Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

Rights and Liberties

Pat Buchanan Continues His Racist Attacks on Sotomayor

By Guy T. Saperstein, AlterNet. Posted July 17, 2009.


What opponents of affirmative action like Pat Buchanan fail to grasp is that this country was built on affirmative action -- for white males.
Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

Yesterday, on MSNBC, Pat Buchanan attacked Sonia Sotomayor, specifically, and affirmative action, in general. Included in his attack were such claims as "this has been a country built basically by white folks," that Sotomayor was purely an affirmative-action candidate who lacks real credentials and his suggestion that we need more white, male Supreme Court nominees -- like Robert Bork -- despite the fact that 108 of the 110 Supreme Court justices in our nation's history have been white.

What opponents of affirmative action like Buchanan fail to grasp is that this country was built on affirmative action -- for white males -- and you don't have to go back to the Founding Fathers to see this in action.

If you go back to the 1950s, which Buchanan apparently wants to do, and look at the major private universities, you would find that 20 to 30 percent of the admissions were "legacies" -- people who got there not on merit but because they were the sons of alumni and donors. George W. Bush, of course, is the poster child for this generation of affirmative action babies.

I'd like to see Buchanan, or any conservative, defend Bush's admission to Yale on the basis of merit. And I'd like to stack up Bush's credentials next to Sotomayor's and ask which one was more deserving of admission to a major university, or the bench, or the presidency, or anything.

The white-male affirmative action that bozos like Bush benefited from and want to protect was a monopoly of opportunities; monopolies work to undermine healthy competition and produce bad results.

The affirmative action that emerged from the 1960s civil rights movement was an effort not only to promote diversity of people and opportunities, but to democratize opportunities so that white-male hierarchies did not automatically get all the perks. This has been healthy for America, not only because society has become more diverse, but also because it now is less likely that the truly unqualified -- the frat boys like GWB with no academic credentials and problems with excessive alcohol consumption [but a connected family] -- are not automatically passed on to graduate schools, and then on to unsuccessful business careers, not to mention catastrophic political careers.

I prosecuted employment discrimination class actions for 25 years, in the process forcing many major corporations to hire and promote women, minorities, older people and the disabled. In every single case I had, when the case was over and the workforce was integrated, no matter how bitter the litigation had been, the companies would confide in me that their workforces after "affirmative action" were stronger, more competitive, more productive.

Affirmative action has been good for American business and good for America. Indeed, corporate America, which has seen the benefits of fair-employment practices firsthand, long ago abandoned opposition to it. Too bad racists like Buchanan have failed to pay attention to what really has happened in the American workforce, and in America, over the past 40 years.


Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: pat buchanan, sonia sotomayor

Guy T. Saperstein is a past president of the Sierra Club Foundation; previously, he was one of the National Law Journal’s "100 Most Influential Lawyers in America."

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Rights and Liberties! Sign up now »


Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Why, oh why...
Posted by: writer7 on Jul 17, 2009 5:57 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
does anyone listen to this pathetic old fucker anymore? He thinks Sotomayor isn't qualified for the Supreme Court yet thinks Palin would make a great president - need I say more?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Why, oh why... Posted by: funnyguy
» That answer is MSNBC brass Posted by: godsbreath64
» RE: That answer is MSNBC brass Posted by: Sister_Lauren
» RE: That answer will be televised Posted by: Sister_Lauren
» RE: Torture on C-SPAN Posted by: Sister_Lauren
» Because... Posted by: ProgressiveManiac
It's intolerance for others
Posted by: cberkland on Jul 17, 2009 6:34 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What it really comes down to is intolerance for others. If the person in question is not like them, they start looking for reasons to be against them. If the person in question is like them, they'll ignore all their short comings. George W Bush and Sarah Palin are perfect examples. Both are obviously far from being the sharpest knives in the drawer, but that's a good thing if you aren't the sharpest knife in the drawer either. Plus they have same skin color, same religious affiliation, same love of guns, same anti-choice beliefs. Perfect. Now change just one or two things, and they will turn against them.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: It's intolerance for others Posted by: Sister_Lauren
Browning Of America.
Posted by: melpol on Jul 17, 2009 8:18 PM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Racial division in the U.S. does not seem to disappear. The best way to solve the problem would be to encourage a mixture of races. Bonuses should be given to support it. The browning of the population would be good for us all.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Browning Of America. Posted by: MOTELCALIFORNIA
Rachel Maddow pwned Pat Buchanan
Posted by: onevoter on Jul 17, 2009 9:00 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Rachel Maddow had Pat Buchanan on last night, and he demonstrated what a bigot he is (not that there was any doubt!)

