Affirmative action is a practice that establishes the provision of granting greater rights for particular groups of people over others which, ipso facto, is a violation of the 14th Amendment of our Constitution (unless, of course, it is interpreted as a living, changeable document by a progressive Justice). The way it has been applied in this country is to inequitably, immorally and probably unconstitutionally assign greater rights, opportunities and privileges to blacks at the expense of whites and Asian-Americans.
Is this fair?
Of course not!
This is reverse discrimination, plain and simple. People are being penalized because their skin is white (or they came from China or Japan, etc.). Such a policy fosters resentment from those who are discriminated against and exacerbates racial tensions and is counterproductive.
In the following editorial by Sen. James Webb of Virginia, a Democrat, he calls for the abolishment of this divisive, inequitable, morally wrong and unconstitutional (strictly speaking) policy. He states that:
“Nondiscrimination laws should be applied equally among all citizens, including those who happen to be white. The need for inclusiveness in our society is undeniable and irreversible, both in our markets and in our communities. Our government should be in the business of enabling opportunity for all, not in picking winners.”
We strongly agree.
Diversity and the Myth of White Privilege America still owes a debt to its black citizens, but government programs to help all 'people of color' are unfair. They should end.
James Webb July 22, 2010
The NAACP believes the tea party is racist. The tea party believes the NAACP is racist. And Pat Buchanan got into trouble recently by pointing out that if Elena Kagan is confirmed to the Supreme Court, there will not be a single Protestant Justice, although Protestants make up half the U.S. population and dominated the court for generations.
Forty years ago, as the United States experienced the civil rights movement, the supposed monolith of White Anglo-Saxon Protestant dominance served as the whipping post for almost every debate about power and status in America. After a full generation of such debate, WASP elites have fallen by the wayside and a plethora of government-enforced diversity policies have marginalized many white workers. The time has come to cease the false arguments and allow every American the benefit of a fair chance at the future.
I have dedicated my political career to bringing fairness to America's economic system and to our work force, regardless of what people look like or where they may worship. Unfortunately, present-day diversity programs work against that notion, having expanded so far beyond their original purpose that they now favor anyone who does not happen to be white.
In an odd historical twist that all Americans see but few can understand, many programs allow recently arrived immigrants to move ahead of similarly situated whites whose families have been in the country for generations. These programs have damaged racial harmony. And the more they have grown, the less they have actually helped African-Americans, the intended beneficiaries of affirmative action as it was originally conceived.
How so?
Lyndon Johnson's initial program for affirmative action was based on the 13th Amendment and on the Civil Rights Act of 1866, which authorized the federal government to take actions in order to eliminate "the badges of slavery." Affirmative action was designed to recognize the uniquely difficult journey of African-Americans. This policy was justifiable and understandable, even to those who came from white cultural groups that had also suffered in socio-economic terms from the Civil War and its aftermath.
The injustices endured by black Americans at the hands of their own government have no parallel in our history, not only during the period of slavery but also in the Jim Crow era that followed. But the extrapolation of this logic to all "people of color"—especially since 1965, when new immigration laws dramatically altered the demographic makeup of the U.S.—moved affirmative action away from remediation and toward discrimination, this time against whites. It has also lessened the focus on assisting African-Americans, who despite a veneer of successful people at the very top still experience high rates of poverty, drug abuse, incarceration and family breakup.
Those who came to this country in recent decades from Asia, Latin America and Africa did not suffer discrimination from our government, and in fact have frequently been the beneficiaries of special government programs. The same cannot be said of many hard-working white Americans, including those whose roots in America go back more than 200 years.
Contrary to assumptions in the law, white America is hardly a monolith. And the journey of white American cultures is so diverse (yes) that one strains to find the logic that could lump them together for the purpose of public policy.
The clearest example of today's misguided policies comes from examining the history of the American South.
The old South was a three-tiered society, with blacks and hard-put whites both dominated by white elites who manipulated racial tensions in order to retain power. At the height of slavery, in 1860, less than 5% of whites in the South owned slaves. The eminent black historian John Hope Franklin wrote that "fully three-fourths of the white people in the South had neither slaves nor an immediate economic interest in the maintenance of slavery."
The Civil War devastated the South, in human and economic terms. And from post-Civil War Reconstruction to the beginning of World War II, the region was a ravaged place, affecting black and white alike.
