It was a great day in discovering the Supreme Court ruled in a 6-3 decision against Harvard and the University of North Carolina for their racist affirmative action policy in admissions. No longer will they be able to consider the race of a student applicant. This is a boon to those kids who actually have proven themselves to be the creme de la creme of high school graduates and will no longer be passed over by those with lesser merit due to racial characteristics in order to meet nonsensical "diversity" quotas.
From what I'm hearing, Harvard in particular is already crafting a work around in order to continue the fiction of "diversity is our strength", but at this writing I haven't the details to go into that one way or the other. Given their recent history, I wouldn't be surprised if they went so far as to appeal the ruling...if that's even possible.
Affirmative action policy is racial discrimination in the other direction. For whatever reason, Asian students are routinely at the top of the merit pecking order, surpassing all other racial groups, including the hated white kids. But worse than that is what these policies have done to too many black students who weren't truly suited to the level and pace of institutions such as Harvard. Even within a single racial group, kids learn at different paces and in different ways. My own daughter, who spent her entire four years in college on the dean's list, had been "demoted" from a math class in high school which crushed her greatly given her own desire to achieve. To be told she wasn't capable to keeping up in the highest level as devastating, but the eventual consequence was that she kicked ass in the "second best" class, as she was just on the cusp. She might have done well enough in the toughest class, but she was aces due to the recommendation that she not be in the "Harvard" class. This has been a problem for too many minorities whose race or ethnicity got them into the top universities, taking spots which students with far better GPAs were then denied. Because, a school can't have too many Asians, right? No matter how freaking smart they might be! What would that do to their reputation for churning out the best and brightest!!!
As an aside, because of a teacher with whom my daughter clashed, she was placed in an English class which was somewhat remedial for her abilities. The teacher didn't understand how this genius was placed in this class, and quickly got her into a more advanced English class where she belonged. She would have been bored out of her mind and might have done poorly as a result of waiting around for the others to complete what she was able to accomplish in short order. That is to say, she would not have been challenged, and this too is a consequence of being prohibited from placement due to the institution's desire to satisfy the woke morons of academia.
In any case, this ruling likely only applies to universities. Corporations can still pretend they're better off with a rainbow coalition (and by that I don't mean queers, though they are to be part of the the "diversity over merit" policy of any "progressive" company for whom profits and longevity apparently have no value. Were I to be the top dog in a large corporation, I wouldn't care in the slightest if my entire work force looked like the Aryan Youth, so long as they were the best at what they do and made my company tops in the industry. For that matter, I wouldn't give a flying rat's rump if the whole place was populated by black people so long as they were the best, too. That's because I'd only hire based on quality of the applicants and no other reason (though if there'd be any dickheads, they'd be let go post haste and replaced with better).
Years ago I applied for a job for which there were two open positions available. They ultimately trained three of us and we all knew only two would survive. I was too concerned with learning what I needed to know to compare myself with the other two, but eventually I was not the odd man out. How much my striking good looks played a role in their decision I can't say, but I do know I proved myself capable. That's how it's supposed to work if one wishes to have a successful company, and if one wishes their institution of higher learning be regarded as the best. The ability of the workers and students is what matters and "diversity" is a scam into which only stupid people buy.
Thus, I'm most pleased that the SCOTUS did the obvious here. The dissenters...Kagan, Sotomayor and Jackson...were horrified at the majority's ruling. But then, they were diversity hires themselves, so it's not at all surprising that they chose to pretend a great injustice was perpetrated. Affirmative Action had was always a bad idea, though I believe it was well intended. But it never required an Einstein to see the problem of its own racism in reverse. That's no way to deal with bad attitudes. One simply stops and rejects them in favor of better. It wouldn't have been so bad had the various fields of endeavor not lowered standards in order to provide a place for those who weren't actually capable, but instead were said to have been denied on racist grounds. The quality of life thus dropped accordingly. There was a time when I lived among a population almost entirely white (one black family on the other side of the block). Merit was all that mattered. How horrible it was for any of us who didn't measure up but were of the same race and thus had no race card to play!! We actually had to work harder or find a different area of interest or work.
Finally, I don't begrudge any quality individual who took advantage of favorable laws and policies to get to the top. Clarence Thomas, I believe, claimed to have been one such person. Thankfully he's brilliant anyway and may have been able to get where he is regardless. But if a funky law is in place, one is an idiot to not take advantage if one can. However, we're all better off when the funky law is rejected in favor of truth and common sense. In this case, that's been done. I hope Harvard, UNC and any other university who played that game will get on board.
