<body><script type="text/javascript"> function setAttributeOnload(object, attribute, val) { if(window.addEventListener) { window.addEventListener('load', function(){ object[attribute] = val; }, false); } else { window.attachEvent('onload', function(){ object[attribute] = val; }); } } </script> <div id="navbar-iframe-container"></div> <script type="text/javascript" src="https://apis.google.com/js/platform.js"></script> <script type="text/javascript"> gapi.load("gapi.iframes:gapi.iframes.style.bubble", function() { if (gapi.iframes && gapi.iframes.getContext) { gapi.iframes.getContext().openChild({ url: 'https://www.blogger.com/navbar.g?targetBlogID\x3d17829824\x26blogName\x3dWrong+Side+of+the+Tracks\x26publishMode\x3dPUBLISH_MODE_BLOGSPOT\x26navbarType\x3dBLUE\x26layoutType\x3dCLASSIC\x26searchRoot\x3dhttps://wrongjr.blogspot.com/search\x26blogLocale\x3den_US\x26v\x3d2\x26homepageUrl\x3dhttp://wrongjr.blogspot.com/\x26vt\x3d7706307521957129916', where: document.getElementById("navbar-iframe-container"), id: "navbar-iframe" }); } }); </script>
          CONTACT     |      ABOUT     |      SEARCH     |      RECENT POSTS     |      ARCHIVES     |      BLOGS, &TC     |      RELIGION     |      ENTERTAINMENT     |      MEDIA     |      IDEAS     |     

10.07.2006    |    Right up there with "black is white"
Consider this from a "nationally recognized employment law expert" named Gregg, in his advice to a Wisconsin state legislative committee (as reported by the LaCrosse Tribune):
Gregg, who is white, said the point system aimed at veterans helped launch his career and that affirmative action "helps everyone" by ensuring equal access to opportunity in the hiring process. Without affirmative action, hiring decisions largely would be based on favoritism, he said.
There are two parts to this Orwellian hash. The first is that preferential hiring of veterans who are not disabled is a good thing. More on this below.

What is truly Orwellian is the notion that "affirmative action" somehow, ensures "equal access" to oppotunity. Wasn't the very nature of affirmative action to give unearned preference to approved groups in order to compensate for real or perceived discrimination? Well, that's the nose of the camel peeking under the tent, as they say. It isn't long until the whole smelly beast is inside.

Well, the smelly beast that is racialism in the form of unearned preferences in hiring has now convinced at least one idiot that "inequality" is "equality." I don't agree that any group should have an unearned advantage in this day and age. But I can understand those who sincerely believe that certain groups still need such preferences in hiring.

Regardless of what I or you believe, however, it is impossible in logic to give one group preference in hiring and then turn around and claim that all groups have "equal access" to opportunity. Both things can not be true.

Such is the nature of those who still patronize blacks and other groups by telling them that they are not good enough to compete on their own. Keep on telling them that, and there's a better chance that they never will be good enough.

As for veteran's preference, that is different. These are men (mostly, but not exclusively) who have served their nation. Many have put their lives on the line in combat. They deserve preference; they've earned it.

Contrast this earned preference with those who were born with what is now the politically correct set of genes or ethnicity. Such preferences are inimical to liberty, they are unamerican, and should be ended forthwith.

Labels:

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home






about this blog

I was born, grew up, and went to school in the Bronx, New York -- on the wrong side of the tracks. Got the chance to go to college, so instead of joining the NYPD (the obvious career choice at that time and place), I became an engineer. Spent some years designing things that go boom (or things that take things that go boom to their destinations...), principally for our military. Also took an interesting career turn and for some years was in charge of counter-terrorism for my agency...so I learned something about guns. And when to use them.

I am a believer, in God. Christian. My opinion of most denominations is that they seem to be more concerned with the collection plate and devising intricate rules as to who is in and who is out.

My politics are a mix of conservative and libertarian, as in live and let live. With one exception, I favor small government, maximum personal freedom, coupled with personal responsibility and accountability for one's actions. I also know that there are, and have always been, things that are true, and things that are not. Two problems: Being smart enough to know which is which, and having the guts to act on it. I make no claims...

The exception to small government? I favor a robust national defense, against enemies foreign, and domestic. Or, as Teddy Roosevelt should have said, "speak softly and carry a whole bunch of armored divisions."

This blog will focus on politics, culture, religion, national security. That's pretty much the same territory as the New York Times. Just that I will never label my opinions as "news."



top of page