In 1938, President Franklin Roosevelt created a national commission to study what he termed "the long and ironic history of the despoiling of this truly American section." At that time, most industries in the South were owned by companies outside the region. Of the South's 1.8 million sharecroppers, 1.2 million were white (a mirror of the population, which was 71% white). The illiteracy rate was five times that of the North-Central states and more than twice that of New England and the Middle Atlantic (despite the waves of European immigrants then flowing to those regions). The total endowments of all the colleges and universities in the South were less than the endowments of Harvard and Yale alone. The average schoolchild in the South had $25 a year spent on his or her education, compared to $141 for children in New York.
Generations of such deficiencies do not disappear overnight, and they affect the momentum of a culture. In 1974, a National Opinion Research Center (NORC) study of white ethnic groups showed that white Baptists nationwide averaged only 10.7 years of education, a level almost identical to blacks' average of 10.6 years, and well below that of most other white groups. A recent NORC Social Survey of white adults born after World War II showed that in the years 1980-2000, only 18.4% of white Baptists and 21.8% of Irish Protestants—the principal ethnic group that settled the South—had obtained college degrees, compared to a national average of 30.1%, a Jewish average of 73.3%, and an average among those of Chinese and Indian descent of 61.9%.
Policy makers ignored such disparities within America's white cultures when, in advancing minority diversity programs, they treated whites as a fungible monolith. Also lost on these policy makers were the differences in economic and educational attainment among nonwhite cultures. Thus nonwhite groups received special consideration in a wide variety of areas including business startups, academic admissions, job promotions and lucrative government contracts.
Where should we go from here? Beyond our continuing obligation to assist those African-Americans still in need, government-directed diversity programs should end.
Nondiscrimination laws should be applied equally among all citizens, including those who happen to be white. The need for inclusiveness in our society is undeniable and irreversible, both in our markets and in our communities. Our government should be in the business of enabling opportunity for all, not in picking winners. It can do so by ensuring that artificial distinctions such as race do not determine outcomes.
Memo to my fellow politicians: Drop the Procrustean policies and allow harmony to invade the public mindset. Fairness will happen, and bitterness will fade away.
Mr. Webb, a Democrat, is a U.S. senator from Virginia.
With Obama’s ascendancy to the Presidency, Americans are witnessing and experiencing rampant racism and not of whites to blacks but rather the opposite, of blacks to whites. Furthermore, this is being accepted with either in your face glee by many blacks or by a dismissive attitude by the liberal media and politicians.
This acceptance of preferential treatment, privileges, rights, etc. because the facilitator or perpetrator is black (as opposed to white) is unacceptable, discriminatory and illegal.
IT IS RACIST AND MUST BE STOPPED! This must be done by actions including verbally, protests, laws and lawsuits.
There must be no tolerance of this black on white (or on any other race/color)!
Stories similar to the one below has become quite commonplace throughout the country with liberals claiming that such actions are “providing more equal opportunities or leveling the playing field”. Such claims are demagoguery but are used to obtain advantages for blacks at the expense of others. There are plenty disadvantaged whites or Hispanics who are being discriminated against by these actions.
You can just imagine the national outrage and uproar (including visits by Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton) if there was a school field trip for (poor) whites that excluded blacks. We didn’t hear a peep from these racist demagogues that white children were excluded.
Double standards are not acceptable!!
Field trip for black students sparks controversy at Ann Arbor elementary school
David Jesse AnnArbor.com Staff May 3, 2010
An Ann Arbor elementary school principal used a letter home to parents tonight to defend a field trip for black students as part of his school’s efforts to close the achievement gap between white and black students.
Dicken Elementary School Principal Mike Madison wrote the letter to parents following several days of controversy at the school after a field trip last week in which black students got to hear a rocket scientist.
Principal Mike Madison is shown at Forsythe in this 2005 file photo.
“In hindsight, this field trip could have been approached and arranged in a better way," Madison wrote. "But as I reflect upon the look of excitement, enthusiasm and energy that I saw in these children’s eyes as they stood in the presence of a renowned African American rocket scientist in a very successful position, it gave the kids an opportunity to see this type of achievement is possible for even them.
“It was not a wasted venture for I know one day they might want to aspire to be the first astronaut or scientist standing on the Planet Mars.
“I also think it’s important that you know that I have talked to the children who did not go on the field trip, and I think they have a better understanding of the purpose of the AA Lunch Bunch now, as I hope you do. I’m sorry if any kids were upset by the field trip or my discussion afterwards with them, and I have let them know that.
“The intent of our field trip was not to segregate or exclude students as has been reported, but rather to address the societal issues, roadblocks and challenges that our African American children will face as they pursue a successful academic education here in our community.”
A handful of parents have complained to district administrators about the trip, the group and Madison. More than a half-dozen parents contacted AnnArbor.com to raise the complaints, but none would agree to talk on the record, citing concerns of reprisals to their children by Madison.