47 comments:
I've seen some numbers about this from law schools, although not from undergrad. The piece of this conversation that gets ignored is how these AA enrolees actually perform in college. What good does it do anyone to AA enroll someone into a school that they aren't likely to have academic success in, while loading them up with student debt? The fact that AA requires race based discrimination against certain races, ignores the very real differences in IQ and test scores between racial/ethnic groups. and doesn't seem particularly interested in how these students do when they're AA'd into certain schools, seems problematic.
If they feel like they need to give anyone a boost, it should be based on income, not skin color.
Great decisions by SCOTUS! Once again, Trump deserves a big thank-you. Huge wins for freedom, justice, and fiscal sanity.
Of course, many states/schools will get around the decision by giving "equitable" treatment to the top 10% of any graduating class, a la Texas. But the messaging is great. Minorities who succeed will know they did it on their merits.
And I already saw on Project Veritas where Biden and Co. will game the payback rules so that the loan forgiveness will still take place - just with sleight of hand (raising the income rates to $80k, etc.).
Craig,
Thoman Sowell, among others, have spoken on the grave downside of replacing merit with skin color. Too often, standards are lowered to achieve the "equity" sought to pretend one is making up for years of slavery and Jim Crow. Many simply drop out when faced with an education level beyond their ability. That ability doesn't mean they can't succeed well in a "lesser" school, and generally means they'll achieve great things by learning at a pace more suitable to their particularly abilities and limitations.
Given how many colleges and universities exist, it seems illogical that anyone would pay so much for the status of having attended and hopefully succeeded at the "great" schools, when the point is to get the knowledge, which can be had at any number of other schools. EVERY school should admit applicants on the basis of merit, while community colleges can focus on those at the bottom rungs while preventing huge student debt at the same time.
Neil,
I get tons of emails from a variety of sources, and several I got in the last couple of days referred to other SCOTUS rulings which I found fantastic and gratifying consequences of my voting preferences. The ruling slapping down Biden's loan forgiveness was another good one, as were a couple related to overturning LGBTQ Mafia demands of merchants, like bakers. Adding these to the Dobbs case gives one a sense that perhaps a change for the better is taking place. Said another way, each of these rulings represent judicial rejection of vile leftist agenda items and done so in favor of actual Constitutional principles. Praise God!
You might be praising all these rulings, but it will only help Biden and the democrats in 2024.
Anonymous (come up with a pen name unique to you),
I don't see how that's at all likely give he's completely opposed the ruling on Affirmative Action admissions to universities and debt forgiveness. I also doubt he's at all pleased about the 1st Amendment rulings against his favored LGBTQ Mafia. I suppose that all the lefty slackers, deadbeat welchers, anti-Constitutional America haters and perverts might be more motivated to fill out additional mail-in ballots come election time, but honest people who understand American principles won't be opposed to any of these rulings, unless they feel they could have gone farther than they did.
The overwhelming majority of Americans want the things SCOTUS has struck down and democrats are already working around the clock to successfully maneuver around these rulings.
I've no doubt the Democrats are hard at work trying to subvert the Constitution once again despite the Supreme Court affirming the principles in conflict with lefty desires. Indeed, that goes without saying, since they want to destroy us. But you'll need to provide some definitive study to support the claim the majority of Americans are as low class as objections to those rulings clearly prove.
I have no doubt that these rulings, while correct and appropriate, will potentially galvanize those on the left to vote in '24. Obviously that's not a reason to rule otherwise, but it does seem likely. I think it's easier to stir up a metaphorical angry mob through peddling fear, than to motivate people by promising more of the same type of rulings. Be that as it may, these are good things for the country. I also agree with Neil, that univeesitues will come up with ways around this ruling, although removing race completely while offering help based on income seems like the better play.
The best play is for government to get out of the education business, and for universities with tons of cash on hand to offer loans themselves.
I agree that the leftists who vote based on what their country can do for them will be more motivated when what their country had unConstitutionally done for them will no longer be available. The bribed don't like their bribes taken away. But that's what generates Dem wins. Bribery and election fraud.
I meant to add...I hope that these great rulings will motivate conservatives to get to the polls in greater numbers. I hope that conservatives who understand the value and merit of these rulings can each convince just one lefty they know of why these rulings were proper and just.
Well, let it be known that the Old White Conservative Men have spoken and pronounced what is best for people of color and other marginalized communities. So, these old white conservatives MUST be right, they know what's best, after all.
