Oh No He Di...INT!

Well, apparently he has.

Fox News host Bill O’Reilly (pictured above) defended fellow FNC host Megyn Kelly Monday night, saying that Santa Claus is indeed white, although he added that it really doesn't matter.

Kelly came under fire last week after saying that both Santa and Jesus were white men. She was responding to a Slate article by Aisha Harris, who wrote a vilely racist opinion piece entitled “Santa Claus Should Not Be a White Man Anymore.” (http://www.slate.com/articles/life/holidays/2013/12/santa_claus_an_old_white_man_not_anymore_meet_santa_the_penguin_a_new_christmas.html).

Hey! How come Aisha Harris hasn't been excoriated for her own disgusting bit of race baiting? Whites are not only a majority in America (72%) they also comprise over 70% of America’s poor and are the fastest growing group in poverty within the U.S. (poor, mostly rural whites have higher birth rates than any other poor group in America, prompting Charles Murray’s 1990's article, “The Coming White Underclass”). Soooo, any thought that Ms. Harris’ assertion is based on her view that there is “a rising black tide within America,” is patently and demonstrably false. As a matter of fact, African-Americans are actually a shrinking segment of America’s population, blacks at appx. 12% of the population have accounted for 36% of the abortions annually and since 1973 have shrunk from over 13% of the population to slightly over 12% today, with fully 1/3 of the blacks living in the USA today being either African or Caribbean immigrants or their descendants. That means, in real terms, since 1973, the native-born American black population within America has shrunk by more than a third! I am virtually certain that Aisha Harris is aware of those facts.

So, HOW can Aisha Harris have escaped the well-warranted outrage over her overtly racist and deliberately offensive remarks?

Whoops! I almost forgot...at this moment in time, even the most obvious and odious black bigots “can’t be called racists” in America.

Predictably, a tsunami of criticism erupted in the wake of Kelly’s remarks.

Critics said St. Nicholas, the model for Santa Claus, was from what is modern-day Turkey, and Jesus was a Middle-Eastern Jew. Both had dark skin, they said.

But O’Reilly noted, in rebuttal, that Turks today don’t consider themselves nonwhite. O’Reilly stated, “In this case, Ms. Kelly was correct. Santa was a white person. Does that matter? No, it doesn't matter. The spirit of Santa transcends all racial boundaries.” I couldn't help but notice that O’Reilly shied away from mentioning anything about the historical Jesus, who was indeed a Middle Eastern Jewish Rabbi and an anti-Roman activist. O’Reilly, who researched the historical Jesus for his book “Killing Jesus”  (http://www.amazon.com/Killing-Jesus-Martin-Dugard-OReilly/dp/1447252667/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1387307746&sr=1-2&keywords=killing+jesus) has to know that the historical Jesus looked nothing like the Europeanized version used to convert the Pagans of Europe. Still, his comments about the modern-day Santa Claus, are true, in so far as they go (he wrongly focuses on the Turkish roots of St. Nicholas which is only peripherally related to the modern-day Santa Claus). Today’s Santa Claus is NOT as much based on the Turkish saint, but instead on the Dutch figure of Sinterklaas...and the Dutch are indeed very much and very proudly northern European white.

The history of the modern-day Santa Claus is easily referenced online on sites like Wikipedia;“Santa Claus, also known as Saint Nicholas, Father Christmas, Kris Kringle and simply “Santa“, is a mythical figure with legendary, historical and folkloric origins who, in many Western cultures, is said to bring gifts to the homes of the good children on December 24, the night before Christmas. However, in some European countries children receive their presents on St. Nicholas’ Day, December 6. The modern figure of Santa Claus is derived from the Dutch figure of Sinterklaas, which, in turn, has part of its basis in hagiographical tales concerning the historical figure of Christian bishop and gift-giver Saint Nicholas. During the Christianization of Germanic Europe, this figure may have absorbed elements of the god Odin, who was associated with the Germanic pagan midwinter event of Yule and led the Wild Hunt, a ghostly procession through the sky. Over time, traits of this character and the British folklore character Father Christmas merged to form the modern Santa Claus known today.

