Affirmative Action is an open-ended solution to a problem that has already been
fixed. The blatant discrimination that existed fifty or a hundred years ago
is all but completely gone, but this "solution" is here to stay. Now the tables are turned, and a
system of racial quotas and (constantly expanding) reverse discrimination appears to
be in place permanently.
When you look at a list
of federal government agencies, departments, bureaus, divisions and directorates,
one thing you'll notice right away is the number of offices and agencies
dedicated to career advancement for certain people based on their gender or
ethnicity. Every facet of the government seems to include an office for the
promotion of workplace diversity, equal employment opportunity, minority resources,
or disadvantaged business utilization. These are all code words for
discrimination against able-bodied white males. In some cases
a single office is in charge of equal employment opportunity and workplace
diversity. But it is logically impossible to implement diversity without
discrimination.
Workplace diversity adds nothing to productivity. The Japanese economy is thriving, yet Japan has
the least diverse work force in the world. God originated workplace diversity at the Tower of
Babel — as punishment! — and stopped the entire project overnight.
If I were the only person who disagreed with the racial discrimination now known as "affirmative action",
this page would be pointless. And if every one of the articles listed on this page had been written
by a caucasian, you could easily dismiss it as a the ranting of bigots. But in fact many
of these authors are themselves black and/or female, or represent some other minority. Some
have PhD's, and they all write very convincingly.
Financial
reform bill calls for diversity. The recently enacted financial reform legislation tries in numerous
ways to change how Wall Street companies and their federal regulators act, but a little-noticed provision aims
for something potentially more difficult and controversial — altering how they look. To
promote diversity in the largely white male world, the law requires each of the 30 federal financial agencies
and departments, including the Securities and Exchange Commission and all 12 Federal Reserve banks, to
establish an Office of Minority and Women Inclusion.
California High Court
Upholds Affirmative Action Ban. California's highest court has upheld the state's 14-year-old law
barring preferential treatment of women and minorities in public school admissions, government hiring and contracting.
Race realist Jared Taylor declares the "civil rights struggle was
won long ago". What is known as "affirmative action" is really discrimination against whites.
If the kinds of preferences shown to blacks or Hispanics were shown to whites it would be a nation scandal,
but because the victims are whites (and sometimes Asians) it is of no consequence. Whites must work to
eliminate this while it is still possible to do so. When non-whites become majorities, they are
likely to push for even more extensive racial preferences than the ones they enjoy today.
Racial,
Gender Quotas in the Financial Bill? [Scroll down] I was searching the bill for a provision
about derivatives. What did I find [was] Section 342, which declares that race and gender
employment ratios, if not quotas, must be observed by private financial institutions that do business with
the government. In a major power grab, the new law inserts race and gender quotas into America's
financial industry.
Another Twenty-Five
Years of Affirmative Action? The Obama administration has filed a brief with the fifth U.S.
Circuit Court of Appeals in Fisher v. University of Texas, a case involving the use of racial
preferences in the admission of undergraduate students at UT Austin. ... What is involved in the Fisher
case, therefore, is nothing less than the most crucial question of individual rights as guaranteed by the
Constitution. On one side are those who believe, as the Fourteenth Amendment makes abundantly clear,
that all citizens are entitled to "equal protection of the laws" without regard to race, gender, religion,
or national origin. On the other side are those who believe that those very factors are of such overriding
importance that efforts to shape equality of outcome must transcend the equal protection clause itself.
Bias by the numbers.
Is an employment test unfair if it doesn't produce a racially balanced result? A case before the U.S. Supreme
Court deals with this question. The plaintiffs in Lewis v. Chicago claim that the city violated federal civil
rights law because a disproportionate number of blacks failed a written exam for firefighting jobs.
Blacks
Held to Lower Standards in Perpetuity. Racial minorities, especially blacks, should feel
highly insulted by the entrenched assumption that they should not be expected to compete against whites
on pencil-and-paper multiple choice civil service tests. Not only should they speak out against
such condescending assumptions, they should refuse any and all special treatment, and demand to be
treated as capable and responsible individuals.
The Lesson of an
Affirmative Action President: Affirmative action was allowed by the Supreme Court as a temporary
exception to the Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution until blacks had the same opportunities others
did. It has now been about forty years, and the goal posts have just moved farther and farther Left.
Today it's not just blacks — it's women, homosexuals, and illegal aliens. And it's no longer
equality of opportunity, but equality of outcome, which was the goal of Communism for seventy years in
the Soviet Union, until the whole Soviet Empire crumbled as a result. ... From a temporary policy to give black
people a better chance in life, we have now arrived at a Marxist goal of universal equality for everyone —
except for white, male, heterosexual, and excessively normal people.
Truths We Dare Not Speak:
Affirmative Action. The concept was noble, but now antiquated and mostly absurd. It requires
the logic of the Old Confederacy to determine racial purity among the intermarried citizenry. Jet-black
Punjabis get no preferences. Light-skinned Mexican-Americans of the fourth-generation claim privilege.
Poor whites from Tulare don't rank. The children of black dentists do. I see very little logic here.
What Does Affirmative Action Affirm? My
objections to correcting the past fall into two categories: First, the people receiving compensation
are not the victims. Second, the people paying compensation are not the perpetrators.
The Content of Obama's
Character. It's telling that 47 years ago, when Reverend King made his great speech on the
Washington Mall, he did not say that he had a dream that one day, an African-American would become president.
King's vision on August 28, 1963 was less ambitious: "I have a dream that my four children will one
day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their
character." Even so, Barack Obama was elected president based on the color of his skin.
Police
May Scrap Entrance Exam: Report. The Chicago Police Department is seriously considering
scrapping the police entrance exam, sources tell Fran Spielman. Dropping the exam would bolster minority
hiring and avert legal battles, according to one source, while others confirm that the exam could be scrapped
to open the process to as many people as possible.
Change We Can Believe In.
[Scroll down slowly] Whether intended or not, affirmative action has become the pet project largely of elites,
who feel their own capital and insider connections will ensure their own do not suffer from the unspoken quotas
they impose on others -- as a sort of cheap psychological penance for their own guilt over their own privilege.
Have any American blacks benefited
from affirmative action? Note that the uptick in employment numbers usually comes from
government payrolls. Public officials can pad these any way they want to, and historically
have. … Still, I thought that the educational establishment could run a McDonald's-style "billions
served" claim on its part of AA law. After all, that which the government runs and funds it can
cook and season.
Liberal Hate Speech. Have you
ever wondered why Barrack Obama never brings up Martin Luther King's speech where Doctor King speaks of racial
equality? The reason is that that speech calls for all races to treat each other with respect.
Doctor King would have refused to pass any program such as Affirmative Action because he would have considered
that program racist based on its discrimination for skin color. Dr. King had no interest in
punishing the innocent for the crimes of the guilty and he would be outraged over the actions of hucksters
such as Jesse Jacksone, Al Sharpton, Jeremiah Wright and Van Jones.
