Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Rush Limbaugh says the affirmative action brief still keeps promoting race preference and its bad
Rush Limbaugh ^ | 1/17/2003 | Rush Limbaugh Showi

Posted on 01/17/2003 9:58:56 AM PST by TLBSHOW

Rush Limbaugh says the affirmative action brief is not what the speech said.

Does not even start to put a nail in the coffin of affirmative action and instead keeps promoting race preference. Does not know why Bush keeps doing this? He is not happy and spent the first hafe hour on it and first call had to do with this subject.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Government
KEYWORDS: affirmativeaction; brief; holdonowisajerk; tlbshowflipflops
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200201-240 next last

1 posted on 01/17/2003 9:58:56 AM PST by TLBSHOW
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: All
Free Republic Rocks, Big Time!

Donate Here By Secure Server

Or mail checks to
FreeRepublic , LLC
PO BOX 9771
FRESNO, CA 93794

or you can use

PayPal at Jimrob@psnw.com

STOP BY AND BUMP THE FUNDRAISER THREAD

2 posted on 01/17/2003 10:00:39 AM PST by Support Free Republic (Your support keeps Free Republic going strong!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TLBSHOW
Uh oh, does this mean more spam and you changing your mind about what to think?
3 posted on 01/17/2003 10:01:16 AM PST by habs4ever
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TLBSHOW
So today he's not the best President ever, right?
4 posted on 01/17/2003 10:03:02 AM PST by Wait4Truth (I HATE THE MEDIA!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #5 Removed by Moderator

To: rdb3; Khepera; elwoodp; MAKnight; condolinda; mafree; Trueblackman; FRlurker; Teacher317; ...
Black conservative ping

If you want on (or off) of my black conservative ping list, please let me know via FREEPmail. (And no, you don't have to be black to be on the list!)

Extra warning: this is a high-volume ping list.

6 posted on 01/17/2003 10:03:36 AM PST by mhking
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TLBSHOW
Is our President doing this for future votes?
7 posted on 01/17/2003 10:05:21 AM PST by elephant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gcochran
Yes, and he's also RIGHT.
8 posted on 01/17/2003 10:06:33 AM PST by caisson71
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Wait4Truth
The speech was great the brief isn't.
9 posted on 01/17/2003 10:07:34 AM PST by TLBSHOW
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: TLBSHOW

10 posted on 01/17/2003 10:08:06 AM PST by Incorrigible
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TLBSHOW
So, is Ruch an expert on Constitutional law, arguing before the Supreme Court and legal precedents? I take it he has been consulting with his knee-jerk legal experts again and is on a rant.

Bush didn't have to file a brief at all. Rush is NOT a legal expert. I stand with the President on this.

11 posted on 01/17/2003 10:08:07 AM PST by Miss Marple
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Wait4Truth
So we are all to get in a huff because Rush says he doesn't agree with the President according to some Freepers. Give me a break! I can remember a number of times that I didn't agree with Rush too! Seems to me it means some of us think and can read on our own!

By the time you get this, the same anti-Bush folks should be out in force how they don't like the President and how they are not going to vote for him again (like they ever did)!



12 posted on 01/17/2003 10:10:14 AM PST by PhiKapMom (Bush/Cheney 2004)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Miss Marple
The Bush-haters have arrived beginning with the one that started the thread.
13 posted on 01/17/2003 10:10:58 AM PST by Wait4Truth (I HATE THE MEDIA!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Wait4Truth
One has to agree with EVERYTHING that our President does in order NOT to be a Bush hater?
14 posted on 01/17/2003 10:12:39 AM PST by elephant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: habs4ever
Get rid of all of affirmative action don't just give us smoke and mirrors.
15 posted on 01/17/2003 10:14:13 AM PST by TLBSHOW
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: PhiKapMom
I appreciate the fact that Rush is on our side most of the time but that does not mean we have to automatically question the President every time Rush does not agree with something. As Miss Marple said, Rush is no legal expert. Second, I have learned to never underestimate this President. There is always a good reason for his actions and it always comes out in the end. You can't turn a battleship around overnight.
16 posted on 01/17/2003 10:14:17 AM PST by Wait4Truth (I HATE THE MEDIA!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: elephant
Votes, no? He's in search of elusive praise from the New York Times Editorial Board.
17 posted on 01/17/2003 10:15:51 AM PST by JohnGalt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Wait4Truth
yesterday the administration stated that it would not speak out against the '78 ruling (forget the parties) which has been a crutch for AA and a cause for confusion throughout the country. Of course that is just my understanding, I could be wrong.
18 posted on 01/17/2003 10:17:47 AM PST by Texas_Jarhead
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: elephant
Nope, not everything. Perhaps giving him the benefit of the doubt once in awhile would be a nice start. It's always the same old people looking for something they can use against him...it's very tiring and boring. I don't agree with him on every single issue - but I trust him to do the very best he can do at any particular moment.
19 posted on 01/17/2003 10:17:53 AM PST by Wait4Truth (I HATE THE MEDIA!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: TLBSHOW
Bush's position is that racial diversity is good, but only if it is acheived based on merit.
20 posted on 01/17/2003 10:18:30 AM PST by SunStar (Democrats Piss Me Off !!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: elephant
While I love President Bush I don't have to agree with everything he does and says. When I don't agree 100% I am then called a hater!

