Skip to comments.Outcry over Romney's Mass. affirmative action move
Posted on 06/02/2012 7:29:54 AM PDT by GlockThe Vote
WASHINGTON -- Mitt Romney scuttled the Massachusetts government's long-standing affirmative action policies with a few strokes of his pen on a sleepy holiday six months after he became governor.
No news conference or news release trumpeted Romney's executive order on Bunker Hill Day, June 17, 2003, in the deserted Statehouse. But when civil rights leaders, black lawmakers and other minority groups learned of Romney's move two months later, it sparked a public furor.
Romney drew criticism for cutting the enforcement teeth out of the law and rolling back more than two decades of affirmative action advances.
Civil rights leaders said his order stripped minorities, women, disabled people and veterans of equal access protections for state government jobs and replaced them with broad guidelines. They complained Romney hadn't consulted them before making the changes, snubbing the very kind of inclusion he professed to support.
(Excerpt) Read more at miamiherald.com ...
Nice try, ignorant press.
Admit it...you are doomed.
Please take your cretin pres with you.
The left doesn’t want equality. The left demands inequality and calls it “equality.”
The more they whine, the happier I am.
Good businessmen tend to prefer qualifications based hires and merit based promotions.
Someone in Miami thinks this article will HURT Romney?
Ha! I doubt that.
Certainly, won’t hurt him around here.
There's one more difference between Romney and Obama.
While far from the ideal candidate, this puts the lie to those who would have us believe that Romney is "no different" than Obama.
I like this move. I am tired of less qualified people getting jobs simply because they are a minority. If I ran a business, I would want to be able to hire the best person for the job regardless of their identity status. Identity doesn’t matter to me. Same goes for voting for the right person. I don’t give a crap about identity/minority status.
I worked with an IT tech in the 90’s who was black. He was also brilliant at what he did. He once told me that he didn’t like AA because people always assumed he was incompetent before they got to know him and realized that he wasn’t hired for skin color.
“The left demands inequality, etc.”
My 8th grade daughter attended her highschool “flyup” day. There was a “diversity” club. A person was supposed to stand up when their niche was called - If that isn’t labeling and the opposite of diversity, then I don’t know what is!
PS - she stood up when they said “who has trouble talking” because she had just gotten braces. The rest clapped and found it very funny - she is pretty and popular BTW, so making it a farce - the club was a farce and the 8th graders seemed to know it
Anyone still saying these two are the same are delusional.
Has romney befriended domestic terrorists and communist radicals?
Mitt beats Obama, and then some.
When the so called "elites" in New York, Washington, or Hollywood look around at their surroundings they see only like minded nodding toward the shibboleths of race preference and the idolization of the minority (ghetto gangster, sodomite, Islamic, whatever). This kind of attack trying to demonize Romney as some sort of arch Conservative in the mold of their favorite image of Sauron the Great, Dick Cheney, will only strengthen him.
Just so. I’ve known a few very smart black people, and they were handicapped by everyone’s assumption that they had gotten where they were because of affirmative action.
I remember writing a grad school recommendation for a black student who was one of the two or three brightest I had ever taught, and trying to figure out how to make that clear in the recommendation letter so the selection committees wouldn’t think I was just doing the usual affirmative action thing.
I must have done it right, because he did get into Yale.
Tell that to some of the obama lovers around here. Remember obama called them Obamicans early on?
Unfortunately, there are a couple of dozen VERY VOCAL posters on this site who fit that category. It makes moving forward much less fun. It's time for us to stop apologizing for soon to be POTUS Romney, and continue emphasizing his strong points.
For me, I will no longer start pro Romney posts with " I would have preferred......., but......."
Sill one of the funniest episodes.
They are recycling old articles?
Holy crap! That’s when the barrel has been scraped dry.
It looks like you are well along the way in the process, if you were ever truly an ABO in the first place.
As for us "couple of dozen" posters who disagree with your capitulation, perhaps you can get this site's owner to ban us all.
No, I'd rather you just accept reality: he's the nominee. Obama's the opponent. One of those two will win in November.
Those are facts I'd be willing to bet my life savings on. Now it's your choice how to proceed.