Affirmative
action and gay marriage are frauds. Equality of rights does not mean equality of results. I can
have all the equal treatment in the world on a golf course and I will not finish within shouting distance of Tiger
Woods. When arbitrary numerical "goals" or "quotas" under affirmative action are not met, the burden of proof
is put on the employer to prove that he did not discriminate against minorities or women. No burden of proof
whatever is put on the advocates of "goals" or "quotas" to show that people would be equally represented in jobs,
colleges or anywhere else in the absence of discrimination.
Political Power Hasn't Brought
Black Progress. Blacks are probably the most politically loyal people in the nation, and it is
almost taken as gospel, at least among civil rights organizations and black and white liberals, that the only
way black people can make socioeconomic progress is through the politics of race and special government
programs. However, such a vision can be subjected to empirical evidence. In 1940, when blacks were
politically impotent, their poverty rate was 87%. By 1960, before blacks achieved much political power,
it had fallen to 47%. During that interval, in various skilled trades, the incomes of blacks relative to
whites more than doubled.
Suit says college singled
out blacks. A former dean of the State University of New York at Cobleskill has filed a
whistleblower lawsuit against the school, saying it discriminated against black students by keeping them in
school for their tuition dollars when administrators knew they had no chance of earning a degree.
Chucky
The Lip has struck again, but this time it's a good thing. [Scroll down] What most of
those Americans who are wondering how Obama got to be president are wondering about is not how a black man
got to be president, but how a guy with only two years experience as a U.S. senator, less than 10 years
experience as a state senator and absolutely zero years of military experience got elected president of the
United States, leader of the free world and commander in chief of our armed forces. Really, could a
white guy with those same credentials have run for president of the United States and won? Or would a
white guy with those same credentials have been laughed out of the presidential race before he was barely
in it?
Obama the Trickster.
This administration is just filled with racial anger. So why would Sotomayor be its first Supreme Court
nominee? ... Sotomayor believes in the US Constitution like Obama does: not at all. But Sotomayor
is not nearly as good as Obama at this double game, seeming rather dim-witted. She's given away her
Hispanic Victimhood at least half a dozen times in public, not exactly what you expect from a Justice of the
Supreme Court. She would be a living embarrassment to the US Constitution. ... Her job on the Supremes
will be to keep the Affirmative Action Establishment in power.
A Tangled Web. The
original Civil Rights Act of 1964 was very straightforward in forbidding discrimination. But, even before that Act
was passed, there were already people demanding more than equality of treatment. Some wanted equality of end results,
some wanted restitution for past wrongs, and some just wanted as much as they could get. Opponents of the Civil
Rights Act said that it would lead to racial quotas and reverse discrimination. Advocates of the Act not only denied
this, they wrote the language of the law in a way designed to explicitly prevent such things. But judges, over the
years, have "interpreted" the Civil Rights Act to mean what its opponents said it would mean, rather than what its
advocates put into the plain language of the legislation.
Has Affirmative Action
run its course? The very idea of continuing a policy which drives home the message that blacks
can't make it in this country without racial quotas and preferences makes a mockery of, not only Obama's
political success, but of every black person's efforts to reach personal goals without the stigma of having
done so only because the government gave them an unfair advantage. … If blacks are ever to be viewed as
equals, the perception of them as needy must change.
When Affirmative Action Is A
Quota System. The supporters of affirmative action often deny that the hiring or award of a position
in a university was a quota, but if they were honest they would have to admit that a quota system was involved in many
cases, when it was decided in advance that the job will only go to a minority, or a promotion, tenure, or resources
will only go to a woman. These examples involve a quota system: the next person hired will be Black or there
will be X number or percentage of women with tenure, etc. This is what a quota is all about.
The Meaning of
Ricci: It's not enough for a city to say, as did New Haven, that it was afraid of being sued by
black firefighters. The evidence was irrefutable that the tests were put together in a conscientious,
race-neutral way. Not only were minority firefighters over-sampled in devising the questions. The
designers established nine oral exam boards, each a three-person panel, each consisting of precisely one white,
one black and one Hispanic. (Such is the extreme race consciousness that the Civil Rights Act, of all
things, has brought upon us.)
Intelligence is Not an Affirmative Action Program.
Earlier this year when Long Island's Newsday printed on its cover the names and headshots of the 59 of the national Intel
science contest's 300 semifinalists who come from the region, it put journalism before politics by not concealing what would
be a major problem for certain elements of the Left and Right: The contingent didn't "look like" America —
at least as some conceive it. ... What would the contemporary promoters of "equality" consider a just and "natural" outcome,
evincive of a total absence of any form of bias? For that to be true, the 59 must reflect perfectly the ethnic breakdown
of the United States — or at least Long Island — or better yet, for the full 300 to be a microcosm of
the country. How would that be possible?
An in-depth look at the "Rooney Rule": The NFL's Affirmative Action Deception.
Imagine an America in which employers faced steep fines for failing to interview a sufficient number of minority
candidates for a vacant management slot prior to making a hiring decision. Even in this day and age, where
diversity rules, that might seem a far-fetched scenario. Yet for the last half-dozen years, this has been
the way the National Football League has operated. And its advocates are seeking ways to expand this
regime to a variety of venues — and with a strong assist from government.
The
cost of a diverse Naval Academy. The Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Gary Roughead announced in Annapolis
recently that "diversity is the number one priority" at the Naval Academy. The Naval Academy superintendent, Vice
Adm. Jeffrey Fowler, echoed him. Everyone understands that "diversity" here means nonwhite skins.
Behind the blindfold. The most
distinctive characteristic of our president's legal thinking is the extent to which it reflects the leftist
orthodoxy of the law schools in which he spent his formative years, including the assumption that the American
legal tradition has been little more than a mechanism of oppression and white privilege. In reading his
speeches and comments over time, it is clear that he views the law not as a neutral set of rules to be presided
over in umpire-like fashion by impartial judges, but as a form of historical affirmative action designed to
right the wrongs of the past. As such, his conception of jurisprudence begins and ends with the idea
of the courts as agents of social change.
New Haven Firefighters. In this
one case we see the multiple issues which will be at the center of Sotomayor's confirmation hearing. And what's more
we have a story that the average American can understand and relate to. The disabled guy worked hard under adverse
circumstances and did better than most of his non-disabled peers, only to be told, "Sorry, the 'numbers' didn't come out
right." And this is justice? Most Americans, I suspect, will think not and will want to know why
Sotomayor acted as she did.
Reverse Discrimination Case Could Transform Hiring
Procedures Nationwide. Inside a burning building, fire doesn't discriminate between Matthew Marcarelli
and Gary Tinney. Inside the New Haven Fire Department, however, skin color has put them on opposite sides of a
lawsuit that could transform hiring procedures nationwide. This week, the Supreme Court will consider the reverse
discrimination claim of Marcarelli and a group of white firefighters. They all passed a promotion exam, but the
city threw out the test because no blacks would have been promoted, saying the exam had a "disparate impact" on
minorities likely to violate the 1964 Civil Rights Act.
The New 'Separate but Equal'. On
the surface, it seems like a blatant case of unlawful discrimination. The fire department in New Haven, Conn.,
administered an exam for firemen seeking promotions. "Many firefighters studied for months, at considerable
personal and financial cost," as Justice Anthony Kennedy recounts on behalf of the Supreme Court's majority in
Ricci v. DeStefano. When the results came out, the city decided to deny promotions to the men who had
earned them — because they were of the wrong race.