While there’s no clear agreement between the two sides about exactly what happened, most of the controversy centers on a field trip taken last week by the Lunch Bunch for African American boys and girls to hear a black rocket engineer talk.
District spokeswoman Liz Margolis said after the trip was over, those who went returned to their fifth-grade class and were greeted by boos by those who didn’t go on the trip. Margolis said Madison, who is black, heard the boos, and went to talk to the class. She said he and the class had a “discussion” about race issues.
“He wasn’t yelling at them. He was very passionate about it,” Margolis said.
Parents have complained he was yelling at the class and belittled a Muslim girl who said she also had experienced racism and discrimination.
The program itself began earlier this year after the school received its latest achievement results. Margolis said the Lunch Bunch came from the school’s School Improvement Team and is tied to that team’s goals. She said several other schools in the district have similar programs targeting specific subgroups of students who are at risk.
According to meeting minutes, Madison introduced the club to the PTO in February as part of the school and district’s equity work.
Parent Vicki Haviland, who is white and has three children at Dicken, said she is supportive of the overall program. Haviland is the secretary of the Dicken PTO and has filed papers for the open school board seat.
“I think the African-American Lunch Bunch is totally in line with the district’s equity work,” she said. “I think the field trip was a fine idea.”
She said she hopes the school and the district would “do a better job in talking about (race in education). Clearly there are people who don’t feel heard about it.”
David Jesse covers K-12 education for AnnArbor.com. He can be reached at davidjesse@annarbor.com or at 734-623-2534.
The following are some of the comments that readers made to the above article:
I propose Dicken create a "Whites Only Lunch Bunch Club."
By creating and sanctioning both the "African American Lunch Bunch Club" and sponsoring the "blacks only" field trip, Madison is in direct violation of the Non-Discrimination Policy of the Ann Arbor Public Schools (Board Policy 2050). That policy reads as follows: No person shall be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination in any educational program or activity available in any school on the basis of race, color, sex, religion, creed, political belief, age, national origin, linguistic and language differences, sexual orientation, gender expression, socioeconomic status, height, weight, marital or familial status, or disability.
Michael Madison's actions are also in direct violation of the Michigan Civil Rights Initiative which states that a "public college or university, community college, or school district shall not discriminate against, or grant preferential treatment to, any individual or group on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin in the operation of public employment, public education, or public contracting."
Madison writes, "The intent of our field trip was not to segregate or exclude students as has been reported, but rather to address the societal issues, roadblocks and challenges that our African American children will face as they pursue a successful academic education here in our community."
If this had been a "whites only" field trip you'd have Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton and every other noise maker heading to Ann Arbor screaming racial injustice and demanding that the person or persons involved in arranging this field trip be relieved of their duties. Why is it when it's the other way around, nothing is ever said or done???
Can you imagine the fallout if whites only were taken on a field leaving black kids behind.Jesse Jackson,Farakon,Al Sharpton etc.would be here in 12 hours flat with their mugs on national tv.That being said the parents who complained but refuse to be named are spineless.Way to stand up for your beliefs.I hope you sleep well and are proud of yourselves.Lame excuse given too.
But the field trip was by invitation only and only black students were invited to attend. Madison used skin color as the sole criteria for determining who could experience this special field trip. When there wasn't enough room for all the black children to attend, he "uninvited" some of the black girls. I wonder what Madison would have done had there not been enough room for all of the black boys? Sent the light-skinned black boys back to their classrooms?
Madison also wrote in his email message to parents this evening, "Even though I am the principal of Dicken school, these strategies and interventions were not made in isolation by myself. The entire staff at Dicken decided that we needed to do something different."
Embarrassing attempt by Madison to "share the blame" for HIS ridiculous decision to give special privileges to children based solely on the color of their skin.
What the article fails to mention is that Madison is a black male and that he doles out special attention and privileges not to underachieving children, physically disadvantaged children, economically disadvantaged children, or all non-white children - just black children specifically. Privileges at Dicken Elementary School are based solely on skin color. There's nothing subtle about it, Michael Madison and the Ann Arbor School District are engaging in discriminatory practices.
Mr. Madison has taken, and will continue to take a lot of heat for this effort. In retrospect, it is easy to label this particular initative as a bad idea, at least in the way it was implemented. But let's cut him some slack. The achievement gap is a persistent problem, one that calls for special attention and out-of-the-box thinking. This was a sincere and heartfelt attempt to provide African American students with a unique opportunity to meet with a strong positive role model. Rather than sounding the alarm of indignation at reverse discrimination, let's look at this as a learning experience about how to introduce the issue of race (which people are very reluctant to discuss openly and honestly) into the classroom.