Whoever "anonymous" is, they've got the Right of it. You all are operating in opposition not just to reason and morality, but also against the will of the larger part of the US. You all are a defeated party trying to claw your way into an apartheid-like power by restricting voting access to people who are not conservatives.
You've lost.
"Well, let it be known that the Old White Conservative Men have spoken and pronounced what is best for people of color and other marginalized communities. So, these old white conservatives MUST be right, they know what's best, after all."
Who better to do so? Leftists of any age, race, sex or ethnicity? You morons rejected the most beneficially effective president we've had since Reagan in favor of an abject buffoon and his hyena VP, stupidly insisting they'd make things better because...and here's the really twisted part...they're smarter and more "fit"!!!!!
The fact is, dumbass, conseratives of all ages, races, ethnicity and of both sexes/genders know what's better about everything than any of you. The proof is all over the freakin' place.
And by the way, as far as Affirmative Action, the majority of Americans do NOT want to see race made a factor in college admissions. You "progressives" clearly believe blacks can't compete on merit and need a boost, displacing those who have performed better. You "progressives" don't mind minorities failing at higher rates when given that boost to colleges and universities at which they cannot keep up. You fake defenders of the downtrodden don't care about all minorities, as Asians are a minority, too, and being F'd the hardest by this racist and much abused concept of Affirmative Action.
NO ONE on the right is restricting voting access to anyone, you lying piece of shit! If anyone's been denying full voting access and info, it's your fascist Dem party. Pay attention, moron!
Yeah, Craig. I think you've nailed it quite well as to the limitations of the federal government on education. And the operative word is "guidelines" as opposed to any hard mandates which anyone must follow. If the guidelines are rational and intelligent, most schools will pattern their specific curriculum by them without hesitation. I also think that if the federal government hasn't any power to mandate a thing, they might be less likely to provide anything but unbiased guidelines which will focus on actual subjects kids need to be learning...the same subjects which served the nation since the beginning. Smart school administrators will be able to tell if the feds are playing games with their guidelines and reject them if they are.
Dan,
It's not so much that "old white conservatives" have spoken, as much as it a a couple of people exercising their first amendment right to free speech and to disagree with the government.
For example, when I speak of eliminating the Dept of Ed, I do so because I truly believe that local schools need more freedom to explore creative ways to meet the needs of their local population. I firmly believe that congressmen and women are not experts in what works best to educate the population of other states. Nor do I believe that a DC bureaucrat can magically know how best to educate students in a small town in NE. Again, I have no problem with broad guidelines, but I would like to see more freedom in how those guidelines are achieved.
Surely with the recent data showing that HS graduates in DFL controlled urban school districts are deficient in things like reading and math, you can't really think that the current system is working. Seriously, do you really think that top down mandates, administration heavy, schools are succeeding?
But, hey as long as it's old, liberal white guys making pronouncements, you have no problem with it. As long as the DFL controls urban areas, the teachers unions, and the Universities where teachers train, you'll get the same shitty results that you've gotten for the past few decades.
https://www.usnews.com/education/k12/maryland/districts/baltimore-city-public-schools-107947
85% of Baltimore students can't read at grade level.
92% can't do math at grade level.
https://foxbaltimore.com/news/project-baltimore/state-test-results-23-baltimore-schools-have-zero-students-proficient-in-math-jovani-patterson-maryland-comprehensive-assessment-program-maryland-governor-wes-moore
23 Baltimore Schools have ZERO students proficient in math.
Yep, the DFL stranglehold on education is producing some stellar results.
https://www.wbir.com/article/news/crime/kingsport-city-schools-teacher-child-abuse-charges/51-6b4e18c4-d1e4-4380-a5d4-441370b81539
Speaking of a systemic failure to protect the least of these, follow the law, cover up abuse, and protect a monster.
Indeed, Craig. Dan's false regard for "the least of these", as he puts it...in this case, minorities in the educational system from grade school through the college level...fails greatly by presuming to condescend to "old white conservatives" when the poor outcomes are greatly impacted by leftist run schools. Yeah. Let's do it their way! Only another fool of the leftist "progressive" persuasion would insist that's a good idea.
But then, Dan's whole point is always to denigrate the better people of the conservative side of the divide. That's where all the devotion to truth and honesty can be found. His side is fantasy land where the victims are many. He's a stupid, stupid person of questionable gender and orientation.
You have to remember that the ignorant and irresponsible Department of Education was invented, established, and given by Jimmy Carter to the teachers unions, those LEFTIST indoctrination organizations, for helping him win the Presidency in which he was so incompetent. It never should have been established to begin with.
