So?

He’s just a weak candidate pandering and flip flopping once again to try to rally a dying, disgraced base. Yawn.

Diogenes, at 6:55 am EDT on July 29, 2008

Oh come on...

I know of a number of other legally sanctioned forms of preferential treatment at the institutions I graduated from (Princeton for my A.B. and Yale for my Ph.D), and most—gasp!—have strongly racial components. But it seems that as long as it is covert, it is legally (I almost wrote “lethally” sanctioned.Affirmative action based on race might have become superannuated for sure and should be replaced by affirmative action based on economic status. You probably wouldn’t like that either.

It has been well documented that recent changes in scholarships and grants have meant that the Ivies and the better state universities have r been given back to the upper middle classes. The world is safe for us again.

Only, given my salary, I’m no longer a member of the upper middle class.

Fartig, at 9:10 am EDT on July 29, 2008

End Double Standards & Quit Rationalizing

The concept and application of “affirmative action” as meaning equal treatment, non-discrimination and fairness in university admissions and employment long ago gave way to racist double standards and gender preferences, especially in universities.

The term du jour for 30 years has been “diversity.”

The various 2008 initiatives are simple, clear and straightforward — no preferences and no discrimination based on race, gender or ethnicity will be permitted in public contracts, university admissions or public employment.

That’s an easy one to support, as voters have shown resoundingly in three large states already in the past 12 years.

The tendentious and tedious excuses, hemming and hawing, and paternalistic whining can be expected to continue in academia, where racist and sexist double standards are a way of life, open and obvious to all, but still piously defended in a tortured manner, as readers of IHE will see on display.

By opposing the 2008 initiatives, Obama confirms his dedication to supporting an odious and divisive system that thinks it’s okay to treat applicants differently based on skin color or gender.

That illiberal stance is reactionary and outdated and I will wager that the initiative wins overwhelmingly in all three states this year....and that’s a good thing.....a very good thing.

Chuck, at 9:55 am EDT on July 29, 2008

Reagan Revisited

What is not stated is that the affirmative action goals process under the federal government’s regulations specifically bars quotas: 41 CFR 60-2.16. “goals may not be rigid and inflexible quotas, which must be met, nor are they to be considered as either a ceiling or a floor for the employment of particular groups. Quotas are expressly forbidden.” Affirmative action goals serve to diversify the pool of qualified candidates as well as remedy the effects of the past exclusion of women and minorities. It is simplistic at best to argue that affirmative action equals quotas or is inherently discriminatory. Only by ignoring American history and the centuries of discrimination can some argue that by diversifying the pool from which one selects qualified individuals is one engaging in discrimination. It just looks self serving, defending the privileged status quo that has existed for generations where the only ones you competed against looked like you. Higher education preferences for wealthy white males have been so common we ignore their existence, especially in the Ivy League. It is appropriate and legal to open the process, as Michigan did by considering legacy students (like President Bush), geography, socio-economic status, feeder schools, athletics and race. While the points were barred, the diversity of the selection criteria was not. If you think race is merely skin color and insignificant, walk a day in the shoes of any person of color in America. It is a permissible factor and has been since Bakke and cannot be replaced by economic status. Ask Danny Glover when he tried to get a taxi in New York. Race still matters in America and it does not matter how wealthy you are.

Sjwilcher, at 10:40 am EDT on July 29, 2008

So now the AAO of Old Dominion is a political analyst?

This is an ARIZONA ballot initiative and the author of the article gets a political quote from the AAO from a university in Virginia? Talk about shopping for a desired quote...

No quotas?? Tell that to Asians trying to get admitted to some universities. Tell that the low income whites who are trying to get money for school. I have been told myself several times that if I had a parent or grandparent of a different ethnicity I could have gotten some help.

McCain isn’t supporting a bill to stop affirmative action (or taking out the euphemisms race based discrimination); he is supporting a ballot measure. The difference is important to recognize. We do live in a representative republic that resolves issues through the democratic process. Universities use a great deal of tax money so why shouldn’t the voters have a say?