Madison just doesn't get it. Closing the achievement gap is a noble cause and I fully support it. What I don't support is excluding children out based solely on the color of their skin.
Madison has created an extremely hostile and divisive atmosphere at Dicken Elementary School.
P.S. Madison, you didn't apologize to all the children who weren't invited. My children did not get an apology from you. The only children who received an apology from you were the ones you berated and bullied for voicing their displeasure at being excluded, the ones you brought to tears, the ones who needed to be counseled after your angry tirade (because they are not black).
Madison starts to apologize and acknowledge he messed up, but catches himself and writes, "But as I reflect upon the look of excitement, enthusiasm and energy that I saw in these children’s eyes as they stood in the presence of a renowned African American rocket scientist in a very successful position, it gave the kids an opportunity to see this type of achievement is possible for even them."
But Madison, why did only the black children get to have such a wonderful experience? I wish you could have seen excitement, enthusiasm and energy in my children's eyes.
Andrew Thomas: I agree with your sentiment, but there are other ways to think outside the box and to accomplish these goals without engaging in blatant discrimination.
If white students had been invited to go they would have had a chance to see that a black man could achieve things that they might only associate whites. The school missed a very good opportunity to help break some racial stereotypies. Seems like a wasted opportunity.
And lest anyone believe otherwise, there were black children on that field trip who come from financially-privileged families.
If you believe in genetic mental equality, then the black achievement gap in the Ann Arbor school district is a function of nurture, not nature. The fact that there is a persistent achievement gap for black students in AA schools despite the tons of extra resources AA pumps into special emphasis programs speaks to the failure of the parents of these children.
Madison needs to listen to Bill Cosby and transmit some serious heat to the parents of these underperforming children. The AA school district is obviosuly bending over backwards to help them... and its not working. If you want to escape the soft discriination of low expectations- move into the Saline school system. AA is headed downhill.
I think all parents should join hands and and formally and peacefully protest the school, and then take a class action lawsuit againts # 1 the county. # 2 the school, and #3 Mike Madison!
This is a blatant abuse of his powers and he is no less guilty!
“The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race.” - Chief Justice Roberts
What happen to M. L. King's "I have a Dream" speech where people were judge by what they did and not their color? We should outlaw all racial groups and just be AMERICANS!
In our recent post, we noted that virtually all of the news media as well as Obama and many in Congress avoided calling the gunman who killed 13 people and wounded 30 at Fort Hood a “terrorist”. That was because he was a Muslim - so we shouldn’t “offend” him. Even with the well chronicled vitriol that he spewed in the presence of others about the righteousness of radical Islam, the virtues of jihad and terrorist attacks and his devoutness to Islam – "let’s not jump to conclusions".
We say: Bull S..t. Tell that to the devastated and forever affected families of the murdered innocent victims who died and to those who were injured.
We refuse to subscribe to a policy of political correctness and don’t think that you should either. Hiding or camouflaging reality and truth and burying your head in the sand may just result in the rest of you being buried too…
The following editorial from IBD discusses “political correctness”, the ubiquitous cancer that is destroying our rights, freedoms and safety.
Suicide By PC
War On Terror: The No. 1 lesson of the Fort Hood massacre is that political correctness kills. But instead of learning this lesson, the Pentagon is repeating the mistake, putting more soldiers at risk.
Army Chief of Staff Gen. George Casey warns that making the connection between Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan's terrorist act and his Islamic faith could "cause a backlash against some of our Muslim soldiers."
Yet ignoring that connection, despite one red flag after another, is what allowed Hasan allegedly to carry out his own violent backlash against non-Muslim soldiers.
Just a few months ago, Hasan was promoted to major. He passed a security clearance despite evidence he openly engaged in anti-American rants, and even discussed cutting the throats of infidels during a PowerPoint presentation. Now there are reports that U.S. intelligence intercepted contacts between Hasan and al-Qaida.
But shhh! This isn't about Islam. Close your eyes. Look the other way. Do not make the connection.
"It would be an even greater tragedy if our diversity becomes a casualty here," Casey said on Sunday's morning shows.
Really? Tell that to the victims of the Muslim terrorist who shouted "Allahu Akbar!" before pumping fellow soldiers full of bullets at close range. Tell it to their grieving families.
Diversity is a good thing only if Muslims embrace the military's mission. Of course many do, but a growing number object to fighting Muslims abroad. By our count, at least a dozen Muslims in uniform have been charged or convicted of terror or spying since 9/11, including Hasan. That's a sectarian pattern, not a random act by a lone gunman, as the media have portrayed it.
