Rush Limbaugh says the affirmative action brief still keeps promoting race preference and its bad

Rush Limbaugh ^ | 1/17/2003 | Rush Limbaugh Showi

[Rodney King]

I assume you will take your semi-insulting comment about me back, then. Yes, I do. Sorry.

[MatthewViti]

You could've just said "Bush can do no wrong"

[Miss Marple]

Thanks! Not everyone is as courteous, and I appreciate it.

[hchutch]

Excuse me, the Texas and Florida policies are, as far as I can tell, performance-based. They essentially said, "If you are in the top 10% [20%] of your high school's graduating class in the state of Texas [Florida], then you are guaranteed admission in the state university system of Texas [Florida]."

I fail to see how that is "the same old, tired racial-preference policies disguised under the slipcover of 'compassionate conservatism'" - to use the words of Michelle Malkin. Quite frankly, it appears that she has mischaracterized the policies.

Since you seem so clairvoyant, maybe you can explain this.

[Uncle Bill]

I told you he would fold. Don't pay any attention to what Bush says. Pay attention to what he does. The wimp factor will always be in play. He's not a conservative. He advances the Democrats most liberal agenda. The rule of law means nothing to him. He does have one big legacy greater than any other president. His affirmitive action down payment program should really draw in the votes. He's the king of mush.

[Uncle Bill]

Bush Adviser Backs Use of Race in College Admissions

Tired of Race? - Thomas Sowell

[TLBSHOW]

Its a very sad day in my household. Bush is a great President, if you like liberal Presidents.

[aristeides]

Interesting and plausible analysis of government briefs in Josh Chafetz's blog here.

By the way, I've been looking at the briefs myself, and they seem to me to suggest -- without actually coming right out and saying -- that, if alternative means of seeking diversity without quotas were unsuccessful, then even outright quotas would be permissible. They also seem to condemn the University of Michigan's programs because the "critical mass" of minority students the programs seek amount to a disguised quota. So a lot of less blatant favoring of minorities would appear to pass muster.

[TLBSHOW]

BUMP

[holdonnow]

So, now that you've had to eat your words about Rush, when will you apologize .... Hmmmmmmm?

[holdonnow]

You were so wrong too, preferring to attack Rush for stating the truth about Bush's affirmative action position. How do you like all those crow feathers? Taste good?

[holdonnow]

Yes, there is. It's called the cult of personality. You might remember ... the Democrats suffered from this for 8 years.

[Howlin]

Of course, it would never occur to you that SOME people might agree with him on issues. To you, it has to be personality, because you don't agree with him, period.

I never have understood what it's fine that you all can disagree with him about every single thing, but it's not okay for some to agree with him on the issues.

Or are you one of those who believes you're right about everything, to the exclusion of all others?

[TLBSHOW]

Ann Coulter on Drudge right now. Slamming Clinton!

[Carolinamom]

How did you know this? On another thread you said that you did not have a TV.

[Stingray51]

The bottom line is that somebody who would otherwise have been admitted on the basis of individual merit is not. Any way you cut it, that is discrimination against individual merit and in favor of something else and, for that reason, I am opposed to it.

[Wild Irish Rogue]

" You were so wrong too, preferring to attack Rush for stating the truth about Bush's affirmative action position. How do you like all those crow feathers? Taste good?"

I stand by my position. My beef is not that Rush criticizes Bush,it's the manner he which he does it. When Rush disagrees with Bush,he does it in a disrespectful and denigrating manner IMHO,many times using the liberal press as his springboard. Rush always exempts Cheney and I find that curious. The most important role that Bush fills for many of us,is that of Commander in Chief. We have a personal blood stake in the upcoming war and nothing,absolutely nothing,supersedes that-not CFR,not steel tariffs,not the University of Michigan's admission's policy-nothing.The only issue that raises my blood pressure,is unrelenting criticism of the President-in time of war,on issues that are second tier. At some point,the overkill seems designed to damage Bush. And I resent that. Especially now. Today,John Podhoretz,in the NYPost stated it best ,when he talked about his disappointments with Bush's stand on CFR,tariffs, etc:

" But all of the above - all of it - was and is meaningless. Something world-historic happened to this country on Sept. 11, 2001. As a result, the only issue on which George W. Bush will be judged - both by voters in 2004 and by history - is his conduct of the war on terror. "

[fightinJAG]

I'm not aware of eating any words. Whatever are you talking about, hmmm?

[Wild Irish Rogue]

" I'm not aware of eating any words"

At least you are not going to choke on the crow feathers, which I have been ordered to eat!

[philosofy123]

This forum is full of "NEOCONS"! These are converted libs who have agenda. The only good thing about this forum is it is easy to use. My kind of conservatives are like Pat Buchanan.