So I guess Rush Limbaugh and Michelle Malkin are haters too? What a joke.

,,,,,,,,

And in his remarks Wednesday on the University of Michigan case now before the Supreme Court, Bush voiced continuing support for the Clinton-Gore-Reno fantasy that government-engineered racial diversity can and should be achieved "without using quotas" or other unconstitutional means. As examples of model programs, Bush cited public university admissions plans in his home state of Texas and his brother Jeb's state of Florida.

As I've noted before, W.'s "10 percent" and Jeb's "20 percent" plans are the same old, tired racial-preference policies disguised under the slipcover of "compassionate conservatism." Jeb's "Talented 20" program, for example, guarantees state university admission to the top 20 percent of students in every Florida high school senior class.

Michelle Malkin

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/michellemalkin/

21 posted on 01/17/2003 10:18:50 AM PST by TLBSHOW
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Wait4Truth
So true! The change is going to come very slowly. It took a lot of courage for the President to order this brief be filed on behalf of the Government but that isn't enough for some people. Now we can truthfully say that the President is being hit from the left and right -- seems if both sides are mad, he must be doing the right thing!
22 posted on 01/17/2003 10:19:25 AM PST by PhiKapMom (Bush/Cheney 2004)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: SunStar
"Ensuring that public institutions, especially educational institutions, are open and accessible to a broad and diverse array of individuals, including individuals of all races and ethnicities, is an important and entirely legitimate government objective. Measures that ensure diversity, accessibility and opportunity are important components of government's responsibility to its citizens."

* * * *

"No segment of society should be denied an opportunity to obtain access to government services and public institutions. Nowhere is the importance of such openess more acute than in the context of higher education. A university degree opens the doors to the finest jobs and top professional schools, and professional degree, in turn, makes it possible to practice law, medicine and other professions. If undergraduate and graduate institutions are not open to all individuals and broadly inclusive to our diverse national community, then the top jobs, graduate schools and the professions will be closed to some."

"Nothing in the Constitution requires public universities and governments to close their eyes to this reality or tolerate artificial obstacles to educational opportunity. Public universities have substantial latitude to tackle such problems and ensure that universities and other public institutions are open to all that student bodies are experientially diverse and broadly representative of the public. Schools may identify and discard facially neutral criteria that, in practice, tend to skew admissions in a manner that detracts from educational diversity."

23 posted on 01/17/2003 10:20:20 AM PST by DSH
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Miss Marple; Howlin; PhiKapMom; Poohbah; Congressman Billybob; JohnHuang2
What was it David Frum has said? Something about "conservative elites constantly sniffing the air for signs of a sellout" or something like that? They're not the ones who have to get the votes to win an election. They're just behind some damn keyboard. They're not the ones confronting the real situations.

Putting out a press release or hiding behind some keyboard and doing a syndicated column is far different from actually having to run the country, and it's about time to call some of the folks who David Frum is talking about (we have a general idea of who they are - the ones who sniff around, claiming a sellout at every turn) out, and tell them to put up or shut up.
24 posted on 01/17/2003 10:29:01 AM PST by hchutch ("Last suckers crossed, Syndicate shot'em up" - Ice-T, "I'm Your Pusher")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Miss Marple
"Bush didn't have to file a brief at all. Rush is NOT a legal expert. I stand with the President on this."

Nor, apparently are the Republican judicial nominee's.

25 posted on 01/17/2003 10:30:56 AM PST by G.Mason
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: hchutch
"put up or shut up"

Trust but verify.

26 posted on 01/17/2003 10:31:39 AM PST by bvw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: TLBSHOW
Michelle Malkin is full of it in her characterizations one the One Florida policy and of the policy in Texas.