The prize for digging up the most imaginative excuse for Hasan's actions goes to ABC News. The network speculated he may have suffered from "second-hand trauma" — "like second-hand smoke" — from counseling soldiers with post traumatic stress disorder.
You see, Hasan had never actually been deployed, never seen combat, as first assumed. So the initial spin that he suffered PTSD no longer worked. Unless he suffered combat stress by proxy. So now it's "second-hand trauma." Anything but jihad.
But let's be fair. At least ABC reported that Hasan was Muslim. Over at Fox News, host Shephard Smith refused to even mention Hasan's name. And he's still waiting on a motive. "As journalists," the anchor said Monday, "we can't report what the motive was, because at this point, we don't know what his motive was."
Seems Fox has caught the PC virus.
Meanwhile, our commander in chief refuses to call the attack terrorism. And he seemed to take news of the military massacre glibly. Briefed on the shooting before an appearance at a Democrat event, he walked up to the podium grinning. Then, in a bizarre non-sequitur, he gave a "shout out" to a Democrat supporter, infuriating soldiers across the country, and rightfully so.
Surely the Homeland Security secretary would tell it like it is. No such luck. Janet Napolitano issued a warning to Americans from the UAE against any anti-Muslim backlash. She said she'd work with Muslim groups, such as the Council on American-Islamic Relations, to deflect any bigotry. To hear her, Islam was the real victim of the Islam-inspired terrorism.
Democrats aren't the only ones in denial. "It's certainly not about his religion," intoned GOP Sen. Lindsey Graham.
Passing out Qurans the morning of the shooting. Nope, no religion here! Proselytizing fellow soldiers to Islam. Not religion.
Close your eyes. Look the other way.
This PC insanity is literally killing us now. We are committing politically correct suicide. If the military is now too PC to protect its own troops from Islamic fanatics on its own soil, how can we be sure it can protect the rest of us?
As part of Obama’s aggressive plan to pass healthcare legislation, the White House has created a website that will it claims will set the record straight on the real truths. Entitled the "Health Insurance Reform Reality Check", it is essentially more of the same: a politically correct racially balanced website that makes specious, unsupportable and partisan claims with the unequivocal intent of continuing the pattern of trying to dupe the American public.
At the very top of the home page is a quote attributed to Obama:
“Whether or not you have health insurance right now, the reforms we seek will bring stability and security that you don’t have today."
"This isn’t about politics. This is about people’s lives. This is about people’s businesses. This is about our future.”
Get real, Arrogance in Chief! This legislation is all about politics. Did you inconveniently forget to mention the affirmative action mandates stealthly contained within the bill? How about the wealth transfers and class warfare intimations. And if it is about people's lives, businesses and our future, why did you attempt to ram this legislation through Congress before the public and probably all members of Congress had a chance to read this gargantuan over one thousand page legislation? Could it be that if they had time to read it they would realize that it would actually be severely harmful to their health?
Speaker of the House Pelosi and the Democrats in Congress have also played gutter politics with Obamanocare. Instead of allowing for constructive discourse and bipartisan input, Pelosi and the Democrats in Congress have prohibited Republican input and have viciously attacked those who are unhappy with the legislation. Those who disagree are called “un-American”, not patriotic, part of a mob, and even Astroturf.
And if this healthcare legislation were truly about people’s lives and businesses it wouldn’t tax individuals to destitution and businesses to oblivion nor would it allow the healthcare that would eventuate to be restricted, rationed and inferior to what is available today.
The one truth in Obama’s statement is that it "is about our future" – a very bleak one health wise and economically, indeed.
The following describes the intolerant rhetoric of Pelosi regarding those who disagree with the healthcare bill. We live in a Democracy which allows for discourse but Pelosi, Reid, Obama and other Democrats are acting as if they are the Imperial rulers of the underling American people.
Some parents may be aware that “politically correct” and “ideological” revisions of historic events and famous individuals going back to the times of the Founding Fathers (a phrase that is now banned) now populate our children’s textbooks. However, most Americans don’t realize how pervasive, misleading, blatantly distorted and altered, and serious these manipulations of truth and fact are.