Aren’t we constantly telling young students to get involved in the democratic process? What’s good for the goose....

Chuck Norton, at 11:25 am EDT on July 29, 2008

Eliminating Race Does Not Solve Your Problem

I am sorry, Chuck, for what you experienced as a low income student. Please note that studies have shown that if you eliminate race as a factor, as McCain and the Arizona Initiative intends to do, the chances of white students being admitted increase by only 1.26 percent. So, I would not put any hopes on that as a solution. There are just too few disadvantaged students of color to change the odds. As I indicated, Michigan also considered income status as more universities are beginning to do. That is the best hope of low income white students, not removing the opportunities for a handful of minorities.

As the president of a national organization whose members are specialists in affirmative action, Ms. Dunman is eminently qualified to speak on this issue. Lastly, while the Arizona initiative is democratic, that does not mean that its goals are just or in the best interests of this nation. Returning to the status quo ante 1964 does not serve this increasingly diverse population and it will not solve your problem of access. Opening up the Academy to more low income students will.

sjwilcher, at 1:10 pm EDT on July 29, 2008

Come out of the fifties

Buy a color television. There’s more than just black and white.

Befuddled, at 1:15 pm EDT on July 29, 2008

The arguments being given for and against Affirmative Action are weak. Advocates are using arguments that no longer carry any weight. Defenders use arguments that sound insincere. Affirmative Action, broadly understood, is everywhere. It is not restricted to beneficial opportunities for minorities. It includes tax breaks of all kinds for individuals and organizations. It includes subsidies for farmers. It includes bailouts of Freddie Mae and Freddie Mac, among others.

Defenders of Affirmative Action should challenge the critics to defend their opposition to this special opportunity for minorities while supporting the kinds of Affirmative Action mentioned above. Critics of Affirmative Action should be consistent in their criticisms and oppose all forms of Affirmative Action.

It is my speculation that critics of Affirmative Action would be less vocal if they were also putting some of their personal benefits at risk.

A broad based discussion of Affirmative Action by policy makers which addressed the full span of its activities would be beneficial to our nation. If nothing else, it would focus the rhetoric on the real issues.

Lawrence, Thin Argument, at 2:15 pm EDT on July 29, 2008

same ‘ol

Whites: the blacks are always trying to steal from us.

Blacks: the whites are always trying to oppress us.

The rest: (can’t get a word in as usual)

Befuddled, at 3:35 pm EDT on July 29, 2008

Cutting through Diversicrat sophistries

Sjwilcher’s defense of reverse discrimination is a motley hodegepodge of standard diversicrat cliches.These may sell in the mini-me intellectual environment of the local liberal arts college, but this is the real world.

a. “Affirmative action goals serve to diversify the pool of qualified candidates”

Standard diversicrat newspeak. Diversicrats specifically seek to weaken the definition of a qualified candidate in order to accomodate racial minorities. Go to the NCAA website and wade through their statistical trickery to extract the data on “diverse” student graduation rates relative to the general student population. I teach such students, and they often sit in the back of class, cut classes, and despite being fawned on and pandered to constantly by administrators, end up being hostile when they find they have trouble competing.

b. “Only by ignoring American history and the centuries of discrimination can some argue that by diversifying the pool from which one selects qualified individuals is one engaging in discrimination.”

Arguing falsely from two erroneous premises is hardly impressive. “Diversifying the pool” is accomplished by weakening academic qualifications. We’re not ignoring American history, we’re trying to learn from it. Discriminating against the (often disadvantaged) better qualified Asians in order to allow (often wealthy) Blacks and Hispanics with inferior qualifications to jump the queue cannot be justified by something that happened two generations ago. This would be like arguing for Irish-American reparations because of what happened in the swamps of New Orleans a few generations back.