You'll
Love Diversity — Or Else. Racial and ethnic diversity is the key to happiness, success in the global
marketplace and, not least, an interesting life. So we are told in a batch of new "fair housing" radio ads that
are the sort of treacly propaganda that cause sober drivers to run off the road. Presented as a celebration of
the 40th anniversary of the Fair Housing Act, the ads were produced by the National Fair Housing Alliance, a private,
nonprofit group whose stated purpose is to make sure the act is properly implemented. The act bans housing
discrimination and imposes stiff penalties for those who get caught.
So You Want To Boost The Economy? End Affirmative
Action! The assumption that lower economic achievement by a minority must be the fault of the
majority has created costs vaster than previously imagined. For example, VDARE.com economist Edwin S.
Rubenstein's recent report Cost of Diversity[PDF] for the National
Policy Institute estimates the price of affirmative action, immigration, and multiculturalism at eight
percent of the GDP, or $1.1 trillion.
How Obama Stimulates Feminists.
Since 1969, when Richard Nixon foolishly imploded America's prospects for equality by turning the concept of
affirmative action into a reality, the country's race shysters and guilt peddlers have come a long way, baby!
They polarized the nation and discern disproportionate treatment out of every difference between individuals.
This is true for minority hustlers of every stripe. Foremost among the con artists to cash in on a
once-proud nation's guilt are the radical feminists. Gender feminists are a virulent strain of
far-leftist whose power has exponentially grown over the past four decades.
Improving Schools: A Job
for Parents, Not Bureaucrats. With the arrival of a new Democratic administration, the country
will no doubt experience another bout of self-reflection and debate on race-based preferences. Despite
the fact we have elected an African-American president — a clear demonstration if ever there was
one of the diminishing level of racism in America — the civil rights lobby sees no reason to diminish
their fierce defense of a racial spoils system which has come to dominate education, contracting, and
employment at all levels of government.
U.S. Supreme Court takes up 'reverse
discrimination' case. The US Supreme Court has agreed to take up a potential major reverse
discrimination case examining the use of race as a factor in government hiring. The announcement came
Friday afternoon after the justices' private conference earlier in the day. The case will likely be argued
in April.
Liberals,
Liars, and Cheats. Recently, the Los Angeles Board of Education was so eager to fire School
Superintendent David Brewer that they bought out the last year-and-a-half of his four-year contract.
Because Mr. Brewer is a black man, certain parties are suggesting that the Board's decision was racially
motivated. One can't help wondering how it's possible to accuse the same people who hired the
incompetent to a $300,000-a-year job can now be accused of being racists for dumping him, even though
they wrote him a check for about half a million dollars.
The
Prez-Elect's Quota Challenge. Racial preferences are, after all, extremely unpopular with most
Americans. Voters in blue states like California, Washington and Michigan have banned them in referenda
over the last decade or so. Voters in red-state Nebraska just did the same thing, by a thumping 58-42
percent margin. (A similar measure in purplish Colorado may pass as well; the votes are still being
tallied.)
Justices to Hear White Firefighters' Bias
Claims. Frank Ricci has been a firefighter here for 11 years, and he would do just about anything to advance
to lieutenant. The last time the city offered a promotional exam, he said in a sworn statement, he gave up a second
job and studied up to 13 hours a day. ... Mr. Ricci did well, he said, coming in sixth among the 77 candidates who
took the exam. But the city threw out the test, because none of the 19 African-American firefighters who took it
qualified for promotion.
Congressman says
Obama's Senate Replacement Must Be Black. The race to replace Barack Obama as Illinois' junior senator
heated up Tuesday as Rep. Bobby Rush, D-Ill., called on Gov. Rod Blagojevich to name a black man or woman to the seat.
By invoking race, Rush, who is black, drove a potential wedge between the prospective white and black contenders for the
seat. Rush said it would be a "national disgrace" if Obama's seat were not filled by an African American.
The Editor says...
This is exactly the kind of racism that liberals pretend to oppose — when it benefits white people.
A plan to survive the Obama years. Well, Americans
usually get the government they deserve, and I urge you all to get ready for this 21st century version of
amateur hour. ... That's not to say that Obama's election doesn't come with a couple of interesting side
effects. For example, henceforth no black man in America may be called unqualified for any job that he
might seek, no matter his prior education or experience level. Want to be a nuclear scientist but lack
a Ph.D. in physics? If the applicant is a black man, it's no problem. Just offer hope to the
profession and promise change from all those stuffy theorems that have given the discipline its structure
over the years, and you're in.
Thomas says Constitution forbids
racial preference. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas said Tuesday [9/9/2008] that
African-Americans are better served by colorblind programs than affirmative action. Thomas, addressing
leaders of historically black colleges, said affirmative action "has become this mantra and there almost has
become this secular religiosity about it. I think it almost trumps thinking."
My
Preferences. Over the past ten years, no American president, Congress, legislature, or governor has
acted to eliminate preferences — in other words, to enforce the 1964 Civil Rights Act, which commands
the government to treat us all "without regard to race, color, national origin or sex." In addition, the
United States Supreme Court has handed down conflicting opinions about the matter. In response, I have led
the national effort to enforce the act through ballot initiatives in states that allow them.
Affirmative
action just moves different groups to the back of the bus. The conversation has intensified
over this November's Michigan Civil Rights Initiative to ban affirmative action preferences in college
admissions and government hiring in our state. But anyone seeking a logical reason to oppose this
fair-minded proposal is encountering more difficulty in doing so.
Senator Obama,
You're No King. In the fullness of time, the American people have done precisely what Dr. King
urged us to do: We have worked diligently to create a nation in which skin color is not a barrier to
opportunity. … And, yet, despite our progress, there is one issue that stands in the way of our completely
fulfilling King's dream; and that is race-based affirmative-action preferences.
Cultural affirmative action: What do
you think Bill Clinton was referring to when he said that he wanted his cabinet to "look like America,"
meritocracy or quota orthodoxy? Yet Clinton isn't alone; he merely gave voice to common practice.
Would Condoleezza Rice have been appointed Secretary of State and Joycelyn Elders Surgeon General if they
weren't black women? Would Ruth Bader Ginsberg and Sandra Day O'Connor have ascended to the Supreme
Court and Janet Reno been Attorney General if they weren't female?
Preferences Forever? We've come a
long way since 1964, when the late civil rights hero Hubert Humphrey stood on the Senate floor and told his
colleagues that if the civil rights bill contained "any language which provides that an employer will have to
hire on the basis of percentage or quota related to color, race, religion, or national origin, I will start
eating the pages one after another, because it is not in there." Four decades later, supporters of racial
preferences imposed by government agencies are blocking legal efforts to establish the color-blind society that
Martin Luther King envisioned.
Affirmative
action dishonesty. Bill is a contrarian by nature, and he has never been able to stomach the
combination of moral sanctimoniousness and rampant dishonesty that often characterizes the most aggressive
supporters of affirmative action, especially in the academy. He spoke with open contempt about several
of his colleagues who had been hired for affirmative action purposes, and with even more contempt for his
white colleagues who had made these hiring decisions.