The sad thing is, he really believes his hate-filled crap and is too entrenched and blind to see.

Rachel pwned Pat.

Here is a link to a petition to MSNBC to ask them to fire Pat and quit paying him as a "commentator"...

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/
1/ask-msnbc-to-fire-pat-buchanan

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Meritocracy or Nepotism
Posted by: cynyk on Jul 18, 2009 1:33 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
New Haven firefighter Frank Ricci in his testimony said: "Ours is not a job that can be handed out without regard to merit and qualifications".
Really, Frank?! Then how come the personnel roles of municipal fire and police departments include so many relatives. It is the world's worst kept secret that nepotism is a common practice in these departments, a practice that dates back for decades. So how do people of color break into this "clubby" system?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

White I Am & I Love Affirmative Action
Posted by: Razional Thinker on Jul 18, 2009 3:12 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
not only on the merit of "doing the right thing"...to remove obstacles and unwarranted stigmas... but it is only by the blending in workplaces, schools, neighborhoods, restuarants, etc. have people (some people)figured out beneath the outer layer, we are all alike. I.E. familarity breeds knowledge.

Instead of explaining away what she said, I wish Sotomayor had proudly owned it because it is true. Whose kidding who that a judge's legal opinion is 100% totally unbiased and not in any way based on personal experience/exposure/expansion? What are they? Ivory Snow Flakes???!!!!

My compliments to the poster who pointed out that it has long been known that in places like a fire department, positions are filled by people with family ties so some bias must exist. (I hope I paraphrased the quoted poster correctly.)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Affirmative Action, G.W. Bush, and Pat Buchanan
Posted by: shill on Jul 18, 2009 4:05 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I agree that affirmative action was needed in order to "level the playing field" when it was instituted into our society around 40 or so odd years ago. However, I think that it has been used about as effectively as it can be used in order to remedy racism that was built into our system. I now feel that it's time to let it go. This is not to say that there is no more racism in our society; only that it is no longer openly SUPPORTED by the LAWS of our country, and this is partially due to affirmative action. However, any more change as far as racism and prejudice (and for that matter, equal opportunity) goes is going to have to take place individually, person by person. Government cannot make racists change their beliefs, only their actions as far as openly discriminating in the workplace as well as in other areas of society where they might LIKE to be able to turn back the clock so to speak.

People like G.W. Bush are ALWAYS going to get special treatment in our society, regardless. Affirmative action hasn't changed and WON'T change this. Families who have big money and even bigger connections will ALWAYS rule, because the rich are different. They have the resources to bend, and sometimes to even break the rules and get away with it. I don't necessarily believe that all of them DO so, but if they so choose, the odds favor them getting away with it more than they do the average person on an equally average income. Thus has it always been throughout history, and I believe thus shall it always be.

While I don't agree with a lot of what Pat Buchanan has to say, I DO believe that he has what I call "political savvy," which is why he is one of the folks to watch and listen to in order to see what the far right wing is thinking at any given time. Sarah Palin is a bad joke, in my opinion, totally unqualified and totally unfit to rule. John McCain sealed his fate when he picked her for a running mate. However, if a guy like Buchanan thinks she would make a good President, you can be sure that he's not alone. He is an insider when it comes to knowing what is being hashed out in the far right wing of the Republican Party and in Washington as a whole. I don't want him fired; I want to know what these folks are up to, and Buchanan is definitely a guy in the know in that area, and one who will gladly speak his mind. And , unlike so many of the folks in the far right wing, Palin included, Buchanan DOES have some intelligent working knowledge of history, how our government works, politics, etc. He is a man who needs to be watched and listened to, as painful and enraging as it might be to some people, because he is what's "happening" as far as the right wingers are concerned, and you can be sure that some of what he says will be echoed by the right wing in the future.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

African-Americans, Football, Basketball Bla Bla Bla
Posted by: jmmartin on Jul 18, 2009 7:04 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You do not reference Buchanan's most racist comment yet. Appearing on the Rachel Show (MSNBC), Buchanan continued his invective against Sotomayor by regurgitating the GOP talking points on her "wise Latina woman" comment. When Rachel pressed him by pointing out the context in which the admittedly awkward remark was made, he came back with an old stereotype about African-Americans that, one must recall, cost Nick "the Greek" his job as a sports commentator on TV. Buchanan said he didn't think certain racial groups in certain fields had any white betters, and he specifically mentioned professional sports.