The 10% and 20% things that were set up by George W. and Jeb are based on MERIT - how one did in their high schools. NIETHER program uses race as a criteria.

It's easy for her to pntificate in a syndicated column or in some book or on Fox News - she's not the one who faces the voters. George W. is the one who's out on the front lines, and has the task of putting foot to left-wing butt.
27 posted on 01/17/2003 10:33:20 AM PST by hchutch ("Last suckers crossed, Syndicate shot'em up" - Ice-T, "I'm Your Pusher")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: bvw
See post 27.
28 posted on 01/17/2003 10:34:09 AM PST by hchutch ("Last suckers crossed, Syndicate shot'em up" - Ice-T, "I'm Your Pusher")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: TLBSHOW
As I've noted before, W.'s "10 percent" and Jeb's "20 percent" plans are the same old, tired racial-preference policies disguised under the slipcover of "compassionate conservatism." Jeb's "Talented 20" program, for example, guarantees state university admission to the top 20 percent of students in every Florida high school senior class.

Michelle Malkin

These are crappy policies, won't achieve racial quotas in many other states, reinforce housing segregation, and drag down standards. They are, however, race-neutral and IMHO therefore are not unconstitutional. The battle we're fighting here is to prevent schools from using race as an explicit parameter in deciding who to admit. The two briefs are squarely on our side in that battle. The trite nonsense about 'diversity' is irrelevant, and I'm confident that Antonin Scalia will have his usual cruel fun with it.

29 posted on 01/17/2003 10:35:12 AM PST by Right Wing Professor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: hchutch
I am with you 100%!
30 posted on 01/17/2003 10:38:17 AM PST by PhiKapMom (Bush/Cheney 2004)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Right Wing Professor
I admit the policies are not perfect, but at the same time, I am not convinced that they are flawed. They set a standard - it is race-neutral, and quite frankly, Michelle Malkin's characterization is inaccurate.
31 posted on 01/17/2003 10:38:38 AM PST by hchutch ("Last suckers crossed, Syndicate shot'em up" - Ice-T, "I'm Your Pusher")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: hchutch
I agree. A good example of diversity based on merit is the President's own cabinet. I am sick of these folks who act like they have all the answers, when they NEVER have run for office.

Malkin is disingenuous and Rush is deliberately obtuse about this. One would think they are stupid, but they are not. I wonder why they act like this?

32 posted on 01/17/2003 10:38:38 AM PST by Miss Marple
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Miss Marple
Reminds me of when Rush was completely off on that enironmental policy... I'm sure you remember THOSE glorious few days.
33 posted on 01/17/2003 10:41:55 AM PST by rintense (Go Get 'Em, Dubya!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: hchutch
I admit the policies are not perfect, but at the same time, I am not convinced that they are flawed.

They penalize smart kids who happen to live in school districts with a lot of other smart kids, and reward kids who live in school districts with a lot of dumb kids. A minority kid who wants to go to college will be far better off living in a minority area, where the competition is weaker. And people will figure out how to work the system; e.g. take a lot of courses for 3 years in a very good school district, and then enroll in a lousy one for a lazy senior year where you take weak courses to get into the top 10%. In a state like Nebraska, where there are very few 'majority minority' schools, they'll fail to deliver the requisite quotas. And they'll cause a lot of underqualified studetns to be admitted, of all races, lowering standards still further.

I agree though, they're not unconstitutional. And they're so bad they won't last long.

34 posted on 01/17/2003 10:49:43 AM PST by Right Wing Professor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Wait4Truth
where are all the color blind repubs so eager to skewer LOTT because they want to win favor with minority voters - you have gotten what you asked for :)
35 posted on 01/17/2003 10:49:45 AM PST by krodriguesdc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: rintense
Apparently some people have difficulty with the concept of incrementalism, long-term strategy, and following a leader.

Yes, I remember that lovely period of the environmental flapdoodle. The other thing I would like to know is why disagreements in policy provoke RANTS from our supposed allies. It inflames those who are not able to get detailed information, and is counter-productive.

36 posted on 01/17/2003 10:50:22 AM PST by Miss Marple
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Right Wing Professor
I think many are in denial about this brief - especially the so called color blind repubs...
37 posted on 01/17/2003 10:51:30 AM PST by krodriguesdc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: krodriguesdc
I am quite happy with the brief. This is about the Michigan case, and broader issues can't be dragged into this case, from my limited understanding of the rules of the Supreme Court.
38 posted on 01/17/2003 10:52:10 AM PST by Miss Marple
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: PhiKapMom
seems if both sides are mad, he must be doing the right thing!

