October 16, 2018
Yep, I'd say that's exactly the case. Which may be the reason that the donkeys are so annoyed that Lizzie has brought up the subject at this particular time. Yes, it is taking focus off the midterm elections, but it may well do more than that. If it strips their one and only weapon -- identify politics -- from their arsenal, Lizzie may well get launched on her very own Trail of Tears.Paul and Scott have joined in the general hilarity over Elizabeth Warren’s disclosure that she might be something like 1/1,000 Native American. (Then again, she might not be. There is so little Native American DNA in the database that several Latin American countries, including Mexico, are used as proxies. Warren may have a better claim to being Hispanic than Indian.) It turns out that Warren likely has less Native American blood than the average white American. Not to mention the wag who noted that she has more bourbon in her blood than Warren has Indian. But Warren doggedly sticks to the one-drop rule that her Democratic forbears promulgated in the antebellum South. Good for her!
Here’s the point: Warren’s defense of her claim to being Native American is good for America. Because if Warren is an Indian, then so are most of the rest of us. And most of us are also African-American or Hispanic. If everyone is an Indian, then no one is an Indian. This logic is fatal to the whole corrupt affirmative action enterprise.
Harvard Law School billed Elizabeth Warren as the first "woman of color†on its faculty. On the contrary, if Warren’s 1/1,000 Native American ancestry counts, the law school has probably had any number of "women of color,†both before and after her. Most of us qualify.
Affirmative action is teetering on the brink. Trial of the Asian students’ race discrimination lawsuit against Harvard University commenced today, I believe. Harvard’s denial that it discriminates against Asian applicants is transparently false, yet the academic world has rallied around the university in what likely will prove to be a vain effort to uphold the discriminatory regime in which nearly all are complicit.
[...]
Why does the edifice of racial categorization and discrimination persist in spite of its obvious irrationality and unfairness? Because many billions of dollars turn on it. And, perhaps equally important, it provides endless opportunities for virtue signaling. After all, if the Democrats didn’t have race, what would they have? That question is, no doubt, frightening to them.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
01:59 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 472 words, total size 4 kb.
35 queries taking 0.2105 seconds, 157 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.