Duh! Last time I looked, not every black person in America was a basketball player, a football player, or a Tiger Woods for that matter. The racism was blatant. Rachel kept after him, winning the debate handily. Buchanan kept raising his voice and getting more and more red in the face. Exasperated, Rachel finally thanked him for being on her show, but one wonders how long he has at NBC and its affiliates.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Buchanan Is a Symptom
Posted by: cprcdirector on Jul 18, 2009 8:11 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Pat Buchanan may be a racist - I can't imagine any white American who can remember when whites-only drinking fountains, rest rooms, waiting rooms, restaurants and public schools were considered normal and acceptable not being infected with the disease of racism. But the real problem with Mr. Buchanan is that he is a professional bloviator.

Unless he is on a program of which he believes the audience deserves his respect(the McLaughlin Group, e.g.), he merely seeks to out-Coulter Coulter. His mainstream media rantings are a symptom of the fact that these journalistic hacks are not interested in civil discourse: it's bad for ratings.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Legacy Scholarships
Posted by: jbowen43 on Jul 18, 2009 10:00 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
When you think of privileged white boys don't leave out the classic legacy student, the Admiral's son, the Admiral's grandson, underachieving adulterer John McCain.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Legacy Scholarships Posted by: JohnSmith68
» Ahhhh... McCain. Posted by: Quannah
» RE: Ahhhh... McCain. Posted by: Brb007
» RE: Ahhhh... McCain. Posted by: Quannah
» RE: Legacy Scholarships Posted by: Lilly
MSNBC Puppet
Posted by: kib on Jul 18, 2009 10:44 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Pat is just an MSNBC puppet used to gain FOX viewers. The sad thing about it is he truly believe he can change Racheal and the gangs views. Thanks for the insight I never thought of the term White male affirmative action, point well taken.
Support Please

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

THE IRATE PAT BUCHANAN
Posted by: VZEQICVA on Jul 18, 2009 1:34 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
He's way past his expiration date.
Anna

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

How many non-white males have been President of the Sierra Club.
Posted by: JohnSmith68 on Jul 18, 2009 1:43 PM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm curious Mr. Saperstein. When you accepted the prestigious position of President of the Sierra Club, how many non-white males had been President before you? And if the answer is zero, didn't you feel a little bit ashamed...like you were benefiting from the ill-gotten gains of white skin privilege? You're a hypocrite. You love race preferences because supporting them makes you feel like a morally superior person and neither you nor your privileged children have to pay for them. It's the children of working class whites and asians who pay the price.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Buchanan the loser
Posted by: hms2004 on Jul 18, 2009 2:31 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Buchanan is a racist and a loser who peddles loser ideology. They guy is a dinosaur. He worked for another loser, Nixon, the disgraced former president/crook. Why is Buchanan still going on tv he contributes absolutely nothing to the national debate substantively. The issues he keeps bringing up have already been settled against him back in the 1970S! That was 30 fucking years ago. However I do like the fact that everyone associates this racist fuckhead with the Republicans, when are they gonna learn that Americans have moved on when it comes to race and for the most part have embraced our diversity?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

For Those Who Wonder
Posted by: Eric.Arthur.Blair on Jul 18, 2009 2:56 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
For those who wonder why Patrick Buchanan still has a job, still is on the public airwaves and still gets listened to: the combined terms of Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan, the Bush Dynasty, Newt Gingrich, James Sensenbrenner, Jon Kyl, Mark Foley, Rick Santorum, et. al., ad nauseam haven't stopped people from continuing to elect Republicans, either. As long as there are enough stupid people to give these people credibility in elections and media ratings, we will have them. Collectively, they are reaming the people of the United States with a dildo the size of a two-liter soda bottle while trying to convince us we enjoy it - and some believe it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Buchanan on Maddow
Posted by: Lilly on Jul 18, 2009 7:25 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Even having listened to Pat Buchanan for years, my husband and I were dumbfounded by his performance on The Rachel Maddow Show. He was like the end of a fireworks show as he spewed and spat racist vitriol. We both sat with our mouths hanging open. After that, Buchanan has no credibility, ever, anywhere, for presenting himself as a reasonable person. His operative line was "when I was growing up in 1960"---he simply does not acknowledge the last fifty years.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» No racist has ever grown up. Posted by: godsbreath64
How Many Are We Missing?
Posted by: Lilly on Jul 18, 2009 7:47 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I am about to go to bed and am really tired so I am not sure I can say this in a way that makes sense, but what I mean is that people who think like Pat Buchanan don't seem to acknowledge the huge pool of talent that remains unknown to us without the aggressive pushes that began in the 1960's like Civil Rights and Affirmative Action law.