This is the far left indoctrination of our children when they are most vulnerable. It involves not only what is presented but how it is approached, the emphasis versus lack of it, what is not covered and even pictures and photos to imprint ideas visually. For example, what do the large contrived photos of blissful minorities and disabled people that are pervasive in our children’s math and science books have to do with the facts, theories and other important information that they are supposed to be learning? Yet, when it comes to serving their designated purpose of presenting, discussing and explaining concepts, ideas and information, these same textbooks too often provide brief, inadequate, and difficult to understand descriptions that make it difficult for children to understand and learn the material. It is no wonder that American children score so poorly in comparison to other industrialized nations of the world. We are too worried about social issues and faux equality instead of useful, important educational preparation that will allow them to be well prepared and competitive in life.
Now these overt attempts at indoctrination of our children’s mind are being extended to the banning of innocuous words that are not in accord with far left ideology. This effort to control language is pernicious, dangerous, a threat to free thought and ideas and must be eliminated. Examples of this word control include Congressman or Congresswoman becoming “Member of Congress” and Chairman, Chairwoman or Chairperson becoming “Chair”. Some other “offensive” words that have been banned include brotherhood, fisherman, fellowship and freshman.
Instead of serving as excellent vehicles for learning, many of the textbooks our children are reading are designed to be stealth and subliminal sources of indoctrination as paranoid as it might sound.
The stealth insertion of affirmative action provisos in the Obamanocare legislation is reprehensible, dishonest and insulting to the American people. These racially based stipulations alone should relegate this proposal to oblivion. IBD captured its essence succinctly: “It's affirmative action on steroids, deciding everything from who becomes a doctor to who gets treatment on the basis of skin color.”
This is massive program that will legislate and implement “legal” reverse discrimination which is blatantly wrong both legally and morally. This is remarkably similar to the recent Ricci vs. DeStefano and the City of New Haven firefighters case that “racially empathetic” Sonia Sotomayor ruled against but was subsequently overturned by the Supreme Court.
IBD shrewdly noted, “Whether it's that firefighter coming up the ladder, or the brain surgeon about to remove that tumor in your head, everybody wants that person to be the best regardless of race or ethnicity — and not admitted by quotas and promoted by political correctness.”
Though not necessarily assuming fault or jumping to conclusions, Michael Jackson’s death may be the quintessential example on two counts of the downside of using race as a criteria versus qualifications. It is not clear if Michael Jackson selected his doctor, who now is being investigated for manslaughter in his death, solely because he was black (see Kanye West's deceased mother's scenario). Secondly, he should have thought more about checking the doctor’s training, credentials and qualifications before selecting of him. If he did, he would have discovered that apart from other significant issues, this doctor attended a medical school that historically trains black physicians who quite frequently lack the intellectual aptitude and scholastic credentials required to attend “mainstream” medical schools. This same medical school consistently ranks at or near bottom in comparison to the other medical schools in this country. If you want great quality, you have to start with the best raw materials.
There is also a significant and unfortunate unintended consequence of affirmative action that can be problematic for the countless members of those minorities who have succeeded because of their abilities and not because of quotas or racial preferences. For example, if you have an emergent medical problem and the doctor who is about to treat you who is Afro-American, can and should you trust his/her abilities and judgment? You think: Is he/she a doctor because he/she earned it based on personal merit and intelligence or because of skin color and affirmative action? This should never be a question that one is forced to ponder! On the other side of the coin, minority physicians who earned their medical degree based on merit like everyone else shouldn't have to deal with the questioning of their abilities just because race based affirmative action quotas.
In the recent history of these confirmation hearings, the Democrats have monolithically voted for the appointees if they were liberal and against if they were of conservative ideology – and aggressively and relentlessly challenged them. The Republican Senators have been far too gracious and derelict of their responsibilities, essentially mailing it in and accepting candidates that should have undergone far more rigorous questioning. Unfortunately, it appears that history is repeating itself again. This should rightfully enrage the countless conservatives who are placing their dwindling hopes that Sotomayor can be exposed for the racially divisive jurist that she has so patently demonstrated in the past and have her confirmation blocked. Republican Sen. Jeff Sessions of Alabama has taken his responsibilities seriously and should be lauded whereas Republican Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina initial comments to her that confirmation was inevitable essentially removed virtually all of the pressure off her.
The following is Senator Jeff Sessions in Senate Hearings discussing concerns regarding Sotomayor and the issue of "empathy"
In this video, Senator Sessions discusses his concerns about Sotomayor and the Second Amendment
This video shows Democrat Charles Schumer, the smarmy, arrogant, and condescending lawmaker that he is in his introduction of Sotomayor. You may not want to watch this on a full stomach!
