I’ll bet it was like pulling a tooth, but John McCain finally answered a question about where he stands on the Arizona Civil Rights Initiative, a measure that seeks to ban preferential treatment by the government based on race, sex, etc., in his home state.
Asked point-blank whether he supported the ballot initiative, McCain said, “Yes, I do…I’ve always opposed quotas.” (Source)
(Michelle Malkin is skeptical of McCain’s endorsement.)
Activist Ward Connerly is on a mission to ban preferences from hiring, contracting, and admissions in state governments. His efforts have proved fruitful in three states so far. Californians approved a ban on preferences with 54 percent of the vote in 1996. Voters in Washington state approved a similar measure by 58.3 percent in 1998, and Michigan voters approved the ban by 58 percent in 2006.
As expected, Barack Obama believes governments should treat people differently based on skin color. In response to McCain’s comments, BHO said:
“I think in the past he’d [McCain] been opposed to these Ward Connerly initiatives as divisive. And I think he’s right. These are not designed to solve a big problem, but they’re all too often designed to drive a wedge between people.”
I echo Roger Clegg. Race is divisive, and yes, BHO, these issues drive a wedge between people, as they should.
The whole point of the civil rights movement was to bar the government from preferring one citizen over another based on factors like race. But our government continues this odious practice, and I can think of nothing more unfair or divisive, no matter which race or sex benefits from the discrimination. A government with the power to discriminate in favor of blacks has the power to discriminate against blacks. Dolts.
Here is something that grates on my nerves as much as the term “African American”: People use the terms “affirmative action” and “race preferences” interchangeably, but they are not even synonymous.
Affirmative action was a policy designed to provide qualified blacks with opportunities to compete with others for jobs. The “cast a wider net” imagery described the process. The goal was to include more qualified blacks into the hiring pool. Affirmative action as conceived quickly became what’s known today as race preferences. Under this standard, blacks are not expected to compete against whites, only against one another. Public colleges and universities are notorious for unofficial separate admissions tracks, for example. It is truly tasteless.
But people like BHO support such tackiness and call it “equality.”
I spent two days last week with folks like Roger Clegg discussing these issues, and it’s sort of a let-down coming back to a place where I’m surrounded by lowered-standards-for-blacks supporters. I suspect I’ll live, though. 
John McCain, disappointingly weak candidate that he is, did himself a huge favor by coming out in favor of the Arizona Civil Rights Initiative. Even if he really doesn’t mean it. If you believe the media hype surrounding the Obamassiah, he should be leading McCain by 15 to 20 points. Why hasn’t he blown the Vietnam vet out of the water?
If I were working for McCain, I’d advise him to come out strong against racially divisive government policies and at the same time, play the race card that Obama himself threw on the table. Obama’s got a weak hand, and McCain needs to call his bluff. But he won’t, which is why he’ll lose in November.
Affirmative Action Reax…
In a rare moment of me completely agreeing with the Corner, Roger Clegg……
Trackback by Andrew Sullivan — 07.28.08 @ 9:46 am
Maybe I missed your post on this, but has affirmative action had any positive effect on the colored communities whatsoever in your opinion? Can you honestly state that “race preferences” or “AA” has had an overall negative effect on the black and hispanic communities?
While I respect the views of AA opponents, most of the arguments never seem to address whether the ends have justified the means. It’s more of the same old “it’s divisive” argument. Who started dividing first?
Can I assume that since you’re against “race preferences” or “unofficial separate admissions tracks” you’re also against offspring of well to do alumni having their own admissions criteria? Can we get rid of that form of affirmative action as well?
Comment by Jim — 07.28.08 @ 12:26 pm
Jim, one of the issues here, for me (I can’t speak for LSB), is the question of who is dividing. If Harvard wants to have a separate admissions track for children of contributing alumni, that encourages alumni to contribute and it is Harvard’s business. If the government requires a college to have a separate admissions track for descendants of slaves, and people who look like they might have had an ancestor who was once a slave, that is unfair government intrusion. Again, if a private organization wants to do that, I have no objections. I believe the United Negro College Fund is something of the kind. I also have no problem with the Daughters of the American Revolution offering a scholarship to my daughter because her ancestors served in the Continental Army. The government, however, should keep its nose out of it.
Comment by toubabou — 07.28.08 @ 1:01 pm
While I respect the views of AA opponents, most of the arguments never seem to address whether the ends have justified the means. It’s more of the same old “it’s divisive” argument. Who started dividing first?
The same could easily be said for affirmative action supporters. Do the ends - some vaguely-expressed goal of “racial equality” which seems to have no exit strategy - really justify the means? Why is racial preference evil when practiced by individuals and private companies but not governments? And what makes affirmative action supporters think that they can fight fire with fire (in this case racial bias with racial bias) and end up with more than scorched earth?
Comment by Mwalimu Daudi — 07.28.08 @ 1:17 pm
I can’t believe readers have nothing more to say on this post. I thought for sure this one would be hot. Oh, well!
Comment by La Shawn — 07.30.08 @ 2:43 pm
Obama and Affirmative Action…
It’s worth actually watching Obama responding to questions at UNITY and his specific assessment of the future of Affirmative Action before you decide what you think….
Trackback by Ta-Nehisi Coates — 07.30.08 @ 3:34 pm
To toubabou,
As one who viewed it as unfair preferential treatment for instant university admission for children of well to do Alumni for a long time, I now understand all your points in your comment. Just a few years ago, none of what you said would have made any sense to me.
Comment by Bev — 07.30.08 @ 4:03 pm
LSB don’t get too excited, this is only for consumption during an election year. I know you know that this man will change in an instant once he gets the office.
Comment by Larry the Tarheel — 07.31.08 @ 10:00 am
Political expediency.
Comment by La Shawn — 07.31.08 @ 10:18 am
Bev,
You just made my day!
Comment by toubabou — 07.31.08 @ 1:10 pm