Santa Claus is generally depicted as a portly, joyous, white-bearded man — sometimes with spectacles — wearing a red coat with white collar and cuffs, white-cuffed red trousers, and black leather belt and boots and carries a bag full of gifts for children. Images of him rarely have a beard with no moustache. This image became popular in the United States and Canada in the 19th century due to the significant influence of Clement Clarke Moore’s 1823 poem “A Visit From St. Nicholas” and of caricaturist and political cartoonist Thomas Nast. This image has been maintained and reinforced through song, radio, television, children’s books and films.”

(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Santa_Claus)

Both O’Reilly and Kelly correctly note that the real target of the criticism is Fox News itself.

That criticism has been, from the start, rooted in anti-working class bigotry, often anti-white bigotry and an antipathy toward free speech on the part of those who've leveled those criticisms.

With Conservatives and traditionalists outnumbering liberals by around 2 to 1 (at least according to Gallup: http://www.gallup.com/poll/152021/conservatives-remain-largest-ideological-group.aspx), America’s media SHOULD reflect that reality rather than look to alienate the single largest group of Americans.

Suffice to say, when even noted FNC critics like Media Matters founder David Brock openly admit that America’s media should be far more Conservative, it SHOULD be time for ALL Left-of-Center Americans of good will to throw in the towel on that one.

“White Knight” Syndrome Leads Judge to Unfair (“Racist”) Verdict

Former Judge Frank Barbaro

An 86 year-old retired (white) judge, a self-proclaimed “lifelong Civil Rights activist,” former Longshoreman and NY State Assemblyman now admits that he wrongly convicted a white man, Donald Kagan, for killing a black man, Wavell Wint, Jr. who was in the process of mugging him over a chain that Kagan was wearing outside a movie theater in East New York Brooklyn in 1998.

Sadly, Frank Barbaro’s confession comes about 14 years too late for Donald Kagan, whom he convicted in 1999 and at the twilight of his own life, a life lived under the happy delusion of “effective do-gooderism.”

Unfortunately, Barbaro’s is NOT a rare disorder. Many white liberals have long suffered under the “White Knight” syndrome, in which they come to believe that THEY are rare bastions of “goodness” among a society filled with (mostly white) racial bigots and other assorted “badies.”

No doubt, it must feel pretty GOOD. That’s why so many of today’s Leftists seem stuck in the 1960s, erroneously believing that white America overwhelmingly reviles blacks and that blacks, in turn, need the paternalism proffered by these “White Knights.”

The fact that overt anti-black bigotry is exceedingly rare makes no difference to the “White Knights,” who look instead at the “disparate impacts” that things like standardized exams and traditional lending criteria have on African-Americans and compare whites who demand “ONE standard for ALL,” in opposition to race-based preferences as “racists,” instead of the moral (and Constitutional) crusaders they truly are.

What else, except the “White Knight” syndrome, could lead a judge to convict a man defending himself from attack (a mugging) of murder, for merely righteously defending himself?

Not surprisingly, Wint’s family, in true “ghetto fabulous” fashion, see THEMSELVES as the victims; “I shouldn’t be back here reliving the past. I thought everything was over with,” said Wavell Wint Jr., who was 4 when Kagan killed his dad.

“He should be ashamed of himself as a judge,” said Wint Jr.’s mom, Carmen De Jesus.

For those concerned over the prospects of Donald Kagan’s wrongful conviction being overturned, NOT to worry, his case is now in the hands of Brooklyn Supreme Court Justice ShawnDya Simpson, a Judge and self-confessed “fashionista,” who is fond of wearing lime green suits under her judicial robes. It appears likely that poor Donald Kagan’s fate is effectively sealed.