In this thread we are talking about politicians and Supreme Court Justices of ethnic diversity. But it seems relevant to add that every time I watch Tiger Woods on TV, I can't help remembering that he would not have been allowed to play the golf course of my childhood, nor to caddy on that course, nor to enter the country club unless he worked there as a domestic, nor to rent or buy a residence in the community. He might have been employed as a day laborer or, more likely, would have been chased out of town by somebody with a shotgun.

To me he stands as an example of talent that was simply lost to the world in the days of segregation. I'm not sure this is a good example because an athlete is not a statesman, but the principle holds true. It must be like seeing only the tip of the iceberg---how many Tiger Woods and Michael Jordans, how many judges and Congressmen and professors and surgeons, do we lose by not taking care to bring everyone forward? We do a better job than in the 1940's but we still have a long way to go.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: How Many Are We Missing? Posted by: funnyguy
» RE: Like now we will have a rainbow Posted by: Sister_Lauren
Shirleyj
Posted by: shirleyj on Jul 18, 2009 9:39 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Thank you, thank you for telling the truth about affirmative action and its benefits since the 1960s. Buchanan's race baiting and poor grasp of history(actually black slaves built the Capitol and the White House), his misplaced xenophobia (since the Irish were not welcome either, a few short decades ago), only embarrasses him. Pitting blue collar whites against other poor minorities is a failed Republican strategy and only serves to marginalize the Grand Old Party.

Private industry has always supported affirmative action (e.g., see the amicus briefs filed by Fortune 500 companies in the Michigan case.) When Attorney General Meese tried to do away with it during the Reagan Admin., private industry convinced the president not to. Judge Sotomayor is an excellent example of the benefits of affirmative action. When given the opportunity, she took it and excelled at Princeton and Yale Law. So did Justice Ginsburg when she was hired at Columbia Law, which had not one female or minority faculty member. Only with the Johnson executive order did Columbia feel compelled to diversify its professoriate. Given the opportunity, she excelled as well. We, the affirmative action babies of the 60s, 70s and 80s, who were admitted to the Ivy League and other selective colleges and universities are making our mark in American society now and I believe that this nation is all the better for it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Even though Fuchanan is an asshole
Posted by: AMERICAN VETERAN on Jul 19, 2009 5:03 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
he is CORRECT about the racist bitch sotomayor.
She IS unqualified to be a judge.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Can we trust him with opinions...
Posted by: Eric.Arthur.Blair on Jul 19, 2009 8:26 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
At around 5:38 into the YouTube recording of the Maddow-Buchanan wrestling match, he declares, unequivocally, "...she's from Puerto Rico...". She's not. She was born in the Bronx which, last I heard, was part of New York City, New York State and still, despite what Republicans would like to think, part of the United States proper. If we can't trust him to get a simple fact right, how can we be expected to even consider, much less respect, his opinions?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Benny Waters
Posted by: Benwa on Jul 19, 2009 9:53 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The problem is not that Buchanan is racist, the problem is that you eagerly brownose ANY non white nominated for the post Sapperstein. You feel that somehow your ethnicity gives you the "chosen" right to endow all whites with your opinion and if they dont accept it they are immediately racists. Let me give you a real definition of a racist: If you dont agree with me you are racist. Go and suck on that for a while Sapperstein.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Benny Waters Posted by: funnyguy
» RE: Benny Waters Posted by: Eric.Arthur.Blair
Pat and others here are missing the critical humanity gene
Posted by: foreverhope on Jul 19, 2009 10:47 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
He and a few others here on Alternet are clear evidence of why affirmative action is still very necessary and proves what Sotomayer as a woman and a person of color has had to overcome to achieve the distinction of U.S. Supreme Court Judge.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» I call bullshit. Posted by: Quannah
» RE: I call bullshit. Posted by: FULLPROOF BULLETPROOF
We need Afirmative Action to maintain our Rascist Local School Funding System..!
Posted by: TJColatrella on Jul 19, 2009 1:46 PM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Doesn't Pat Buchanan know we need Affirmative Action so we can maintain our National Racist System, of Local School Funding..?