Deconstructing Obama:
Deconstructionists have attempted to remake society around a new set of power relations. In their
philosophical re-do, they imperiously take the advantage away from white males and hand it over, lock, stock
and barrel to all non-white males and females of all varieties. And presto-change-o the world is still
unfair, but it is unfair in a different direction. A more "fair" form of unfairness, or so say the
deconstructionists.
'Help' That Harms:
The arguments about the unintended consequences of affirmative action aren't new. What is new is a
growing body of empirical evidence to back up the claim that affirmative action in higher education harms not
only whites and Asians but also blacks and Hispanics. But this body of evidence may never see
light — which is why the report is so important.
The End
of Affirmative Action. Affirmative action in theory bears no resemblance to affirmative action
in reality. … Of course, it should come as no surprise that people engage in racial discrimination in hiring
when they are specifically asked to do so by human resources. But what is surprising about affirmative
action is the extent to which it encourages discrimination along the lines of other variables not classified
as "allowable" under official policies.
Affirmative action may
be on ballots. A campaign is underway to ban affirmative action in five states already embroiled
in debates over illegal immigration. Efforts are proceeding in Arizona, Colorado, Missouri, Nebraska and
Oklahoma to put initiatives on November ballots that would end programs to increase minority and female
participation in government and education. The push is led by Ward Connerly, a California management
consultant who successfully ran similar campaigns in California, Washington and Michigan.
Democratic
Chickens Coming Home to Roost. Affirmative action is unconstitutional, in violating the
14th Amendment. It is illegal, in that it violates the 1964 U.S. Civil Rights Act. And it is a
moral outrage. But for most blacks, as for their white patrons, support for affirmative action is a
political and moral litmus test. Any white who fails that test is for them a "racist" and irredeemably
evil.
The
First Affirmative Action Candidate. There is little difference between the rhetoric of Obama and
the white candidates. They all speak of hope and change. Why should Obama's words be more believable,
legitimate or acceptable? The answer is white guilt. American institutions tainted with white guilt
are ready to dispense with justice for what they perceive as the higher goal of attaining moral legitimacy.
The charge of racism in contemporary America is probably the most intimidating, if not the most ruinous, to white
people's careers.
McCain Backs Ban on
Affirmative Action. Presidential challenger John McCain said Sunday [7/27/2008] that he supports
a proposed ballot initiative in his home state that would prohibit affirmative action policies from state and
local governments. A decade ago, he called a similar effort "divisive."
Arizona University is Forced to Treat White
Professors Equally. A federal judge in Phoenix this month said that Northern Arizona University
owes $1.4 million to a group of professors who have been pursuing justice through the courts since
1995. … The lawsuit and its outcome are yet another striking illustration of the perils of affirmative
action, with its often contorted logic of redress and blame and its tendency to commit exactly the sort of
discrimination that it was designed to prevent.
Group seeks affirmative action
vote. A civil rights group in Michigan will ask voters through a ballot initiative this
November to decide whether to abolish affirmative action for college admissions, government hiring and
contracting. The Michigan Civil Rights Initiative (MCRI) has been trying for three years to pose
the question to voters, all while fending off lawsuits and other civil rights groups, Gov. Jennifer M.
Granholm, a Democrat, and some prominent state lawmakers who oppose it.
Affirmative Blackmail: According
to its mission statement, a primary goal of the American Bar Association is to "promote respect for the
law." In the interest of mandating racial preferences in admissions, however, the ABA has just
ordered law schools to do the opposite — in fact, to violate the law — and is
resorting to blackmail to achieve its end.
Students
disrupt election vote. Hundreds storm meeting hurling insults at panel trying to certify
affirmative action ban for 2006.
[If Affirmative Action is put to a vote it will fail. This incident shows that the
beneficiaries of Affirmative Action will resort to violence to perpetuate it.]
Police investigate
alleged threat to affirmative action foe. An official with the Michigan Civil Rights Initiative,
which is pushing for an end to race-based affirmative action policies, has accused a member of an opposition
group of threatening her with a knife.
Help wanted: Must not be
white, male. Able-bodied white men seeking a career in Canada's Department of Public Works
had best wait awhile before submitting their resumes — the deputy minister of the federal
agency has instructed managers to temporarily hire only visible minorities, women, aboriginals and
the disabled.
Racial profiling
for dollar$: The Bush administration supports racial profiling — as long
as it's lining the pockets of the right people. Bean-counting government bureaucrats are
free to take race, ethnicity and gender into account when doling out public funds to
non-white-male contractors.
The darker side of
quotas: When racial preferences are lifted, whites don't gain much, but Asian admissions jump
through the roof. At the University of Texas-Austin, when preferences were removed, Asian freshmen
jumped to 18 percent in a state where Asians comprise only 3 percent of the population. … The
diversity "racket" discriminates against some minorities for the benefit of other minorities.
Questions for Senator Schumer.
During debate on the 1964 Civil Rights Act, Hubert Humphrey, the Minnesota Democrat who was one of the principal
sponsors of the legislation, denounced the "wholesale distortions" and "nightmarish propaganda" that the law
would permit preferential treatment of an individual or group because of race or a racial "imbalance" in
employment.
Destroying effective
policing: Police departments must use race and sex preferences in hiring as a result of federal
court consent decrees and political pressures. To meet these demands, many police departments have
lowered, and in some cases eliminated, established standards for personal character and intellectual and
physical capacity.
How Racial P.C. Corrupted the
LAPD: The LAPD was once known as "the world's greatest police department," due largely to its
stringent character screening. Back in the era of Sergeant Joe Friday, LAPD candidates were checked out
as thoroughly as homicide suspects. … All that is now history. In a bid to appease racial activists
and meet federal decrees, strict screening and testing measures were dismantled. New black and Hispanic
officer candidates were hustled into the ranks at any cost.
The road to bad laws is paved with good intentions.
The more likely that an assault will be successful, the more likely criminals will be to make it. The
major factor determining success is the relative strengths and sizes of the criminal and officer. In
particular, when officer strength and size requirements are reduced because of affirmative action, each
one-percent increase in the number of female officers increases the number of assaults on police by 15 to
19 percent. The Atlanta-courthouse shooting simply arose from such a case.
Affirmative Action Has Mixed Results for Cops.
Because of large differences in strength and size between men and women, different standards are applied to
ensure that there are more female officers. In the Nichols case, the difference was stark: the
suspect was 33 years old and 6 feet tall; the female sheriff's deputy guarding him was 51 years
old and 5-foot-2.
The Decline of Affirmative
Action. By tying it to the then controversial women's movement, [Democrat Congressman
Howard W.] Smith hoped to kill the Civil Rights Act. … Within decades, government had
imposed de facto quotas and fair practice standards for women (and minorities) throughout the work place
and academia. That had not been [President] Kennedy's intention.
Baking up a controversy:
The enemies of campus bake sales are at it again, inflaming one another over the dire threat of cupcakes and
cookies sold at different prices to whites, minorities, and women. The sales are political parody, of
course, poking fun at affirmative action policies and trying to get a debate going. Campus orthodoxy
holds that such policies are sacred and that any dissent, even in the form of satirical cookie prices, is
illegitimate and deserving of suppression.