Ain’t That RICH……”Affluenza” Defense Works for Texas Punk

Ethan Couch (left) and the 4 people he killed

This past June 15th, Ethan Couch stole a bunch of beer from a local Walmart with his buddies, jumped into a pickup truck and subsequently smashed into a woman whose car had broken down on a Burleson, Texas road, killing the woman, two people who lived nearby and came to help, and another passerby. Killed were Brian Jennings, 43-year-old Burleson youth minister; Breanna Mitchell of Lillian, 24; Shelby Boyles, 21, and her 52-year-old mother, Hollie Boyles, who lived near the crash site.

Prosecutors said the teen’s blood-alcohol was three times the legal limit when he caused the chain reaction crash and struck the four pedestrians. He also had seven passengers in his Ford F-350, and was speeding, according to trial testimony.

In court, he faced a 20 year sentence, BUT glory be...he found a judge, who bought into a bullshit “disease,” called “Affluenza” – having too much money and too little conscience. WoW! How in the hell do I get THAT disease?!

According to his defense team, Ethan Ethan Couch suffers from “affluenza,” a term which means that his wealthy parents pretty much let him get away with everything. The defense saved him from a 20-year sentence; State District Judge Jean Boyd bought it at his sentencing on Tuesday and gave Couch probation instead. They insisted that, “He (Couch) never learned that sometimes you don’t get your way,” Gary Miller, a psychologist assigned to Couch said in court. “He had the cars and he had the money. He had freedoms that no young man would be able to handle.”

(http://newsfeed.time.com/2013/12/12/the-affluenza-defense-judge-rules-rich-kids-rich-kid-ness-makes-him-not-liable-for-deadly-drunk-driving-accident/)

A psychologist called as an expert defense witness said the boy suffered from “affluenza.” Affluenza is defined as a psychological malaise that affects young people who may come from families with money. These individuals may have the feeling of guilt, lack of motivation or a sense of isolation. (http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/12/12/families-outraged-over-teen-probation-only-sentence-in-dwi-crash/) As a result, this past Tuesday State District Judge Jean Boyd  sentenced the 16-year-old to 10 years’ probation after he confessed to intoxication manslaughter  in the crash. So Couch pleaded guilty to four counts of manslaughter by intoxication and two counts of assault by intoxication causing bodily injury. As a result, four people are dead and two teens in the bed of the truck were seriously  injured – one cannot move or talk.

Ironically enough, tonight CNN is airing “An Unreal Dream” the Michael Morton story about a man maliciously prosecuted and wrongly convicted for the 1986  murder of his wife(http://www.cnn.com/2013/12/04/justice/exonerated-prisoner-update-michael-morton/). Morton did 25 years in prison for a crime he didn’t commit and wasn’t exonerated by DNA evidence due to stonewalling by the Texas prosecutor Ken Anderson, who has been subsequently disbarred for his actions(http://www.law360.com/articles/487677).

Here in the USA, we used to excoriate “3rd World justice,” where the rich and poor dealt with entirely different legal systems.

We haven’t been able to reform those backwater hellholes, so it appears we’ve tried “joining them” instead. Well, on that score, it certainly seems MISSION ACCOMPLISHED!

ADDENDUM:

In the wake of his ridiculous sentence, the judge (Jean Boyd) has come under deserved fire for being “too lenient” on felons and “seeking rehabilitation over incarceration whenever she can.”

UNFORTUNATELY, in our race-obsessed national media the focus has been on a discrepancy between Ethan Couch’s 10 year probation sentence and that given to an unnamed 14 year old black youth who killed a man while playing “the knockout game.” According to News 8 in Texas, (we) “discovered the same judge sent a 14-year-old black boy to prison in March 2012 for killing just one person with a powerful punch to the ground.

“That teenage suspect’s name was never made public, since he was prosecuted as a juvenile.

