Former President Has Spoken
Barack Hussein Obama has spoken! He has informed the world that we are racist because we were consumed with the news of the mini-submarine that imploded in the deep waters near the sunken Titanic. Evidently, a boat capsized off of the coastline of Greece, and hundreds of people of color perished in the tragedy.
What is the first mixed-race president talking about? What kind of idiocy is he peddling? I am not taking his or any other leftists’ holier-than-thou nonsense anymore. Obama set the stage for the disorder and chaos that is tearing our country apart with his phony outrage, racial division, class warfare, support for the radical leftist agenda and communist view of history. He is stirring up trouble again, but the people are rising up and he is looking almost as lost as Joe Biden – his game is antiquated and he has brought chaos upon our great land. The majority of the citizenry have backpedaled for decades as the left yelled in our face with pseudo moral superiority. The citizenry has had enough. We are fighting back.
We need to defeat the left soundly and send them into code pink mode – permanently on the sideline in their isolated freak show.
Historically Men Had More Rights Than Women
I think that “affirmative action” type programs should only take gender into consideration. If you go back far enough you will see that all races, tribes, castes and ethnic groups allowed men to have more rights and opportunities than women.
Why Others Must Sacrifice
Two Supreme Court decisions involved questionable university policies to reduce racial disparities by increasing campus diversity.
Universities have inventively increased cost barriers to higher education that drive racial disparities. Higher education rates are a much greater causes of racial disparities than racism. Higher education leads to more opportunities, better health outcomes and higher incomes. The most effective strategy to narrow racial gaps in the US is to encourage more individuals to attend/graduate college. Costs, tuition and fees have continued to rise despite containment strategies. For example, legislative tuition containment efforts only increased fees.
These two cases involved superficial solutions with little benefit. Minority preference in admissions increases diversity for only a select few institutions with dramatically low acceptance rates. For the remainder, discrepancy is due to racial differences in number of applicants. Racial preference in admissions doesn’t increase the number of minority applicants. Forgiving loans after graduation, which smart applicants know can never be counted on, doesn’t increase the number of minority applicants either. Several commentators suggested scholarships to increase diversity. However, availability of scholarships usually only affect college selection decisions. Applicants know scholarships are selective and can be taken away. When making the first decision, to go or not to go to college, potential applicants look at the overall bottom line. Only reducing costs can effectively reduce barriers to higher education and increase minority applications.
Superficially concentrating on ideological, intellectually lazy policies targeting racism is a dangerous cycle. Since racism is the only answer considered, the only solution is to reduce racism. However, these solutions ignore the reality of free will. We all have a right to make different decisions (that others may disagree with) based on variety of factors (unimportant to others). When these solutions fail, the only explanation considered is difficulty overcoming racism. In biased minds, success is not required, failure “proves” that failed ideology is true.
The other reason for these superficial policies is addiction to continually growing unchecked revenue. Administrators and professors refuse to make changes required for real impact. They want to continue to increase their personal benefits. Others must pay to reduce negative impact of higher education’s refusal to control growing costs.
In an increasingly liberally biased university environment, opposition is responsible for failure. Therefore, those who disagree must pay more to fix negative effects. Protesting colleges for failing to control costs would be a better way to accomplish goals of both these cases.