Preferences aren't
necessary. For more than three decades, supporters of affirmative action have argued that racial
preferences in higher education were absolutely vital if blacks and other minorities were to obtain college and
professional degrees. A new study, however, debunks the myth that those preferences are necessary …
providing stunning evidence that affirmative action may actually hurt the chances of blacks to obtain their law
degrees.
Double Standards,
Double Talk, and Multiple Troubles. Fairness in the public realm once meant equality before the
law, but many today equate it with equality of outcome. Is it any wonder, then, that American political
culture has become plagued by identity politics, victimization claims and affirmative discrimination?
Alan Keyes On Affirmative Action: In the 1960s,
the civil rights movement sought to enforce the principle in the Declaration of Independence that all men are
created equal. Today's civil rights groups, including the NAACP, have abandoned that principle.
Today, civil rights groups defend affirmative action by arguing that it cures past discrimination. They
do not see that no one can cure a past injustice with another injustice, and that it patronizes American blacks
because it presumes that blacks cannot succeed on their own. Affirmative action does not advance civil
rights in this country. It is merely another government program to secure money and jobs for a few
people who benefit from it.
Real Reason to Oppose Affirmative
Action: Debate over affirmative action is centered on a person's perceptions of fairness.
Those favoring it argue it is unfair to have the same requirements for select minorities as for others.
Those opposed believe it's unfair that the more qualified candidate loses an opportunity to a less qualified
member of a preferred group.
Federal Overhiring of
Minorities: 12,310 new federal jobs were created during FY 2001 but only 2,820 of this total
were filled by white males and other "non-minorities". That means that fewer than 23 jobs out of
every 100 new Federal jobs were filled by non-minorities. Apparently FY 2001 just wasn't a very good
year for white guys to apply for a federal job!
Blacks in the Federal Work
Force: The First Place prize in the federal quota competition goes to Court Services and
Offender Services (CSOS) for employing 1,025.4% more blacks than their affirmative action "target".
Diversity Means Quotas.
Times executive editor Howell Raines has basically admitted that affirmative action played a major role in giving
disgraced former reporter Jayson Blair the opportunity to prosper at the paper. Blair came to the paper on a
minority internship and was promoted to national reporter, covering the beltway sniper shootings, over the
objections of a Times editor. The editor was told Blair had to be promoted to diversify the newsroom.
How Title IX [held] us back at
the Athens Olympics: Should the gold medals be divided equally among the participating
countries? Of course not, nor should money be allocated equally to everyone who shows up. Yet
that is what Title IX regulations impose on our schools and colleges.
Title
IX Tied Our Hands At the Beijing Olympics. U.S. athletes won in spite of Title IX regulations,
which impose gender quotas on sports for institutions that receive any federal money. Title IX has
crippled our national competitiveness. Title IX regulations have forced educational institutions to
eliminate men's teams until the number of men and women on sports teams is the same ratio as the number of men
and women enrolled in academic classes. In the numerous colleges that are now 60 percent female in
academic enrollment, Title IX requires that men's teams be eliminated until only 40 percent of the
athletes are men.
Speaking of Title IX... Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.
In a mind-boggling move, NCAA president Miles Brand recently urged NCAA institutions not to blame Title IX for
any athletics cuts that they might be forced to make in the current economic downturn. ... The truth is that
Title IX is always a factor in athletic department program decisions.
Affirmative
action? No, racial preference. The affirmative action described in President Johnson's
Executive Order 11246, issued on Sept. 28, 1965, specifically said things were to be done without regard
to race. The 1964 Civil Rights Act says the same thing.
The soft bigotry of low
expectations comes from many directions. Paul Hornung, the Pro Football Hall of Famer, NFL Green
Bay Packers' star and Notre Dame Heisman trophy winner, stood recently before the public relations' "racial
insensitivity" pit that dragged down John Rocker, Jimmy "The Greek" Snyder, Al Campanis, Fuzzy Zoeller
and Sen. Trent Lott.
Affirmative Action Is Not What It Used to Be. The
term "affirmative action" has long since ceased meaning what it meant in its beginnings soon after the Civil
Rights Act of 1964. In 1968 President Lyndon Johnson issued Executive Orders 11246 and 11375 which
ordered government agencies to take "affirmative action" (urged by President Kennedy earlier) to encourage the
full participation of minority-members in American life. Later gender was added to affirmative action.
College Bake Sales Spark
Conflict. Campus bake sales by conservatives who oppose affirmative action are cooking
up discord — and complaints about restrictions on free speech. Organizers charge white
students $1 for a cookie, while blacks and other minorities pay 25 to 95 cents. Unfair? So
is affirmative action, organizers contend.
Destroying black youth: Let's
examine some practical matters ignored in the pro-affirmative action celebration of the court's decision.
Saving quotas: There was
some talk recently about upcoming vacancies on the Supreme Court because some retirements were expected. However,
the High Court's decision on affirmative action suggests that there are already vacancies, even though no one has resigned.
The Supremes and affirmative
action: The Supreme Court decision upholding affirmative action is incoherent, disingenuous, intellectually
muddled and morally confused. Yet, it is welcome.
Bush supports racist affirmative action.
President Bush commented on the Supreme Court ruling yesterday [6/23/2003] stating, "I applaud the Supreme Court for
recognizing the value of diversity on our Nation's campuses. Diversity is one of America's greatest strengths."
"Diversity" Breeds Journalistic Corruption.
The Jayson Blair/New York Times scandal represents the impact of the insidious push for "diversity" in the media. Blair,
considered a "promising" and "talented" black reporter, was a living example of the importance that the major media attach to
"diversity" in the newsroom over accuracy and objectivity in the journalistic product.
Jayson Blair: A study in
compassionate racism. As newspaper editors convened emergency denial-control meetings and minority
journalists circled their wagons, New York Times executive editor Howell Raines went ahead and admitted what was
obvious to anyone without a blankie over his head: Of course it's about race.
Racial preferences at the New York
Times: Jayson Blair, the black now-disgraced, former up-and-coming reporter of The New York Times,
personifies everything wrong with racial preferences.
Crash landing for affirmative
action? It is difficult to imagine how the morale so necessary for national security can be
maintained in a military which does not use merit as its sole basis for performance evaluations.
Quota
"logic". Old-timers may remember a radio program about a crime-fighting
hero called The Shadow, who had "the power to cloud men's minds, so that they cannot
see him." Affirmative action has that same power today. Some of the murkiest
thinking of our times has come from those defending group preferences and quotas.
The
grand fraud: part I. Many defenders of affirmative action are not even honest
enough to admit that they are talking about quotas and preferences, even though everyone
knows that is what affirmative action amounts to in practice.
The
grand fraud: part II. In the feminist movement's version of history,
women's changing economic position is explained by women's being repressed by men until
they began to be rescued in the 1960s by the women's movement, anti-discrimination
policies, and affirmative action. Hard facts tell a very different story.