Glenn,
Anyone who thinks that virtually the entire education system isn't primarily an arm of the DFL, is simply willfully blind.
Yet these folx keep doubling down on the same education system that is currently failing urban students. All they want is more, more, more of somebody else's money.
Watch out, it's coming. Dan will almost assuredly sound off about his extensive post high school studies in "education" and how many teachers he personally knows and how wonderful they are.
"Well, let it be known that the Old White Conservative Men have spoken and pronounced what is best for people of color and other marginalized communities."
Hilarious.
"So, these old white conservatives MUST be right, they know what's best, after all."
Hilarious.
"Whoever "anonymous" is, they've got the Right of it. You all are operating in opposition not just to reason and morality, but also against the will of the larger part of the US."
Absolutely hilarious!
"You all are a defeated party trying to claw your way into an apartheid-like power by restricting voting access to people who are not conservatives."
Are you saying that blacks are too stupid to obtain for themselves a voter I.D.??? How is that restricting voter access?!?!? What world do you live in?!?!?
You accuse people who disagree with you of being a racist while at the same time being the only one here who looks at the world through the lens of race.
"You've lost."
You are a pathetic excuse of a man...not very bright.
We need to add four more justices to the Supreme Court and impeach Clarance THomas.
"You all are a defeated party trying to claw your way into an apartheid-like power by restricting voting access to people who are not conservatives."
Wouldn't it be great if Dan could provide evidence that this actually happens, or that anyone is working toward this goal? Wouldn't that be great?
And it's not the GOP which is defeated. It's the nation by virtue of so many morons with the right to vote not paying attention, the Dem Party pushing their marxist agenda and the RINOs of the GOP confirming we're more a Uniparty nation than one with two parties with differing agendas. But the funny part is how Dan thinks, by promoting the America-haters, that he will come out of the end game without being a victim of what he pretends is "the Way" politically. He's a buffoon.
Jesse said,
"You accuse people who disagree with you of being a racist while at the same time being the only one here who looks at the world through the lens of race."
You don't understand, my friend! Dan can make all sorts of statements of how we "sound" racist, or say things with which racists would find agreement or "the Klan would love you", but so long as he doesn't explicitly say "You're a racist!", he's not accusing us of being racists at all. He's just that dishonest!
"We need to add four more justices to the Supreme Court and impeach Clarance THomas."
Clearly the words of a moron who's too cowardly to at least distinguish himself with a unique pen name. Very likely this is Dan's diaper load, feo.
I love the "Let's pack the court because we can't get our way without changing the rules." talk. What a childish attitude. "I can't get my way, so I want to fix it so I can by any means necessary.".
Y'all know where they live now, why not just whack the ones you don't like?
Don't give them any ideas or encouragement for ideas they already have, Craig.
What this nonsense demonstrates is how ignorant so many are regarding the Constitution. If they were even slightly educated, they'd know that the conservative majority are those who abide the Constitution in their rulings more strictly than the three stooges of Sotomayor, Kagan and "What's a woman?" Jackson. That's true even when a few of the right-wingers get something wrong now and then. Rather than pack the court, they need to vote for presidents most likely to nominate judicial candidates in the mold of Thomas, Alito or the late Scalia when openings allow it.
I guess that their ideology wasn't designed to make sense.
We will retake the House in 2024 and Biden is gonna win in a landslide. We will ban Bibles and all other literary classics.
"We will retake the House in 2024 and Biden is gonna win in a landslide. We will ban Bibles and all other literary classics."
I wonder who this joker is.
The joke will be on you when all the things I spoke of come to pass. Biden 2024, Biden 2028, Biden 2032, Biden 2036, etc.
Oh, I get it! This is a comedy routine. No wonder you don't use your name. You're neither funny nor bright!
Meh. You're just scared that no one really believes your crap anymore.
Great plan. Elect the old, rich, white guy with the appearance of dementia president for life. I guess the transition to banana republic had to happen at some point.
"Meh. You're just scared that no one really believes your crap anymore."
Not being a lefty/marxist/Democrat/progressive (same things), I don't deal in crap. I expose, refute and rebut crap. You're free to try to demonstrate I promote or defend crap, however. Now that would be truly funny!
Indeed, Craig. I mean, say what you will about Trump, but to have suggested we could ever be better off with Biden instead is about the greatest example of national delusion this nation has ever experienced. It was so obviously untrue as Biden's half-century track record proved, yet they ran with that insanely stupid narrative. No one could have predicted things would deteriorate as badly as it has since the 2020 election, but to predict things absolutely would was a no-brainer even the brainless left and Trump-haters should have seen.
