African American kids in poverty. Real racism has ravaged the inner cities of this country and I'm sorry if I have no patience for your privileged allegations of bulll**** "racism." Try the real world.

Your definition, that no one uses, is not always wrong. It's a wide definition without any practical use.

Totally agree 13ball. There are specific problems involved with educating different people and races. Ignoring this is inefficient at best and, more likely, directly harmful to millions of people and hampering their ability to get an equal opportunity for education. Of course dividing by races oversimplifies at times and is not a perfect solution. We just do the best with the cards we are dealt (). Having an office that is specially equipped to educate people with a shared cultural background is just doing a better job at tending to people's particular needs then if we ignore some of these common denominators. It is simply more efficient to have people who understand black people's situation working in one office and people who understand and can better educate Hispanics working in another (If you still think this is racist, just recognize that even if there was only one office, it will be divided in the same fashion. Whether or not there are "seperate offices," there is still a division based on race and a multitude of other factors).
Is it political pandering? Of course. Is it racist (in a loose sense of the term)? Sure, if that makes you happy, although it does not help to progress the conversation. Does that mean it is bad or unfair? Of course not.
Also, like Howard Beale pointed out, most of you aren't even responding to how this will/could actually work, which is potentially not even going to be according to a division by race, but larger geographic boundaries like zip code (or income).
It is sad that the people calling this racist are in a way dominating the discourse. We could actually have an interesting conversation if we wanted and didn't get sucked into this dribble.

I think its racist that you want to grant special privileges to group of historically oppressed people but not another group of historically oppressed people.