“Just after 10 p.m. on October 6, [2011,] the teen was riding in a Cadillac with two friends when he suddenly jumped out of the vehicle in the 1700 block of Vaughn Avenue and punched [Mark] Gregory, who was 5-foot-1 and weighed 106 pounds,” the Tarrant County District Attorney’s Office said in a statement. “Gregory’s head struck the pavement and he died two days later.”

The 14-year-old boy admitted to the crime, and never expressed remorse for the murder, according to prosecutors.” (http://www.wfaa.com/news/local/Decision-in-16-year-olds-drunk-driving-case-raises-questions-about-judges-previous-decision-235688241.html)

BUT the same report notes that the judge sought rehab in that case as well, but no facility would take him; ”Still, Gregory’s mother, Anita Lauterbach, said she remembers the judge being more into rehabilitation rather than race.

“She wanted to send him to one of these special places in Arizona. But no one would take him,” Lauterbach said. “We were horrified. We just couldn’t believe it. The district attorney and I were just sitting on pins and needles. But when nobody would take him, [it was] a sigh of relief.”

Lauterbach said she is still disgusted at her experience with the judge.

“She’s too easy on them,” Lauterbach added. “I don’t think she needs to be sitting on that bench.”

I might well agree with that last statement, BUT, the cases are NOT at all similar. In the Ethan Couch case, as egregious as it is, he is a juvenile primarily guilty of reckless endangerment and vehicular manslaughter (a homicide absent intent), while in the case of the the unnamed black teen, that defendant is guilty of felony assault that resulted in death, which amounts to either 1st degree manslaughter (a potential 30 year stretch in many places for an adult), at the least, OR 2nd degree murder, depending upon the skill of the prosecutor and the willingness of a jury to be swayed.

MOREOVER, the issue ISN'T that Boyd's leniency should be more universally extended, or "available to all," it SHOULD NOT be available to ANYONE.

"Justice" is only partially about attempting to rehabilitate offenders, there is another, equally vital component of justice and that is the offender "paying for his/her crimes" with confinement (jail time) and Civil Compensation.

“No One Knows HOW He Got in There”….

That line from an American national media News report was, of course, in reference to the “fake sign language interpreter” at the recent Nelson Mandela Memorial.

Amazingly, according to the American national media, “NO ONE knows” HOW a fake signer got into the Mandela Memorial...as if he’d crashed a block party...or an Obama State Dinner. Now WHO would do that? (Hint: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/6665738/Couple-who-gatecrashed-Obamas-dinner-photographed-at-inauguration.html)

Well, I certainly KNOW “HOW he got in there,” so maybe I can help out a little bit on this one.

That sign language interpreter slot is a PAID position. In fact, it pays pretty well for a relatively short gig.

SOMEONE, yes (almost certainly) the political hacks (probably the HEAD of the organizing committee) who set up the Memorial HIRED this guy, Thamsanqa Jantjie, who NOW claims he isn’t a fraud but had a “schizophrenic episode” (http://news.yahoo.com/mandela-memorial-sign-language-interpreter-39-fraud-39-004855924.html) while on stage. Wow! That’s a LOT better! Someone, probably a friend hired Mr. Jantjie  instead of, say, someone from a local school for the deaf, since they didn’t appear to have a real signer on staff.

Now here’s the thing about that bit of media paternalism that’s so vexing...these overwhelmingly white media flacks are always more than willing to say such insipid things that make themselves look foolish and risk damaging their own credibility, to defray at all costs charges of incompetence being leveled at...the incompetent, ESPECIALLY when those incompetents happen to be “ethnic minorities.”

But WHY?!

They’ll lamely say that “We don’t want to reinforce the petty bigotries of so many in our audience,” BUT I believe it goes much deeper than that...in fact, it goes directly to their own deeply held petty bigotries about those groups. The ONE THING the MSM hasn’t done very well is integrate their own cozy nests. Why else are most newsrooms, and most of our national media outlets so overwhelmingly, virtually mono-chromatically white?!