I wouldn't suggest that we'd be better off with Biden, but I also think it's a mistake to assume that things would have been amazing under Trump.
It's not a matter of "amazing"...though by comparison to both Obama and Biden, that's not a completely foolish opinion...but the degree of improvement, again, stands out as a rational and legit reason to re-elect Trump.
By the way, did you see that piece about Vivek I posted on FB?
Trump supporters are usually uneducated when compared to the rest ofthhe populace.
While I acknowledge that in incremental improvement is an improvement, it seems like that's a pretty low bar.
I'm not sure, I've been pretty busy lately and have just been skimming FB and doing stuff for work.
"Trump supporters are usually uneducated when compared to the rest ofthhe populace."
Yet wise enough to know he was a far, far superior choice in the 2020 election. Trump-haters are clearly stupid people who think a degree equates to intelligence and wisdom. The consequence of these "more educated" Trump-haters is clearly the worst state of the union in several generations.
"While I acknowledge that in incremental improvement is an improvement, it seems like that's a pretty low bar. "
The size of the increment is what's important here, and you're not justly presuming to imply that improvement was slight. That's absurd and absurdly false. We're not talking a warm up of 2 degrees over the sub-zero temps. We're talking an improvement in economic growth, employment, manufacturing and elsewhere said to be impossible by Obama, and then a clearly precipitous drop across the board when BidenCo. took over. This isn't an imperceptible increment at all on either end of Trump's four years. And this indeed takes into account his "failures" while president which are few by comparison to his successes, his spending being the worst.
Art,
The problem that I pointed out was the vague and imprecise nature of the word improvement, as it would apply to the 2024 campaign. If Trump can't or won't be specific about what he'll improve, and give detailed explanations of how he'll make things happen, then there is always the out by saying "Well, it's .1% better.". These vague promises of "Things will be better." without details are meaningless.
Craig,
You're asking too much of Art. He is a Trumper and therefore does not know how to think well. They just want Trump in office even if he doesn't do anything great.
Trump supporters are usually uneducated when compared to the rest ofthhe (sic) populace.
I supported Trump over Biden and I'm better educated than most people I know and better than 99% of high school graduates in todays horrid schools, and in fact I'm better educated that most college students.
Your made up statistic only demonstrates that you are an ignorant LEFTIST.
Craig,
It's a mighty stretch to suggest that improvement Trump made the first time around were anything like a mere ".1%". An absurdity, in fact. And given that the improvements were vastly better than that over Obama, It's beyond any doubt orders of magnitude better than the Clown In Chief allowed to take office by incredible fools on both sides of the divide (with the clear help of clear election fraud).
I don't recall Trump making any excuses for not fulfilling every promise made prior to the 2016 election. That is to say, no constant deflections regarding how the state of the union was prior to his election, no constant references to the lack of party support, etc. (That's not to say he never gave reasons at any time, but that he didn't engage in what we've seen from the leftists) And I don't think he believes he'll fail at accomplishing anything he intends to promise, so I don't see him planning in advance an excuse, particularly of the type you describe. Maybe I'm overlooking something from his record. Feel free to supply.
As to "vague promises to improve", his track record suggests not laying out details...while I would like to see them myself...doesn't suggest his promises are worthless in the least.
I can't help but feel you're intent on rationalizing your rejection of Trump short of something substantive. You don't need to do that, particularly if someone else lights your fire more brightly. So just focus on hyping reasons why the other guy is your pick and resist the compulsion to pretend you have something concrete to diminish Trump.
"You're asking too much of Art. He is a Trumper and therefore does not know how to think well. They just want Trump in office even if he doesn't do anything great."
That's funny. Did you make that up yourself, or steal it from someone else you regard as intellectually impressive? I have no problems being regarded as a Trump supporter, because despite the options of at least two others I could also support, Trump's stellar track record as president makes him unlikely to do nothing many would regard as great. To believe he wouldn't improve American life over what Biden's destroyed indicates severe mental incompetence. I hope you're not old enough to vote. You certainly don't seem to be.
I support Trump for president because of what a great job he did the first time around before the morally bankrupt robbed him of a second term. He's still the best pick so far for the GOP nomination because of that reality Trump-haters haven't the honesty to concede. If I didn't believe, because of his great record, that he'd "Make America Great Again" or at least better than it's been since Joe Depend was illegitimately installed. Go ahead. Try to dispute that, boy.
Glenn,
The left likes to think they actually have brains. They're funny people.
Post a Comment