BHO an affirmative action baby???
Isn’t that special!
So Obama knows he doens’t qualify on the basis of his merits. First in college, then for Harvard Law Review. Now he’s the first affirmative action president. He has No experience.
Affirmative action is racist. It should end.
If you read the whole article, at the beginning they say that they never reveal if somebody was selected through grades, or writing competition, or affirmative action.
But then Obama shows no doubt that he was selected because of affirmative action! That means that his grades were bad and his writing too.
And he crearly says that he got admitted to college and probably Harvard too thanks to affirmative action.
I wonder why he never mentionned that during the campaign.
As always, no word of this will be in the media.
This affirms the obvious.
B.Hussein Obama cannot tell the truth.
The guy is a compulsive liar.
Having read the Affirmative Action President’s list of actual accomplishments, I had no doubt that he had benefitted from Affirmative Action. Where’s the story here?
Since by definition "affirmative action" gives someone something that they should not have received by taking from someone who should have received it solely on the basis of race, I'd like to see the inverse of this article where someone who was screwed by the obomination's preferential treatment discussing the evils of the system. (McCain?) I guess it isn't the "content of their character" that we're working on these days but the "color of their skin"
Why oh why do they destroy the evidence used in selection??
‘The (Harvard Law Review) Selection Committee first identifies the group of candidates whose excellent performance, either in the classroom or on the writing competition, sets them apart. (Approximately half of this first batch is chosen solely on their performance on the writing competition; the other half are selected on a weighted formula of 70 percent grades and 30 percent writing competition)’
I don’t like affirmative action PERIOD, but whereas I can at least understand it for disadvantaged groups in terms of scholarship levels (and I repeat, I think it stinks), I cannot understand it on a simple and purely moral level.
If you ask me an Italian, to name all 50 American states and I only name 42, I shouldn’t score higher than an American who names 48. However if because of my background I am given a handicap advantage - well at least that’s understandable. Wrong but understandable. But if I am caught cheating - i.e. wearing a tiny earphone to get the answers relayed to me, then that’s a UNIVERSAL sin and nothing about my background should make a difference.
From an already wrong-minded affirmative action based on backgrounds, we have slipped into MORAL relativity. It’s no longer “He’s Italian so it’s only fair he knows fewer states.” It is now: “He’s Italian so he can cheat!”
advantage
So I am not wrong if I claim the “magic Negro” is a quota boy?
I counted at least three other errors in BHO’s letter in addition to the one identified in the last paragraph. These errors say it all.
So does the HLR always publish first drafts without editing? This thing was crawling with typos and other, more serious, errors.
He still is
(benefitting from affirmative action, that is. Would a white guy with his qualifications have been elected - of course not)