The
grand fraud: part III. The end of affirmative action in the state-supported
universities of California and Texas was decried and denounced by those who said that it
would mean the end of black students' "access" to college, the "resegregation of higher
education" and other irresponsible rhetorical flourishes.
The
grand fraud: part IV. Someone once said of Lillian Hellman that every word she
uttered was a lie, including "and" and "the." Many defenders of affirmative action deserve a
Lillian Hellman award. Not only is much of what they say contradicted by readily available
facts, much of what they say publicly contradicts what they themselves say privately. Often
their very reasons for favoring affirmative action are false.
Create
affirmative action for the truly needy: Presently, the U.S. Supreme Court is
hearing a challenge to the racist admissions policy at the University of Michigan. The
university ranks applicants on a scale that awards points for SAT scores, high school grades
and the color of one's skin. A perfect SAT score is worth 12 points. Being
black earns you 20 points.
Quotas
on trial: The dishonesty that is incidental to other policies is central to
affirmative action. Most of what is said in support of this policy is either wholly
unsubstantiated or demonstrably false.
Quotas
on trial: part II. People who are for or against affirmative action are usually for or against the
theory of it. What actually happens under this policy gets remarkably little attention.
Dirty Secrets About "Affirmative Action":
"The dirty little secret about affirmative action is that it doesn't work." So concluded ABC network
reporter Bob Zelnick in his excellent book on the subject, titled "Backfire." An even dirtier
secret is that virtually no one really cares whether or not affirmative action works to advance minorities
or women.
Affirmative Action: Facts and
Myths. Why do so many prominent social critics possess so little understanding of the causes
they champion with such passion? Nothing so limits the public's ability to form reasoned opinions about
vital issues as does the endless barrage of irresponsible, baseless assertions made by
such individuals.
Affirmative
Action Hero: The Life and Death of Patrick Chavis. Seven years ago,
Chavis became the toast of the media elite and the racial preference crowd when he
was profiled lavishly by New York Times magazine writer Nicholas Lemann. Chavis,
who made the cover of the magazine, was a black physician admitted to the University
of California-Davis medical school under a special racial-preference quota.
Affirmative action, a
disservice to us all: The University of Michigan employs an admissions process that openly and
unapologetically benefits minorities. Opponents decry the policy as a violation of the spirit, if not
the letter, of the Bill of Rights (drawing specific attention to the Equal protection clause of
the 14th Amendment).
"Affirmative
action" revisited: Secretary of State Colin Powell distinguished preferences
from affirmative action in his autobiography. "Equal rights and equal opportunity… mean
just that," said Powell. "They do not mean preferential treatment. Preferences, no matter
how well intended, ultimately breed resentment among the nonpreferred. And preferential
treatment demeans the achievements that minority Americans win by their own efforts.
Next: Get rid of racial
boxes. President Bush has spoken. Giving 20 bonus points to public college and
university applicants just for being black, Hispanic or Native American is "divisive, unfair, and impossible
to square with the Constitution."
Racism in the
newsroom: The diversity craze in the newsroom has not only hurt good, qualified white male
reporters and editors in tangible ways, it has hurt the very people it was intended to help and it has hurt
the credibility and viability of the news organizations infected with this disease.
Diversity is Not Merely Skin Deep:
The Illinois Board of Higher Education recently sought public comment on its campaign to promote faculty
"diversity," which it equates with skin color or national origin. Most of the current and proposed
"steps to increase minority faculty," however, are unnecessary and unconstitutional.
Why Affirmative Action is
Harmful: I'm not a very good "briefer," as they say in Washington, because I tend to throw
complications at politicians who want simple answers, but on this issue I can keep it simple.
Race is Still an Issue in College Admission,
Activist Says: In 1996, California voters passed Proposition 209, which did away with
racial preferences in admissions. The Center for Equal Opportunity says the University of California is
ignoring the law in a unseemly manner and is back to using race as a factor in admitting first-year students.
One of the Issues Tearing Our Nation's
Fabric: Affirmative Action. Hubert Humphrey, a self-described sixties liberal, defined
discrimination as "any distinction in treatment given to different individuals because of their different
race." Today's preference programs have gone far beyond that view and, as reformers have suggested,
now threaten to turn Dr. King's dream into a nightmare and his vision of a color-blind society into a
dangerously polarized illusion.
"Friends"
of blacks: During the 1940s, black students in Harlem schools had test
scores very similar to those of white working class students on the lower east side
of New York. Sometimes the Harlem scores were a little higher or a little lower, but
they were never miles behind, the way they are today in many ghetto schools. If blacks
could do better back when their opportunities were worse, why can't today's ghetto
students do better?
"Friends" of Blacks, Part 2: No group is
more in need of forgetting old political ties and making some new ones than blacks. The black vote has
been almost an automatic monopoly of the Democratic Party for years. Yet the dominant forces among the
Democrats have agendas that are directly contrary to the interests of blacks.
New Words for the Same Old Hustle: Martin
Luther King Jr. did not protest the double standards of Jim Crow so they could be replaced with the double
standards of affirmative action. Americans today are a remarkably tolerant and unbigoted
people — especially when compared with others around the world — and yet our
government and laws are obsessed as never before with race and racial categories. That obsession in
turn infects our workplaces, our schools, our media. Thirty-four years after Dr. King's death, we are
more mired in race than ever.
American History vs. Affirmative Action
Hogwash: No one wants to talk about this because it would undermine the myth that the government
and black "leaders" are responsible for the advancement of the black population. One of the consequences
of that myth is that, while most blacks lifted themselves out of poverty, the public image is that government
programs were responsible. This has left many whites wondering why blacks can't advance themselves by
their own efforts, like other minorities -- and left many blacks likewise convinced that without
government programs they would be lost. Such myths help race hustlers but hurt the race that they
claim to be leading.
Affirmative
action's latest victim: a black judge. Unfortunately, Affirmative
Action is now little more than a euphemism for the use of quotas, though they
often go under the cover of "goals" or "diversity" or some other verbal disguise.
Affirmative Action Can't Be Mended. "Even
if affirmative action was not a violation of justice and fair play, was not a zero-sum game, was not racially
polarizing, it is a poor cover-up for the real work that needs to be done."
Imaginary
History: Picture three white fire fighters raising the American flag at Ground Zero. Then
picture a magical transformation: a statue of one white, one black and one Hispanic. The rulers of
political correctness didn't like what really happened, so they plan to portray it the way they think it
should have been.
Judge People by Their Character, Not Skin
Color: Color blindness now has been replaced with color preference in the form of affirmative
action. No amount of rationalizing can disguise the fact that affirmative action involves implicit
or explicit racial quotas, i.e., racism.
Affirmative action for
Osama: Under the affirmative action program now pending before the Supreme Court in
Adarand Constructors v. Mineta, each of the 12,000 boys born in Pakistan last year who were
named "Osama" would be granted preferential treatment over American-born whites. They just have
to immigrate here. Our government discriminates against native-born Americans in favor
of Pakistanis.
The Native Hawaiian Government Reorganization Act
Creating a state within a state.
Native Hawaiians seek
rights to self-government. Hawaii politicians are scrambling to gather enough votes in
Congress to pass a bill that would grant Native Hawaiians a degree of self-government and possibly a
share of the land ruled by their ancestors.