The agenda that Obama and the Congressional Democrats want to impose on the American people is replete with items that will satiate their far left ideological wish list. If implemented, the consequences would be far more destructive than anything that this nation has faced in the past. Their proposals and legislation would cause severe, possibly irreparable harm to all facets of our existence such as our rights and freedoms, finances, wealth accumulation, and even education. We are witnessing relentless attacks on hard working, productive and motivated Americans with one bill after another seeking to levy high and punitive taxes then redistributing the money to those who are unproductive, unmotivated and loudly voice their entitlement mantra. Their rhetoric is intended to engendering class warfare in order to be able to pass imprudent reckless legislation. Penalizing the productive and rewarding the lazy is not the American way. Affirmative action and empathetic judicial decisions favoring specific chosen groups rather than allowing decisions to be based solely on ability, attitude and effort further erode our rights and the tenet of equality for all.
What are some of these bills, issues or newly passed laws? The pork laden, almost $800 billion dollar tax wasting stimulus bill which has been entirely ineffective as even noted by Biden and others in the Administration. Then there is the multi-trillion dollar plan for the government takeover of the healthcare sector which would not only bankrupt this country but also result in severe rationing of care, long wait times even if care was available, and plummeting of the quality of care. The Cap and Trade Bill is the largest, most oppressive tax increase in the history of the world.
These are just for starters. Then we have the issue of Supreme Court Justice nominee Sonia Sotamayor of “ethnic empathy” fame who has had four of her six case rulings in the U.S. Appeals Court overturned by the Supreme Court. Not very good record! And the government’s heavy handed takeover and edicts regarding GM and illegal mandates as regarding the disposition of Chrysler…
We must stop this insanity, this profligate, irresponsible and inexorable spending and borrowing that will encumber this country for generations, severely reduce the standard of living and place us at the mercy of countries like China who do not have our interests at heart. The Government’s actions will also noticeably curtail our liberties, rights and freedoms.
The following parable written by an anonymous author, illustrates the importance of aggressive, effective and vocal opposition to the agenda of Obama and the Pelosi led far left Democrats of Congress.
Dinner With Obama - A Parable
Once upon a time, I was invited to the White House for a private dinner with the President. I am a respected businessman, with a factory that produces memory chips for computers and portable electronics. There was some talk that my industry was being scrutinized by the administration, but I paid it no mind. I live in a free country. There's nothing that the government can do to me if I've broken no laws. My wealth was earned honestly, and an invitation to dinner with an American President is an honor.
I checked my coat, was greeted by the Chief of Staff, and joined the President in a yellow dining room. We sat across from each other at a table draped in white linen. The Great Seal was embossed on the china. Uniformed staff served our dinner.
The meal was served, and I was startled when my waiter suddenly reached out, plucked a dinner roll off my plate, and began nibbling it as he walked back to the kitchen.
"Sorry about that," said the President. "Andrew is very hungry."
"I don't appreciate..." I began, but as I looked into the calm brown eyes across from me, I felt immediately guilty and petty. It was just a dinner roll. "Of course," I concluded, and reached for my glass. Before I could, however, another waiter reached forward, took the glass away and swallowed the wine in a single gulp.
"And his brother, Eric, is very thirsty." said the President.
I didn't say anything. The President is testing my compassion, I thought. I will play along. I don't want to seem unkind.
My plate was whisked away before I had tasted a bite.
"Eric's children are also quite hungry."
With a lurch, I crashed to the floor. My chair had been pulled out from under me. I stood, brushing myself off angrily, and watched as it was carried from the room.
"And their grandmother can't stand for long."
I excused myself, smiling outwardly, but inside feeling like a fool. Obviously I had been invited to the White House to be sport for some game. I reached for my coat, to find that it had been taken. I turned back to the President.
"Their grandfather doesn't like the cold."
I wanted to shout, "that was my coat!" But again, I looked at the placid smiling face of my host and decided I was being a poor sport. I spread my hands helplessly and chuckled.
Then I felt my hip pocket and realized my wallet was gone. I excused myself and walked to a phone on an elegant side table. I learned shortly that my credit cards had been maxed out, my bank accounts emptied, my retirement and equity portfolios had vanished, and my wife had been thrown out of our home. Apparently, the waiters and their families were moving in. The President hadn't moved or spoken as I learned all this, but finally I lowered the phone into its cradle and turned to face him.
"Andrew's whole family has made bad financial decisions. They haven't planned for retirement, and they need a house. They recently defaulted on a subprime mortgage. I told them they could have your home. They need it more than you do."
My hands were shaking. I felt faint. I stumbled back to the table and knelt on the floor. The President cheerfully cut his meat, ate his steak, and drank his wine. I lowered my eyes and stared at the small gray circles on the tablecloth that were water drops.
