In case you were wondering how Obama would take the SCOTUS’ overturning of the Ricci case – after his current Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor had accepted, in every detail, the previous ruling on appeal, wonder no more.
WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama said Thursday the Supreme Court is “moving the ball” to limit affirmative action, but he stressed that its ruling in favor of white firefighters still allows employers and educators to take race into account in hiring, promotions and admissions.
I guess we’ll see how that last bit turns out – seems to me that a SCOTUS decision opposing discrimination against people for being White in a professional setting is, at best, only a few logical steps from admitting that giving official, full-weight-of-government racial preference to one group is de facto discrimination against anyone who doesn’t belong to that group.
”The president, a former constitutional law professor, avoided criticizing this week’s 5-4 ruling even though it reversed a decision his own high court nominee, Sonia Sotomayor, had endorsed as an appeals court judge.”
Okay – I know this is a little off-topic, but this is something that bothers me A LOT whenever one of the marionette-MSM regurgitates it for the purpose of lending weight to the words/opinions of The One.
Obama was never a Con Law Professor.
He was a lecturer.
There is a Huge, HUGE difference.
I have lectured in front of classes on both Philosophy and Money Laundering (blessedly, not at the same time) and know that it doesn’t NEARLY make me qualified to be a professor.
If you take a trip to the ‘About’ page of this site and you’ll find a reference to a REAL college professor – I know the difference – you should too. Okay, enough. Onward.
“This was a very narrow case, so it’s hard to gauge where they will take it,” Obama said in an interview with The Associated Press.
Whereas, an ACTUAL Con Law professor would have immediately seen the logical path of this precedent-creating decision…
…and should have seen his later interview-statement for the blatant loophole-work-around that it so obviously represents:
Obama was critical of the process that New Haven, Conn., used to administer promotion exams and then toss them aside because of the racially skewed results.
The president said the city might have prevailed if it “had thought through how it was going to approach the issue ahead of time and said, ‘We think merit and highly qualified firefighters are absolutely important. That doesn’t contradict our desire to make sure that there is diversity in a city that’s 60 percent black and Hispanic. Let’s design promotion approaches that reconcile those two things.’“
Ladies & Gentlemen, under the heading of “Character is what you say when you don’t have time to think about it”, I give you the tendencies and priorities of the President of the United States.
‘If the city had only ‘officially’ built their racial-discrimination priorities into their promotion system beforehand, this case would have been over before it started – the city only lost to its own PC short-sightedness’
But - just quickly – Let’s Review:
What would the mindset of city officials have to be, in order for them to have planned how “to approach the issue ahead of time” ?
Wouldn’t that have involved a conscious and publicly-recorded belief and expectation that “the issue” would be one of: “How do we apply racial preference to our promotion system so that, when they inevitably fail the academic/cognitive sections, Minorities can still be promoted in percentages that reflect the racial makeup of the local population?”
And how racist would that be, especially when considering academic studies asserting that even the willful color-blindness that many Whites have trained themselves to is, in itself, a racist behavior?
But, you see, ‘Racism’ and ‘Discrimination’ were never REALLY at the heart of this case in the first place, according to Obama…
”Instead, Obama said, ‘I think what people instinctively, probably, reacted to on that particular case had more to do with the fact that the people that studied for those tests already had a set of expectations that were thwarted.”
Ah – of course… It wasn’t about government-mandated racial discrimination at all!
It was merely that those people who had :
A) Observed the requirements of the promotion process as it had been created,
B) Sacrificed significant amounts of time, effort and personal expense in preparation – and who
C) Actually exhibited superior performance compared to that of their peers in that process…
… had developed a Sense of Entitlement, thinking that A+B+C=D (promotion)
It wasn’t important that the City said “Too many of you diligent high-scorers are White, so we’re not promoting any of you.”
I was just the candidates’ indignation over having “a set of expectations that were thwarted.”
Well then – nuthin’ to see here, folks, move along - if the President says it, then it must be true.
And don’t worry :
“Crude quotas” are unnecessary and constitutionally impermissible [but] I do think that there are still circumstances in which on a college admissions or on a hiring decision, taking into account issues of past discrimination or taking into account issues of diversity of a workforce or a student body can still be appropriate,” the president said.
As opposed to personal discipline, hard work, preparation, ability, vision, desire….
There is so much that’s wrong with that statement… I barely know where to begin.
- Ron