An unconstitutional
act. If Democratic Sen. Daniel Akaka of Hawaii gets his way, the Senate next week will pass
S. 147, a bill that would for the first time create a race-based system of governing in the United
States. Akaka's bill, the Native Hawaiian Government Reorganization Act, would erect a new governmental
structure to have jurisdiction over American citizens who have "one drop" of Native Hawaiian blood.
Apartheid for Native Hawaiians: Now
there's a new group that wants in on all the special rights, free benefits and racial preferences that
accompany sovereign tribal status: Native Hawaiians.
Hawaii Moves Toward Second 'Ethnic'
Government. In a move that critics call a direct threat to the U.S. Constitution, federal
legislation is moving forward in Congress to create a second, separate government in Hawaii solely controlled
by ethnic and indigenous Hawaiians.
Hawaii's Racial Separatism
Threatens America's Fundamental Principles. Among the 50 states, Hawaii is the most diverse. All ethnic
groups are minorities. Intermarriage is commonplace. All races live, work, play and pray side by side. But
despite the Aloha Spirit, institutional racism has become entrenched in Hawaii, causing huge problems. Hawaii is
rapidly building a bridge to the Nineteenth Century. Hawaii has "affirmative action" on steroids. The favorite
racial group is the 20% who have at least one drop of Hawaiian native blood. Two state government agencies serve
"Native Hawaiians" exclusively.
'Native Hawaiian' Act a Pending Disaster, Experts
Warn. Representatives of 10 state and national organizations that advocate for property rights
and low and fair taxation are warning members of Congress and others with influence over national policy of
dire consequences if the Native Hawaiian Government Reorganization Act of 2007 becomes law.
Trouble in paradise?
I've been talking to some buddies from high school, and we're thinking of getting together and forming an Indian
tribe. … Why? The benefits are just too good. … Indian tribes are exempt from many federal
laws, collect their own taxes and generally can ignore the Bill of Rights, discriminate in favor of their
"tribe" members and operate their own justice system.
Bill Would Divide Hawaii by Race, Dole Out
Entitlements. Legislation to divide Hawaii along racial lines and hand out race-based government
benefits to as much as 20 percent of the state's population is moving through Congress, having attracted
almost no attention outside the state, despite its implications.
The
'Native Hawaiian' bill. The U.S. Senate is scheduled to begin debate soon
on S.147, the falsely named "Native Hawaiian Government Reorganization Act of 2005." The
proponents of this bill, some motivated by seemingly benign purposes and others by simple greed,
argue that the legislation redresses ancient wrongs done to early Hawaiians by the United States.
Black Activists
Oppose Race-Based Hawaiian Government. Members of the black leadership network
Project 21 are expressing concern that legislation now under consideration in the U.S.
Senate conflicts with America's "melting pot" philosophy.
Pluribus Sine Unum. America's
motto is "E pluribus unum," Latin for "Out of many, one." Some U.S. senators seem to be reading it
backward. This week the Senate will consider legislation that would create an independent, race-based
government for Native Hawaiians. If the bill becomes law, it would create a racial spoils system that
would hand special privileges to up to one-fifth of the state's population — including many with only a
trace of Hawaiian blood. It could inspire mainland groups such as Hispanic separatists to seek similar
spoils, should they ever gain enough political leverage.
Did Anyone Ask the
Hawaiians? If I told you there would be a bill coming to the floor of the United States Senate
this week that would create a sovereign government based on race, would you believe me? You can be forgiven
for being skeptical. It sounds ridiculous.
Time to stand for unity.
A number of Republicans appear ready to jump on the Native Hawaiian bandwagon. The bill's chief sponsor is
Sen. Daniel Akaka, who has tried to get the legislation through Congress for several years. In the past,
he's been given a boost by Sen. Ted Stevens, R-Alaska, who has also pushed for legislation to make Puerto Rico
a state, but most mainstream Republicans have steered clear. Not so of late.
Gonzales'
time to shine? Within the week, the Senate is expected to hold a vote on Senator
Akaka's Native Hawaiian Government Reorganization Act. Akaka's bill would institute an
extra-constitutional race-based government for native Hawaiians. The new government would
have jurisdiction over Hawaiian residents with "one drop" of native Hawaiian blood. Those
governed by this new, race-based government would not be subject to the same federal and
state tax laws as their non-native Hawaiian neighbors. The bill's opponents note that
this is surely is a recipe for racial conflict on the Hawaiian Islands.
Conservatives
facing uphill battle. The Native Hawaiian Government Reorganization Act, S. 147,
sponsored by Hawaiian Democratic Senator Daniel Akaka, has drawn harsh criticism from conservatives
who see it as a new form of extra-constitutional race-based governing. Akaka's bill would set up a
separate governing entity to preside over residents with "one drop" of Native Hawaiian blood.
Hawaiian tribe: The
first business for the Senate when it reconvenes Sept. 6 after the summer recess will be passing a
bill giving native Hawaiians the same status as mainland Indian tribes, despite opposition by Republican
leaders and the Bush administration.
House votes to let
Native Hawaiians self-govern. Native Hawaiians should regain some of the self-governance powers
lost when the islands' queen was overthrown more than a century ago, the House decided Wednesday [10/24/2007].
The White House threatened a veto, saying the legislation that passed by a 261-153 vote would divide
Americans "along suspect lines of race and ethnicity."
The Editor says...
Isn't that exactly what the Congressional Black Caucus does? Or the NAACP? Or "Affirmative Action" quotas?
More information about
the Native Hawaiian Government Reorganization Act.
Status of
the Native Hawaiian Government Reorganization Act of 2005.
Politics Rules in Debate over Hawaiian Ethnicity
Bill. A bill that would have created a "Native Hawaiian Government" with special powers for
400,000 persons of native Hawaiian ancestry died in the U.S. Senate on June 8, when the measure came four
votes short of the 60 that were needed to keep it alive.
Senate committee
approves Native Hawaiian bills. The Senate Indian Affairs Committee approved bills today to
extend self-government and self-determination to Native Hawaiians and to reauthorize federal housing
programs for them. Sen. Daniel K. Inouye, D-Hawaii, said he did not expect the Native
Hawaiian government bill to reach the Senate floor until after May.
Akaka Bill is Bad for
America. The proposed legislation would dedicate scarce financial resources to promote ethnic
divisions within our great nation and, at the same time, expand the role of government in an attempt to fix
a system that does not appear to be broken.
Race-baiting the Aloha
state. The Native Hawaiian Government Reorganization Act that was passed Wednesday [10/24/2007]
by the House is a stunning display of racial divisiveness. If enacted, it would further inflame tenuous
race relations nationwide by allowing an estimated 400,000 people across the country who claim native Hawaiian
ancestry to form their own body of government for negotiating with state and federal governments.
Hawaii and
the Ethnic Grievance Industry: Under legislation that the House of Representatives has voted
261-153 to foist on Hawaii, [Hermann] Goering's role would be played by a panel empowered to decide who is
a "Native Hawaiian" and entitled to special privileges and immunities. Because there are perhaps only
7,000 "pure" Native Hawaiians, "Hawaiian blood" will inevitably be the criterion and the "one-drop rule"
likely will prevail. Goering would have approved of this racialist sorting-out.