This is certainly NOT about  "international sensitivity," because without question the very SAME sort of thing could very easily happen here in the USA. Pick virtually ANY major, dysfunctional (predominantly black) urban area and the same kind of incompetence is merely “par for the course.”

Oh WAIT! Our national media covers for that sort of domestic incompetence as well!

So, it must be a reflex action on their parts. IF those in the MSM are truly devoid of such “petty bigotries” why aren’t more ethnic minorities more visible in the national media?

Will They Once Again Turn a Gift Into an Abortion?

It appears that the Conservatives have been handed a great gift in the form of “Obamacare.” If you think that the website debacle is bad, the emerging realization that there is NO “free healthcare,” NO vaunted “public option” (UNLESS you already qualify for Medicare or Medicaid), ONLY mandated health insurance with a range of policies, from “Bronze” thru “Silver” and “Gold,” all the way to “Platinum,” with those policies that come with higher premiums delivering a wider range of care AND much lower deductibles and those policies with lower premiums delivering a much more limited range of care, with much higher deductibles, often as high as $25,000 or more. That realization amounts to a gigantic “bait and switch,” a prodigious ripoff and it will almost certainly come with profound and far-ranging political and social ramifications.

Small and medium size businesses have long been screaming about the ACA’s costs, but now labor unions are crying too (http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/09/20/obama-s-labor-pains-unions-rage-against-the-affordable-care-act.html). Big Labor is especially concerned that the collectively bargained, multi-employer insurance plans that more than 15 million unionized workers access under the Taft-Hartley Act may well be threatened under the ACA. Those plans currently allow workers like builders, plumbers, carpenters, etc. to change jobs among participating employers and stay in the same health-insurance plan. Because many of the jobs involve manual labor, the plans usually account for injuries and repetitive stresses, benefits that unions say their workers sought instead of higher wages.

However, under the Affordable Care Act, small companies can choose to stop covering such workers through the union agreements and send their workers to the state-based exchanges instead. The Fed’s claim is that trough these exchanges, workers COULD “pay lower premiums thanks to federal subsidies,” but many of these workers are now paying NO or very negligible premiums, as these plans are primarily financed by the Construction firms they work with.

Labor leaders are also concerned that even the workers who retain union plans will end up paying higher premiums, and since there will be fewer people in the plans, the coverage for those remaining members could very well become less comprehensive.

Wisely Senate Republicans, like Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) who introduced a bill last week specifically barring the White House from making any changes to the bill for organized labor, have sought to take full advantage of this crisis. Senator Thune and his cohorts rightly claim that any such changes or modifications for such Labor Unions would amount to a “backroom deal.”

“Union leaders are now awaking to the ugly reality of ObamaCare that most Americans have predicted all along, including higher health care costs,” Senator Thune said.

Not long ago, commentators on CBS News radio had speculated that the costs of the ACA could result in such an onerous tax burden and such a diminution in health care that “the government could be thrust into Republican hands for the rest of the Century.”

I personally find that highly unlikely.

First, a mere decade of GOP rule could (1) undo much of the entitlement ethos currently embraced by much of America and (2) show just how equally inept the GOP is, relative to the Democrats. BOTH political Parties are largely peopled by short-sighted, self-centered would-be “rulers” rather than statesmen or public servants.

Moreover, just as the Democrats have done with their post-Great Recession political gift, the Republicans will almost certainly find a way to fuck this gift up. Most likely, given their wont, they’ll probably screw it up by focusing on “social issues” like gays and abortion.

The one thing I've NEVER understood is how truly religious people could possibly embrace the Conservative, “fend-for-yourself” agenda. The SAME doctrine that declares “all life sacred,” also preaches that “aid to the destitute is mandated by Christian morality.”

I AM a Conservative, but I am NOT a “Christian,” certainly not in the contemporary sense of that word, so I am NOT burdened by the inane ethos that declares “ALL life sacred,” and DO NOT belief charity or alms is mandated by ANY moral code, “Christian,” or other, as such a code would make veritable slaves (true “public servants”) of the most productive among us.