Seems to me he's roadkill -down the middle - got nothing accomplish by this move but upseting all. But when it comes to the oil, NAFTA, grants to the corps, illegal immigration this president stands up decisive on one side. When it comes to abortion, affirmative action, cutting spending, sending the felon -Klintoons - to justice - Where is your decisiveness,GW?? Where!!

39 posted on 01/17/2003 10:52:27 AM PST by Digger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Miss Marple
Re-thinking Rush's comments, I am not so sure he is out of bounds. He seems to have limited his comments to apparent discrepancies between the speech and the brief, although I'm not sure the discrepancies are as great as they seem.

Michelle Malkin, on the other hand, appears to have mischaracterized the "Talented 20" in Florida and the "Top Ten" policy in Texas, set up by Jeb Bush and George W. Bush respectively. That is WAY out of bounds.
40 posted on 01/17/2003 10:53:12 AM PST by hchutch ("Last suckers crossed, Syndicate shot'em up" - Ice-T, "I'm Your Pusher")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: krodriguesdc
He is getting many calls about it and people want AA stopped!
41 posted on 01/17/2003 10:53:19 AM PST by TLBSHOW
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Digger
You know, he could have not filed a brief at all. Where is YOUR understanding of what can be accomplished in one court case?
42 posted on 01/17/2003 10:53:31 AM PST by Miss Marple
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: TLBSHOW
BUMP
43 posted on 01/17/2003 10:55:07 AM PST by krodriguesdc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: PhiKapMom; Doctor Raoul
I didn't know Ann was on last nights hardball.
44 posted on 01/17/2003 10:55:58 AM PST by TLBSHOW
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Right Wing Professor
I see. Still, it's a good faith effort - and if it doesn't work, someone can go back and reassess them for an even more merit-based policy down the road. They are improvements over the corrupt quota systems like the University of Michigan's, and should be seen as a step towards a purely color-blind admissions policy.

45 posted on 01/17/2003 10:56:10 AM PST by hchutch ("Last suckers crossed, Syndicate shot'em up" - Ice-T, "I'm Your Pusher")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: TLBSHOW
I think that brief is full of it!
46 posted on 01/17/2003 10:56:21 AM PST by krodriguesdc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: hchutch; Rodney King
The 10% and 20% things that were set up by George W. and Jeb are based on MERIT - how one did in their high schools. NIETHER program uses race as a criteria.

Yes and no. The policies are facially neutral when it comes to race. But the fact is that the schools are de facto segregated, so that there are many schools which are almost all white and others that are almost all minority. Taking the top x percent from all high schools has the effect of discriminating against students at mostly white schools who do not fall within that top x percent but who, based objectively on their test scores, would easily fall within that percentage if they were at a largely minority, underperforming school. In other words, if you take the very best high schools in Texas and Florida and take a kid who is in the top third and place him in one of the worst high schools, he very likely would be a top performer.

47 posted on 01/17/2003 10:56:52 AM PST by Stingray51
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Miss Marple
well that's good you're happy - there are many who are not!
48 posted on 01/17/2003 10:58:10 AM PST by krodriguesdc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: TLBSHOW
Rush's accusations that Bush had abandoned the U of Michigan case were bizarre. He unloaded on Bush-but,did not offer any specifics,other than to trash Bush over and over,based on this apparent sentence in the brief (paraphrase)" racial diversity is a goal in college admissions or enrollment". Huh? What's wrong with that goal? That sentence doesn't say anything about affirmative action or racial quotas. Rush offered nothing substantive,no quotes from the brief ,no interviews with lawyers,other than that sentence taken from a liberal reporter's column.Rush could have gotten someone from Justice to further explain the brief,but as of now,the topic of the brief's wording, has been dropped.If Rush truly wanted to discuss the brief,he should have used someone from Justice as his source,rather than the words of a liberal columnist.Rush acted like Bush had personally authored the brief. I trust that Ted Olson did the right thing. Then Rush announced that he is taking 2 weeks and part of a third week off, to go to the Super Bowl and play in 2 golf tournaments.
49 posted on 01/17/2003 10:58:40 AM PST by Wild Irish Rogue
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gcochran
Bush's speech highlighted the notion that a diverse student body is a required ingredient for good college education. That is not true. Good college education has nothing to do with how many females/males/Chinese/Japanese/black/ white/fat/skinny students are in the class!
50 posted on 01/17/2003 10:58:46 AM PST by philosofy123
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200201-240 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson