At National Review Online on Tuesday columnist John Fund blasted Attorney General Eric Holder for advocating permanent racial discrimination in favor of black Americans. His column is must" reading. Holders position is mind-boggling. It pushes the extreme edges of racialism. Anything approaching those far edges is immoral. It must never be accepted.
Here is the money" quote from Funds column:
Last month in an appearance at Columbia University his alma mater Holder made a jarring statement in support of racial preferences saying he cant actually imagine a time in which the need for more diversity would ever cease." Affirmative action has been an issue since segregation practices" he declared. The question is not when does it end but when does it begin. . . . When do people of color truly get the benefits to which they are entitled?"
This is rubbish. First affirmative action" (henceforth AA") and diversity" are not the same thing. Diversity a reasonable goal in a diverse country can be promoted without deliberately giving preferences to one group by virtue of its skin color.
Second even when hiding AAs implicit quota system behind fig-leaf disguises as the University of Michigan famously did in the Grutter v. Bollinger case AA by its very nature denies benefits" that otherwise would accrue to members of other ethnic groups in order to assist blacks. This is hardly a new observation of course but it bears repeating because Holders use of the word entitled" amounts to an insistence that some people are less entitled than others.
At Red State Repair Man Jack" notes the horrible injustices done against Asian Americans in the name of affirmative action for blacks:
Asian-American teenagers applying to elite colleges and universities suffer a far worse discriminatory barrier from affirmative action policies than most other minority groups suffer despite these policies. Princeton Sociologist Thomas Espenshade collected the following statistics:
If all other credentials are equal Asian-Americans need to score 140 points more than whites 270 points higher than Hispanics and 450 points above African-Americans out of a maximum 1600 on the math and reading SAT to have the same chance of admission to a private college…
This is not just a matter of college admissions. The Holder/Obama Justice Department is going to the mat to discriminate against white applicants to the heroic Fire Department of New York in favor of black applicants who missed as many as 70 percent of the questions on a simple fire-academy entrance exam. It has deliberately chosen to ignore laws against vote fraud in order to help boost the supposed interests of black voters. Indeed as I have written numerous times here whistle-blowing former Justice Department lawyer J. Christian Adams has detailed in his book Injustice manifold examples of jaw-dropping racialist bias in Holders domain.
But Holder cant win his way on all these things unless nobody fights back. In an outrageous case in which his minions in effect argued that a North Carolina towns black citizens dont even recognize their own best interests interests which the Justice Department literally equated with Democratic Party identification the Holder team finally was forced to back down after being faced with ignominious defeat. As Adams has pointed out in numerous columns and blog posts this is starting to be a pattern: When challenged in court the Holder team often suffers setbacks or is otherwise flummoxed.
Not only that but Holder already has had to accept resignations from some of the key people responsible for his racialist agenda within Justice. When the light is shined on their shenanigans the heat apparently becomes nearly unbearable.
This is as it should be. Racial discrimination is a horrible thing. Black Americans suffered from such discrimination to an extent hard to imagine today. Racial bias no doubt still exists in many directions from many directions and it ought always to be fought.
But to have an attorney general of the United States say that the force of government must be used forever to enshrine into law what used to be called reverse discrimination" is for him to say that American law will always put skin color above other considerations and pick winners accordingly.
This is not the rule of law as most Americans understand the very concept and it certainly violates every reasonable notion of equal justice under the law.
The U.S. Supreme Court has now accepted a new challenge to affirmative action. It will test whether Holders reactionary view still holds sway. By verbally pushing the envelope so far Holder may actually have hurt his own case by demonstrating that no reason or evidence will ever suffice to end reverse discrimination. Let us hope the high court thinks so.
At National Review Online on Tuesday columnist John Fund blasted Attorney General Eric Holder for advocating permanent racial discrimination in favor of black Americans. His column is must" reading. Holders position is mind-boggling. It pushes the extreme edges of racialism. Anything approaching those far edges is immoral. It must never be accepted.
Here is the money" quote from Funds column:
Last month in an appearance at Columbia University his alma mater Holder made a jarring statement in support of racial preferences saying he cant actually imagine a time in which the need for more diversity would ever cease." Affirmative action has been an issue since segregation practices" he declared. The question is not when does it end but when does it begin. . . . When do people of color truly get the benefits to which they are entitled?"
This is rubbish. First affirmative action" (henceforth AA") and diversity" are not the same thing. Diversity a reasonable goal in a diverse country can be promoted without deliberately giving preferences to one group by virtue of its skin color.
Second even when hiding AAs implicit quota system behind fig-leaf disguises as the University of Michigan famously did in the Grutter v. Bollinger case AA by its very nature denies benefits" that otherwise would accrue to members of other ethnic groups in order to assist blacks. This is hardly a new observation of course but it bears repeating because Holders use of the word entitled" amounts to an insistence that some people are less entitled than others.
At Red State Repair Man Jack" notes the horrible injustices done against Asian Americans in the name of affirmative action for blacks:
Asian-American teenagers applying to elite colleges and universities suffer a far worse discriminatory barrier from affirmative action policies than most other minority groups suffer despite these policies. Princeton Sociologist Thomas Espenshade collected the following statistics:
If all other credentials are equal Asian-Americans need to score 140 points more than whites 270 points higher than Hispanics and 450 points above African-Americans out of a maximum 1600 on the math and reading SAT to have the same chance of admission to a private college…
This is not just a matter of college admissions. The Holder/Obama Justice Department is going to the mat to discriminate against white applicants to the heroic Fire Department of New York in favor of black applicants who missed as many as 70 percent of the questions on a simple fire-academy entrance exam. It has deliberately chosen to ignore laws against vote fraud in order to help boost the supposed interests of black voters. Indeed as I have written numerous times here whistle-blowing former Justice Department lawyer J. Christian Adams has detailed in his book Injustice manifold examples of jaw-dropping racialist bias in Holders domain.
But Holder cant win his way on all these things unless nobody fights back. In an outrageous case in which his minions in effect argued that a North Carolina towns black citizens dont even recognize their own best interests interests which the Justice Department literally equated with Democratic Party identification the Holder team finally was forced to back down after being faced with ignominious defeat. As Adams has pointed out in numerous columns and blog posts this is starting to be a pattern: When challenged in court the Holder team often suffers setbacks or is otherwise flummoxed.
Not only that but Holder already has had to accept resignations from some of the key people responsible for his racialist agenda within Justice. When the light is shined on their shenanigans the heat apparently becomes nearly unbearable.
This is as it should be. Racial discrimination is a horrible thing. Black Americans suffered from such discrimination to an extent hard to imagine today. Racial bias no doubt still exists in many directions from many directions and it ought always to be fought.
But to have an attorney general of the United States say that the force of government must be used forever to enshrine into law what used to be called reverse discrimination" is for him to say that American law will always put skin color above other considerations and pick winners accordingly.
This is not the rule of law as most Americans understand the very concept and it certainly violates every reasonable notion of equal justice under the law.
The U.S. Supreme Court has now accepted a new challenge to affirmative action. It will test whether Holders reactionary view still holds sway. By verbally pushing the envelope so far Holder may actually have hurt his own case by demonstrating that no reason or evidence will ever suffice to end reverse discrimination. Let us hope the high court thinks so.