IF you truly believe  things like, “God ‘blesses’ people with children,” you’re really not a Conservative at all, but you probably ARE an idiot!

In real life, no “god” micromanages life any more than such a god would “play dice.”

Children aren't “blessings” from any “god,” especially to those who can’t even adequately feed themselves without government aid. The 25 y/o woman (Tashika Turner) who lost 3 of her children in a South Bronx fire had run up nearly $4,000 in unpaid electric bills, which is why she’d resorted to using candles for light. Unfortunately she’d apparently left some of them burning as they all went to sleep. Children are NOT “blessings” to those who cannot even adequately take care of their own needs.

God does NOT “bless” people with children, people “bless” or “curse” themselves with them. You see, people don’t “pray” children into existence, they generally...how to put this most diplomatically...well, they fuck and often the byproduct of such copulations is children. Now-a-days, people mostly copulate (fuck) for recreation, as it’s a relatively cheap, somewhat exciting, or at least stimulating and abundantly available form of fun.

Suffice to say, mandated contraception for the dependent poor, coupled with clean, cheap and readily available abortions for those who want them would effectively eliminate such tragedies.

STILL, I have little doubt that once the GOP becomes both empowered and emboldened by the coming failure of “Obamacare,” the zealotry will once again pop out into the foreground to sabotage any potential success that Party might hope to achieve.

To the zealot, focusing on goofball and already lost “social issues,” like gays and abortion, is far more important than bringing much needed Libertarians and Independents back into the fold, so I have little doubt at all that the GOP will find a new wave of Chrstine O’Donnell’s, Sharon Angle’s and Todd Akin’s to turn this gift into a…well, into a political abortion.

And yes, while it’s true, I don’t much care for organized religion or religionists, for that matter, I have some very recent history (some connected with the names cited above) that backs my view up. Much as I have little use for religion or religious zealots, I don’t hate them either, I just wish they’d take to sliming the other side with their crazy ideas every once in a while.

Bill de Blasio Praises Racist Rabbi

Rabbi Chacham Ovadia Yosef

The next four years in New York City promise to offer a refreshing albeit dysfunctional departure from the Bloomberg “Nanny State,” at least if Bill de Blasio, the presumptive next Mayor follows through and actually wins the coming November election. He is heavily favored.

In response to a recent attack by a gang of bikers on an Asian couple driving through the Washington Heights section of Manhattan, he inanely suggested that police visit motorcycle clubs and “talk with the bikers.”

But perhaps even worse was de Blasio’s office recently issuing a statement hailing the “wisdom, charity and sensitivity” of a notorious Israeli rabbi who died Monday, October 7^th, 2013. Over the years that Rabbi, Ovadia Yosef has made shocking remarks about non-Jews, blacks, Palestinians and even Jews.

More than 800,000 Israelis mourned 93-year-old Rabbi Chacham Ovadia Yosef, a spiritual leader, political force and former chief rabbi for Jews of Spanish, North African and Middle Eastern origin.

De Blasio praised Ovadia Yosef without mentioning that even the Anti-Defamation League had repudiated many of the rabbi’s hate-filled statements.

Bill de Blasio’s camp called Rabbi Ovadia Yosef’s wisdom, charity and sensitivity “legendary.”

“Millions of people around the world lost a leader today in Rabbi Chacham Ovadia Yosef,” de Blasio, the public advocate and Democratic nominee for mayor, Tweeted and said in a statement, adding, “His wisdom, charity and sensitivity were legendary.”

But Yosef has drawn scathing criticism over the years for his stance on gays, Palestinians, non-Jews and even Holocaust victims.

In 2000, Yosef criticized the Nazis as “evil,” but in the same breath said the 6 million Jews died in the Holocaust because they were “reincarnations of the souls of sinners, people who transgressed and did all sorts of things which should not be done.”