"By the way," He added, "I have just signed an Executive Order nationalizing your factories. I'm firing you as head of your business. I'll be operating the firm now for the benefit of all mankind. There's a whole bunch of Erics and Andrews out there and they can't come to you for jobs groveling like beggars."
I looked up. The President dropped his spoon into the empty ramekin which had been his crème Brule. He drained the last drops of his wine.
As the table was cleared, he lit a cigarette and leaned back in his chair. He stared at me. I clung to the edge of the table as if were a ledge, and I were a man hanging over an abyss. I thought of the years behind me, of the life I had lived. The life I had earned with a lifetime of work, risk and struggle. Why was I punished? How had I allowed it to be taken? What game had I played and lost? I looked across the table and noticed with some surprise that there was no game board between us.
What had I done wrong?
As if answering the unspoken thought, the President suddenly cocked his head, locked his empty eyes to mine, and bared a million teeth, chuckling wryly as he folded his hands…"You should have stopped me at the dinner roll," he said.
The Fourteenth Amendment mandates that all Americans in this country have the same legal rights and no one is more equal than anyone else. Increasingly, this stipulation is being ignored by the infusion of socialist ideology and “empathy” for certain “victimized” groups into our laws that ironically will give them more rights than other Americans. Affirmative action is certainly the poster child of this but the expansion of federal hate crime laws certainly threatens further erode the protections of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Excerpting from the article below: “As it stands, the bill criminalizes any violent act perpetrated against someone because of race, color, religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity or disability.” Let’s look at the real world consequences of this bill as currently. A White man is beaten by a Black man. The Black man will be charged with assault as under current laws. Now let’s reverse this. A Black man (protected group) is beaten by a White man. Now, not only will the White man be charged with assault but he will also be federally charged with a hate crime.
This same asymmetry of rights is present in other scenarios – just select the protected group. A lesbian attacking a straight female will only be charged with assault but a heterosexual male attacking a gay man not only will be charged with assault but also a hate crime! Though the intentions of the law might have been noble, the unintended consequences on other people’s rights are not. This law should not see the light of day!
Yesterday in our post, we cheered the Supreme Court correct verdict in favor of Ricci and the Firefighters versus the City of New Haven. We also noted that this case was unequivocally a blatant and abhorrent example of reverse discrimination in order to allow the city of New Haven to realize greater ethnic “diversity” in its member firefighters. It egregiously abridged the rights of a group of individuals (largely White) who were more qualified and scored better on the test but did not have the correct ethnicity yet was overturned by only a 5 to 4 margin. We may not be so lucky in the future if Sonia Sotomayor, Obama’s pick for the Supreme Court justice vacancy and whose decision the Supreme Court overturned, is confirmed. Her decisions, opinions, speeches and background are replete with “ethnic empathy” where some people (specific minority groups) have and will be afforded more rights and leeway than others.
The Supreme Court by a 5 to 4 margin overturned the decision of the 2nd U.S. Court of Appeals that Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotamayor rendered and that went against Ricci and the White firefighters in their case versus the City of New Haven. In the surprisingly close ruling, the Supreme Court indicated that these firefighters were unfairly denied promotions because of their race (reverse discrimination) in order for the city of New Haven to implement their diversity plan.
Though the decision was anticipated, what we find shocking is that the vote was only 5 to 4 to reverse the Court of Appeals judgment in a case that was patently was blatantly reverse discrimination by any criteria. This case and the razor thin margin should serve as a clarion call regarding the importance of vehemently opposing the nomination of Sonia Sotomayor. A similar case like this in the future could go the opposite way resulting in the discriminatory abridgement of our rights thus attributing greater inherent rights and equalities to some favored groups or individuals versus others.
Contact your representatives and voice your opposition to Sotomayor being confirmed!
See Video regarding the case and Supreme Court verdict:
It has been well documented in the past that the liberal agenda to force diversity on college campuses has been most discriminatory against Asian Americans. This egregious policy essentially penalizes the hard work, dedication and success of this group as a whole, restricting their ability to enroll at particular universities and colleges where they are eminently more qualified than other applicants.
In an editorial written by Larry Elder in 2006 (Asian Students Face Quiet Bias by Universities), he noted that the median SAT scores for Asians at the University of Michigan was 1400 out of 1600 whereas the median for blacks was 240 points lower. Looking at it from another angle, he noted that Asian students with an SAT score of 1240 and a GPA of 3.2 had only a 10% chance of being accepted there versus 88% of Hispanics and 92% of blacks with the same scores. This is blatant and intolerable racism that must be stopped!
Print This Post
Subscribe to Our RSS Feed
Follow Us on Twitter
Comments