|
|
| Re: Idiot Michael Steele calls Afghan War, a ''War of Obama's Choosing'' (627044) | |||
 |
|||
| Home > OTChat | |||
|
[ Read Responses | Post a New Response | Return to the Index ] |
|
||
|
Re: Idiot Michael Steele calls Afghan War, a ''War of Obama's Choosing'' |
|
|
Posted by trainsarefun on Sat Jul 3 10:33:08 2010, in response to Re: Idiot Michael Steele calls Afghan War, a ''War of Obama's Choosing'', posted by JayZeeBMT on Sat Jul 3 08:36:58 2010. I seriously beg to differ with your assertion that Obama (and Thomas) are "beneficiaries of affirmative action". Even if their race was factored into a decision to admit them to schools like Harvard and Yale, they still need the GRADES to stay there.You might beg to differ, but it's easy to stay in once you're in; the hard part is getting in. YLS doesn't even have grades in the a traditional sense, just H/P/F, and most of the class makes the Law Journal or some other review. and I think it's dubious to say Harvard or Yale is admitting students solely based on "affirmative action". There are so many people of color out there, with the academic chops to make the grade at these schools. You are not carefully reading what I wrote and launching into straw men. Affirmative action doesn't in the main help the people most in need of help, the people in sub-par poorer school districts who have potential to do better - it helps more well-to-do people achieve a higher station in life than would have been possible purely through their own efforts. You must likewise have missed the part where I write, Mind you, affirmative action gave President Obama admittance. What he did therafter, although affirmative action admittances are traditionally shown favoritism, was no doubt due in significant part to his own efforts. But without affirmative action getting him that foot in the door, his spot at Columbia, at Harvard, at Chicago, to cultivate his circle of friends and associates, etc, he would never become Senator from Illinois, let alone President. But without admittance to pedigreed institutions, he likely doesn't become President, or, to quote his gaffe-prone Vice President speaking from the gut, 'a clean, black man' running for that office. Even if he were just as smart as he is, but graduated from Ohio State, that's not the entree to fundraising friends and tacit poster-childness for socail welfare programs like affirmative action. Back to Clarence Thomas, do you actually believe that he was most qualified person to sit on the court, or was it the fact that he was someone groomed for the fact of Thurgood Marshall's death, a Black Republican with no respect for stare decisis who only knows the Pol Pot extremism of 'back to year zero'? And what other source do you need other than the man himself on affirmative action? Chicago isn't in the habit of handing out Lecturer appointments, so I'm sure there was something in Obama's curriculum vitae that neither you nor I are privy to. It is, IMHO, highly presumptuous to suggest Obama was admitted to, attended, or taught at, any of these schools based on anything other than merit. You just don't get it. His CV is public, so you can point out to us why he got the job. He didn't get the job just because he's Black; that's the view you've attributed to me and are trying to caricature. He got the job created for him by liberals of a certain stripe eager to increase the diversity of their faculty, and to assist an up-and-coming beneficiary of affirmative action politician. Mind you, he's not the only President to be admitted where he likely wouldn't have made it in on merit alone. Take, e.g., George W. Bush. But why is it okay that I can point out the (non-racial) affirmative action that helped George W. Bush become President and get an 'amen', but you can't face similar truths about Barack Obama and racial-based affirmative action? |
|
|
|