“They had been reincarnated in order to atone,” Yosef said at the time.

In late 2005, Yosef blamed the death and destruction of Hurricane Katrina on the fact that the majority black population of New Orleans didn’t study the Torah.

“Tens of thousands have been killed,” he was quoted as saying in his weekly Saturday sermon.“All of this because they have no God.”

In a 2010 sermon he said that Abbas should “perish from the world,” but later apologized.

It was such inflammatory remarks that drew more nuanced responses to his passing in some corners — including from Abraham Foxman, national director of the Anti-Defamation League.

Republican mayoral candidate Joe Lhota expressed condolences, while acknowledging that the rabbi “has made statements over time that were unfortunate.”

Lhota said he didn’t take issue with de Blasio’s unqualified statement — even though critics on Twitter did.

Gawker went a step further with a story that highlighted some of Yosef’s choice remarks headlined, “Bill de Blasio Mourns Death of Very Racist Rabbi.”

Included was a statement in 2010 that suggested that the purpose of non-Jews was to serve Jews.

“Goyim were born only to serve us. Without that, they have no place in the world — only to serve the people of Israel,” he was quoted as telling the Israeli newspaper Haaretz.

Wiley Norvell, a spokesman in de Blasio’s office, said his condolences weren’t meant to be a sign of outright support. “Bill, like the US ambassador to Israel, was offering his condolences, not an endorsement of his views,” said Norvell.

THIS promises to be a fun way to further discredit activist government, piling on its already stockpiled recent failings.

JMK

The Terribly Uncomfortable Truth About Standards

Recently there has been a spate of pieces about “race realism,” “race and intelligence,” and plain old “racism” itself.

ALL of those topics tend to boil down to the efficacy of standards.

The argument that race has little, if any impact on IQ has always appealed to me precisely because it undercuts the basis for lowering standards or instituting preferences for any groups based on poor performance. After all, (1) each exam is merely a “snapshot in time” subject to change at any moment and (2) counting by race and gender only exacerbates and fuels more tensions between groups.

After all, once we accept that race itself does not handicap someone cognitively, then ANY and ALL race-based remedies are invalid.

How about the argument that more American blacks are poor?

What about it?

That DOES NOT amount to a racial argument, nor lend itself to a race-based remedy.

I suppose we could argue the efficacy of a “needs-based” form of preferences, but I believe the evidence supporting such a scheme is lacking, given the fact that many great students and business leaders have come from impoverished backgrounds WITHOUT any such “help.”

What about the fact that “traditional physical standards” that are weighted heavily toward upper body strength “discriminate” against females, as attested by the recent spate of failings in the Marine Corps Officer Training course;

A Third Pair of Female Marine Lieutenants has Failed to Complete the Corps’

The Washington Times

Wednesday, July 3^rd, 2013

http://p.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/jul/3/two-more-female-officers-fail-marines-infantry-cou/

“Infantry Officer Course at Quantico, Va.

The Marine Corps Times embedded a reporter with the latest class of candidates. It reported Wednesday that one of the women was pulled for falling behind schedule. The other made it to the course’s end but did not meet its standards, as did six men, the newspaper said.

“Corps commanders have said they will not lower standards to ensure that women can qualify for direct ground combat units.”
I certainly hope that last line (Corps commanders have said they will not lower standards to ensure that women can qualify for direct ground combat units.) is true. After all, if women ARE truly equal, then there exists absolutely no reason why they shouldn’t be held to the same standards men are.

We’ve seen physical standards lowered and watered down for Police and Fire Departments across the country with predictably very poor results.

It had been complained that because of NYC’s Fire Department’s past (and continuing) focus on upper body strength, as few as under 1% of all females can expect to pass such physicals with high enough scores relative to males to expect to be hired.

Likewise the FDNY’s written criteria (written “exams” calibrated to 7^th & 8^th grade reading levels) have been accused of “discriminating” against (primarily) black applicants.