FWIW, we just found Dad on a tribal registry in the 1940 census, which was just made public in April. We have no idea when or why he was taken off, but guess it was probably in the 1960's when AA hiring and free stuff from the government for the right ethnicity first reared its ugly head.
Dad never talked about it nor used it to get any job or promotion. We grew up thinking we were white with some Native Americans in the family tree and cousins we met at family reunions. We never realized it was so close.
Dont want anyone banned for differing opinion, but the reality is that its either Mittens or Obama in November and while mittens may not be even close to our favorite pick, he is still better than obama by a mile.
Whoa. Hold on. Mitt OPPOSES special treatment for ANY ethnicity, religion, sexual behavior choice, gender, or age group?
Damn. Sounds pretty conservative to me.
Icing on the cake: he pissed off "civil rights leaders".
Well, there are a few Democrats who took advantage of the Mitt ban to sow discontent, and plenty of people here were happy to jump onto their threads and help. They have slowed down now that people can respond. It’s a sad circumstance we have to deal with. We can’t blame people for being disgusted with moderates, or Republicans who call themselves progressives. Mitt is better than Obama, infinitely better, and for that reason he has my vote, but that is a low hurdle. What he does from this point on will determine whether or not he deserves support from conservatives.
"To quell such criticism, Romney appointed a special advisory panel that included minority and civil rights leaders to recommend changes.
"The changes the panel wanted became too hot for the administration to deal with," said Leonard Alkins, who was head of the NAACP's Boston branch during the controversy and was a member of Romney's advisory panel. Alkins said many of the panel's recommendations were aimed at bolstering the policies Romney had abolished.
"Romney essentially walked away from the fight, ignoring his own advisory panel. Instead, he had state officials effectively follow the old affirmative action policies he had formally revoked with his executive order."
So when faced with criticism, he effectively left the old affirmative action policies in place despite his own executive order, and brought in the very people who are part of the problem to sit on an advisery board to be its solution?
Sorry guys, but this doesn't exactly make Romney a conservative hero or anti-affirmative action crusader. At the very least, the entirety of the article suggests that he's weak-willed and will back down whenever an action of his is challenged by the Left.
Given that the Democrats had 80% of both legislative houses and could impeach and remove him at will, with the support of the MA electorate, I think this merely means the guy understands that he can only push as far as the political environment will allow. Politicians don't have the freedom we do of pushing for whatever we want, regardless of whether it's politically possible.
Look ZF, it's time to get the stories straight. Was Romney our hero and paladin of conservative values, or was he the powerless pawn of the Massachusetts Democrat legislature? He can't be both, yet all we hear is the selective choice of one or the other based upon whether it will make Romney look good, or will preserve him from looking bad. That sort of logic is the type of thing that FReepers would decry if we were talking about anybody else but the GOP nominee. It just doesn't wash.
Further, if your argument really had merit, then he never would have made the provocative action to begin with.
I predict that on the day after election day no one here will be surprised to see you floating in the punchbowl.
Harvard Law School might have an opening soon.
I am liking Romney more and more
Romney, while I don’t like him or want him as president, as right in this move. Indeed - he really is in favor of equal protection -
Equal doesn’t mean same. It means that you base hiring and recruiting on the merits of the individual, not the color of their skin.
I am looking past the election on how told Romney to at least some conservative ideals, and in my mind, throwing our support to him without concrete promises is not the way to accomplish this.
I do have a problem with the Romney lovers who were masquerading as "hold your nose" conservatives, but now are feeling enabled to come out of the closest.
The banning comment was a joke, since the person doing the banning here is a lot closer to my position than the people who want us gone.
I don’t like anyone being banned. I know what Romney is and I know what Obama is. Romney stinks ad probably will be horrible, however, Obama is instant lethal injection suicide.
It is what it is. I voted for Ron Paul in the primary, but now it’s about getting Obama the he’ll out office, nothing else.
I will refuse a black Dr. on that basis. I will assume AA is the reason they are where they are. Apologies to the truly capable, but I look out for #1.
Why would Romney care a fig about a single Black voter? He knows damn well 90% of them will again support Obama, and they get more handouts than any other Americans. There is much to be gained with other voters from stripping Blacks of their racial quotas, subsidies and welfare largesse.