It's as simple as that...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I'm black and I'm sick and tired of REVERSE RACISM and ILLEGAL ALIENS !!
Posted by: FULLPROOF BULLETPROOF on Jul 19, 2009 3:35 PM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Pat Buchanan is no racist. Obama is the racist for picking a backer of open borders to sit on the bench and decide. I'm a black independent and I hate both the conservatives and the liberals and am not fooled by their slick shit talk.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Quannah = Lying TROLL Posted by: FULLPROOF BULLETPROOF
White Infrastructure
Posted by: Ligeia on Jul 19, 2009 8:30 PM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Say the Smith family bought land, and through their very hard work and careful investments built a profitable farm and a comfortable house. Do the Jones next door have the right to seize a portion of the Smith property because the Smith grandchildren are better off than the Jones grandchildren? Our White forefathers came over here with their own money, talents, education and work ethic.
We don't owe other groups free jobs or any other benefit.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: White Infrastructure Posted by: desidid
» RE: White Infrastructure Posted by: Ligeia
» RE: White Infrastructure Posted by: Morell
» RE: White Infrastructure Posted by: Ligeia
Sapirstein Logic Incorrect
Posted by: Ligeia on Jul 19, 2009 8:40 PM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Sapirstein compares Bush, the (reputedly) weakest member of the White cohort, to Sotomeyer, the strongest of the Latino cohort, to make the claim that both groups are deserving of equal outcomes. Never mind these two individuals; consider the productivity of the White cohort as a whole ... just who is it that pays our taxes????

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Productive ---- NOT!
Posted by: Ligeia on Jul 19, 2009 9:25 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Sapirstein: "I prosecuted employment discrimination class actions for 25 years, in the process forcing many major corporations to hire and promote women, minorities, older people and the disabled. In every single case I had, when the case was over and the workforce was integrated, no matter how bitter the litigation had been, the companies would confide in me that their workforces after "affirmative action" were stronger, more competitive, more productive."

Sadly, the above statement just isn't true. Managers no longer manage American businesses: pursuing diversity is their full-time goal.

One NYC law firm reputedly paid its administrative managers $10K+ to pull in a minority who then managed to survive one year in a paralegal slot.

Another firm, a mid-sized Jewish operation, recruited a Jewish woman to move to NYC all the way from Argentina (!) to fill the "Latina" quota.

All the corporations have similar practices. Even the most mediocre performer can find herself getting lunch invites from higher-ups, thanks to her token status.

And meanwhile, actual talent is being totally ignored. What will be the long-run cost of this waste in pursuit of totally arbitrary quotas?

As for the past 25 years of diversity, our whole economy has gone straight downhill.

And, since Anna Rosenberg, asst sec'y of Defense under Truman, forced Affirmative Action on our armed forces, we have not decisely won any large scale military operation.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Productive ---- NOT! Posted by: Morell
» RE: Productive ---- NOT! Posted by: Ligeia
Who cares? PB can blabber what he wants. Just move on. Besides,
Posted by: JenniferBedingfield on Jul 19, 2009 9:34 PM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Sotomayor is destined to win the confirmation so move it on already.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

NOT A SINGLE THING THAT PATRICK BUCHANAN ESPOUSES WOULD MAKE THE UNITED
Posted by: Raymond Emerson on Jul 20, 2009 12:09 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
States a better place to live in or a better place for children. That does not define a patriot.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

If there were tests for the presidency
Posted by: Eric.Arthur.Blair on Jul 20, 2009 7:52 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If there were tests for the presidency like there are for becoming a New Haven firefighter or hearings to become a SCOTUS justice, would Bush have passed without white male affirmative action? I don't think so. He would have been at the bottom either way.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

tripot
Posted by: itouch backup on Jul 21, 2009 10:15 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
anti-choice beliefs
Posted by: hahaho on Jul 30, 2009 5:53 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
George W Bush and Sarah Palin are perfect examples. Both are obviously far from being the sharpest knives in the drawer, but that's a good thing if you aren't the sharpest knife in the drawer either. Plus they have same skin color, same religious affiliation, same love of guns, same anti-choice beliefs. Perfect. links of london tiffany Now change just one or two things, and they will turn against them.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement