The
1978 Bakke Decision had ostensibly ended the segregation of standards that some
folks had tried to instill with Affirmative Action’s preferential policies
throughout the 1970s.
After
that decision outright quotas were legally banned, although through the 1980s
and into the 1990s various apartheid-like schemes that sought to utilize racial
preferences in lieu of quotas were challenged and scaled back.
Still,
with each new challenge scaling back their uses, new schemes to utilize race to
favor “protected races” at the expense of other races (most notably Asians and
whites) came into play.
Much,
if not ALL of this was/IS rooted in a “liberal” paternalism,” that sees blacks
are innately incompetent and intellectually inferior and thus unable to compete
with other races.
Moreover,
this paternalism has no Party boundaries. The current lawsuit against the FDNY,
for instance, was initiated by the G W Bush Department of Justice under then
Attorney General Alberto Salazar.
In
recent years all manner of Civil Service Entry level and promotion exams have
been sued over “disparate impact” (differing outcomes between various
ethnicities). In the case of the FDNY’s Entrance Exams, its written has been
dumbed down to such a point (a 7th grade reading level) that it’s
hardly a “test” any more.
Regardless,
due to the significant “disparate impact” (more blacks do poorly than whites)
the test has been sued.
BUT
this is hardly an isolated example of this new apartheid. In Chicago, eleven
Chicago police officers are suing the city over claims they were demoted from Mayor
Rahm Emanuel’s security detail simply because they aren't black.
According
to published reports one Police commander told one of the plaintiffs that, "The
color of your skin is your sin," when that plaintiff asked why he
was being demoted and the black officers were not, according to the suit.
The
suit, filed Monday (August 13th, 2012) in U.S. District Court in
Illinois, contains some explosive accusations that the officers had their civil
rights violated after Emanuel took office last year.
In
another recent case, a federal jury ruled in favor of a former Las Vegas deputy
fire chief Friday in his racial discrimination lawsuit against the city
and his former supervisor.
According
to that complaint filed in U.S. District Court, former fire deputy chief
Ken Riddle had worked for the city of Las Vegas since 1978 and was fired in
August 2006.
The
jury found that his race was a "determinative factor" in his termination.
Riddle, a white man, sued for damages, including lost income, employee
benefits, emotional distress and mental anguish.
David
Washington, a black man, was fire chief and Riddle's supervisor. The response
filed by Washington and the city denied the charges.
Riddle's
attorney Mary Chapman said the jury ruled in favor of Riddle and awarded him $365,000
in compensatory damages.
The
jury also charged $25,000 in punitive damages against Washington, which according
to Chapman, federal law only allows punitive damages to be awarded if malice is
shown.
How
much more proof do those who remain “undecided” about this issue need, before
deciding that this IS about defending the principles of “Equality of
Opportunity” (EVERYONE being judge by the SAME standards) and “Equality before
the Law” (the very concept of “protected/favored groups violates this precept)?
This
is not an area in which “reasonable people can agree to disagree,” this is
about proponents of racial preferences INSISTING on an apartheid-like policy
that discriminates against whites, Asians and puts high-quality applicants from
ALL backgrounds at a distinct disadvantage.
It
is imperative that all Americans of good faith and traditional values stand up
to oppose this new apartheid, this modern-day segregation of standards, this
misguided celebration of mediocrity.
JMK
1 comment:
Well, Ken Riddle won his case. Maybe that's a sign that the country isn't too far gone.
Post a Comment