Somewhat related: Native Hawaiians Reclaiming Land.
More than 200 acres of land that belonged to the Kingdom of Hawaii before the United States took control a
century ago will be returned to Native Hawaiians, according to terms of a $200 million tentative settlement
announced Friday [1/18/2008].
The Editor says...
I don't get it. If the land belonged to the Kingdom of Hawaii, which is now the State of Hawaii,
why isn't it state property?
Native Hawaiians Occupy Palace.
A Native Hawaiian group that advocates sovereignty locked the gates of a historic palace Wednesday [4/30/2008]
in downtown Honolulu, saying it would carry out the business of what it considers the legitimate government of
the islands.
Hawaiian group demands restoration of the
monarchy. Surrounded by royal guards and the occasional tourist, Her Majesty Mahealani Kahau and her
government ministers hold court every day under a tent outside the palace of Hawaii's last monarch, passing laws and
discussing how to secure reparations for the Native Hawaiian people.
The Editor says...
I support Hawaii's right to secede, provided that Texas is allowed to secede as well.
Democratic platform adopts native
Hawaiian recognition. Recognition of native Hawaiians is back in the Democratic Party's
national platform. The wording is a bit different from the plank adopted in 2000, but the emphasis
on some form of native Hawaiian recognition by the federal government runs on the same track.
So this is what the Native Hawaiian stuff is all about! The Akaka Bill: A
Cash Cow for Democrats. Obama's multi-billion dollar nationwide scheme to circumvent campaign
spending laws comes neatly disguised as a Hawaii-only deal for "reconciliation" and "justice". "Campaign
finance" isn't even in the bill's description. It is called the Akaka Bill. Reintroduced
February 4 for the 2009 Congressional session as S381 and HR862, the Akaka Bill creates a process
to establish a Native Hawaiian Tribal Government.
Regrets Only? Native Hawaiians Insist U.S.
Apology Has a Price. Lawyers typically warn clients never to apologize for anything, since a plaintiff
could seize upon the remorse as an admission of liability. But what happens when governments apologize?
Time for Hawaii to secede? Who's Ready for the "Native Hawaiian Council"!
The 50th state is on the verge of being governed quite differently, now that a pro-sovereignty Hawaiian is in the
White House.
Shakedown at the luau.
Imagine what would happen if Congress proposed setting up a special, sovereign government for any descendant, anywhere
in the country, of the mix of Cajuns and American Indians who lived before the Louisiana Purchase of 1803 in what is
now the state of Louisiana. ... Substitute "Native Hawaiian" for "Native Cajun," however, and this is exactly what
the House and Senate leadership plans to ram through a slumbering Congress this month.
By hook or crook... Race-Based
Government Established at Expense of Troops? The House and Senate are wrapping up work on the last
appropriations bill of the year and rumors are swirling that the controversial Native Hawaiian Government
Reorganization Act, also known as the "Akaka Bill," will be included in the Defense Appropriations bill.
The defense measure is proving to be controversial, because House and Senate appropriators are using it to
carry non related matters like a $1.9 trillion debt limit increase, an extension of unemployment benefits
and the Native Hawaiian measure.
Aloha,
Segregation. President Obama speaks proudly of his childhood in Hawaii, so we wonder
what the state's voters think of his support for a bill that would redistribute its wealth based on
race. That's what would happen under the Native Hawaiian Government Reorganization Act, which
Congress is trying to sneak through in its final days this year.
Nine weeks later, another article with the same title: Aloha Segregation.
A bill expected to pass the House today [2/23/2010] with overwhelming Democratic support would accomplish something
peculiar for a liberal republic in the 21st century: It would partly disenfranchise a portion of one
state's residents, create a parallel government for those meeting a legislated criterion of ethnic purity, and
would portend the transfer of public assets, land, and political power from those who fail to satisfy the
standard of ethnic purity to those who do. For these reasons and many more, the Native Hawaiian
Government Reorganization Act richly deserves opposition.
Bill
to Grant Native Hawaiians Sovereignty Passes House. A bill that would give native Hawaiians the
same right as Native Americans is halfway through the congressional process but opponents say the legislation
is divisive and would turn over valuable land and resources out of U.S. hands.
Congress
Tries to Break Hawaii in Two. Last week, the House of Representatives, in a largely party-line
vote, passed the Native Hawaiian Government Reorganization Act. Popularly known as "the Akaka bill," this
piece of legislation might turn out to be this Congress's single most calamitous decision. The bill
creates a complex federal framework under which most of the nation's approximately 400,000 ethnic Hawaiians
can organize themselves into one vast Indian tribe.
Senator Akaka's Native Hawaiian Bill Going
Nowhere. The House bid farewell to departing Rep. Neil Abercrombie last week by passing the
Native Hawaiian Government Reorganization Act, a vote the Hawaii Democrat emotionally described as "the
culmination of a legislative lifetime for me." It's probably just as well that Abercrombie is now
back in Honolulu.
Congress to
Divide Hawaii Along Ethnic Lines. The U.S. House last week passed legislation that would in
effect divide Hawaii into two states, one for ethnic Hawaiians and the other for everyone else. In an
opinion piece in Monday's Wall Street Journal, Gail Heriot and Peter Kirsanow — members of the U.S.
Commission on Civil Rights — said the bill "might turn out to be this Congress' single most calamitous
decision."
Native Hawaiian government may
become reality. Their kingdom long ago overthrown, Native Hawaiians seeking redress are closer
than they've ever been to reclaiming a piece of Hawaii.
Aloha Oy Vey! By law,
Congress cannot discriminate in favor of one race over others. Congress cannot create Indian tribes,
it can only recognize ones that exist, provided they can prove their history. Furthermore, a large
percentage of tribal members live on reservations, whereas Native Hawaiians are scattered throughout the
Hawaiian Islands and some live on the mainland. Approximately 20 percent of Hawaii's residents
would become part of this "governing entity," and it would have jurisdiction over members residing in other
states. The bill would give them racially exclusive rights, thus discriminating against their fellow
citizens of other races.
Color Bind: Racial preferences
carry a high price.
Bush Backs Racial
Preferences: Contradicting a campaign pledge, the Bush administration backs constitutionally
dubious racial set-asides of government contracts.
Bush administration supports racial
preferences: Never-Ending Supreme Court Case Has Bush Fighting for Affirmative Action. Back
when he was just a hopeful candidate with his eye on the White House, George W. Bush expressed
concerns about affirmative action. "I don't like quotas," Bush said during the third presidential
debate against former Vice President Al Gore in October. "Quotas tend to pit one group of people
against another. Quotas are bad for America. It's not the way that America is all about."
But the Bush administration's Justice Department is set to defend the policy of awarding some government
contracts based on race when it argues the remnants of a long-running case returning to the Supreme Court
this fall.
Racial Double
Standards: A measure of accommodation is accorded children because they are not adults and thus
not to be held to the same accountability standards. But should that same accommodation be accorded to a race
of people?