(What, you never heard of that?).

c. The bit about “walking in the shoes of a person of color” in America is hilarious. Many modern students would love to. Then if they could crack 700 on the SAT (or 25 on the MCAT) they’d be in line for a full scholarship to Harvard. My kids all ranked near the top of their classes at a large state university, and crushed the GRE’s and MCATs. If they’d been black, they’d have gotten into a dozen top grad schools. As a professor, I had to listen to Black doctors’ kids with 650 GRE’s whining about only getting into Michigan, while my kids had to scratch and claw their way into grad school and medical school. Their “privilege” involved studying until 2am every night.

As for Danny Glover’s taxi, this “social experiment” confounds person with race, and is meaningless. However, given the extraordinary imbalance of interracial criminal violence directed by blacks against whites, perhaps Glover needs to consider the source of the prejudice he imagines he rceived.

d. “Race still matters .... and it does not matter how wealthy you are.” Sjwilcher lives in a dream world. Race matters, but wealth matters a heck of a lot more, which is why Jason Williams was able to pull a shotgun and blow away his chauffer in front of witnesses, and get off with a slap on the wrist. Race certainly mattered to the O.J. Simpson jurors, but you don’t think his wealth mattered?

Stubbornly Rational, at 4:35 pm EDT on July 29, 2008

They doth protest too much, methinks...

As the person in charge of the federal agency that changed the regulations in 2000 to state clearly that affirmative action employment goals shall not be quotas or preferences, I will only quote Justice Harry Blackmun who wrote in Bakke: “In order to get beyond racism, we must first take account of race. There is no other way.” The LAW calls for federal contractors to use affirmative action to promote equal opportunity. The LAW permits race to be taken into account as one of many factors in higher education admissions. The LAW allows for taking gender into account in employment where there is a manifest imbalance in a job group as, for example, there are no women road dispatchers and an employer wants to choose a woman whose credentials are virtually identical to a man’s. Is that discrimination after the years of women being excluded from this job? I think not. (Johnson v. Transportation Agency)

sjwilcher, at 7:10 pm EDT on July 29, 2008

Affirmative Action

Our site takes a supportive view on affirmative action. But Senator McCain’s reflexive hostility has its defenders. Thanks for adding your summary to the blogging universe.

Burr Deming, We support it at Fair and Unbalanced, at 8:00 am EDT on July 30, 2008

Look Alike, Think Alike

JP Craig provides here a superb example of the utter bankruptcy and corrosive racism that makes the term “diversity” such a fraud.

He sat in an auditorium on his campus and noticed that most of the new faculty were “lily-white.” From that passe and outdated racial term, he concluded that they were, well, all pretty much alike.

Never mind their fields of specialization, research interests, or personal qualities and backgrounds....... they were all “lily-white.”

Suppose we put JP Craig in a room and seated there with him were, say, Karl Rove and Karl Mauldin, Tom Cruise and Tom Seaver, Michael Phelps and Michael Bolton, Ann Coulter and Anne Hesch, Pat Robertson and Pat Sajeck, Keith Olberman and Keith Jarrett, Barbara Walters and Barbara McClintock, Jesse Helms and Jesse Ventura, George W. Bush and George Soros............JP Craig would sadly shake his head and say they were all lily-white.

In a nutshell, this is the perversity and racist groupthink that nowadays travels under the banner of “diversity.”

McCain does not yet have my vote, but his support for popular state initiatives that would ban gender preferences and racial discrimination is an important step away from the lunacy that has become the religious obsession with “diversity.”

Chuck, at 9:00 am EDT on July 30, 2008

McCain Comes Out Against Affirmative Action’

It is unfortunate a US Senator lacks the understanding of Affirmative Action and the goals established by institutions of higher education.

Unlike those of us of African descent whose ancestors traveled by way of slave ship, many a young people were brought to this country by their parents seeking a better life. The DREAM act would have provided them with access to high education.

McCain is selling out the American people for votes. McCain is doing what he has accused Obama of being, a flip-flop.

Dr. H. R. Dozier, Vice President, at 9:10 am EDT on July 30, 2008

Billiards

Funny how there are 16 billiard balls, but only the Cue ball and the Eight ball are given top billing.

Befuddled, at 1:55 pm EDT on July 30, 2008