Apparently the problem with such standards is that they seem to show that NOT all people are equal in all areas. THAT is the terrible truth about standards, they expose the inherent inequality between individuals. Standards meant to compare individuals are NOT designed to compare groups, and those who do that, tend to be poor at math and logic skills and elicit a lack of even basic understanding of how and why such standards are valid.

It seems obvious that the clearest way to reduce racial and gender tensions is to simply hold ALL applicants to the highest possible standards, let the chips fall where they may and STOP counting by race and STOP inanely insisting that an equal proportion of females as males will be adept at Policing, firefighting or in combat units. Interestingly, you don’t see such a mad dash for females to get into mining, trucking or commercial fishing, as those professions appear dangerous WITHOUT the high profile natures of Policing, firefighting and they lack the “fast-track potential” of military combat units.

In short, I am encouraged by those here who take issue with the idea of a racial component to ability, as that view eliminates completely the primary reason for supporting race-based preferences and undermines the inane policy of “disparate impact,” based upon the view that things like race and gender DO hamper or handicap many high caliber applicants.

I am part of a group (Merit Matters) that has vigorously opposed the use of disparate impact and opposed ANY and ALL programs of race or gender-based preferences in either reemployment or College admissions.

ALL are welcome to join us:

http://meritmattersusa.blogspot.com/

https://www.facebook.com/groups/meritmatters/

For those who claim that, “Whoever is in charge of setting standards will set them to favor people who look like themselves,” t he SATs have proven incredibly accurate predictors of College performance. Sadly, although interestingly enough they tend to OVER-predict for blacks. They are NOT actually IQ tests, as IQ exams (like the Wonderlick, the Wexler & Stanford-Binet IQ tests, all test one’s ability to process information in different forms). In short all such standardized instruments are good at what they’re designed to do.

Moreover, Asian-Americans, as an example, are not only NOT hampered/held back by such standards (and neither Wexler, nor Stanford or Binet were Asian, nor was Carl Brigham, who developed the SAT), they greatly benefit from them AND are harmed by ANY and ALL race-based preference schemes...AND Asians look nothing like the people who designed those standards!

Interestingly enough the SAT exam was designed NOT to weed out non-patrician whites, quite the reverse; “In 1933, James Bryant Conant, on becoming president of Harvard, decided to start a new scholarship program for academically gifted boys who did not come from the Eastern boarding schools that were the regular suppliers of Harvard’s students. He gave Henry Chauncey, an assistant dean at Harvard, the task of finding a test to evaluate candidates for these scholarships. Chauncey met Carl Brigham, and came back to Conant with the recommendation that he use the SAT. Conant liked the test because he thought it measured pure intelligence, regardless of the quality of the taker’s high school education.”(http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/sats/where/history.html)

It sounds righteous to criticize such methods devised to include more diverse (economic and ethnic) groups as “tools of systemic discrimination,” but the facts don’t support such charges.

IF affirmative action were limited to “outreach and recruitment,” we could all support it without reservations (so long as that outreach & recruitment were based primarily on economic NOT ethnic considerations), however people of good conscience cannot really support the existing race-based segregated standards, at least not without quite a bit of cognitive dissonance and angst.

The only proper response to past discrimination is to eliminate discrimination going forward, NOT seeking to rationalize “more discrimination,” or “discrimination targeted toward a different group.”

I’m (at present) skeptical, but heartened that the Marines have, to date, refused to lower their combat physical standards to ostensibly pass more females through. Our Fire and Police Departments SHOULD be encouraged, not vilified to do the SAME.

I personally DO NOT believe that physical standards that emphasize upper body strength put an “unfair,” or at least not an unnecessary competitive burden on females. I believe that for such fields those physical standards are very much “job necessities.” SOME females will be able to compete. If that “some” is 3% or even 0.5%, what does that matter? What SHOULD matter is that the force is the BEST qualified overall.

JMK