The Wisconsin Supreme Court struck down a state-funded scholarship program that awarded financial aid based on the race of college students. The Democrat-controlled court followed the precedent laid out by the United States Supreme Court in finding that Gov. Tony Evers and the state were violating the Equal Protection Clause of the United States Constitution. Two of the most liberal justices, however, wrote a concurrence denouncing the bar on the use of race for such scholarships. If Democrats are able to pack the Supreme Court as demanded by many party leaders, this concurrence is an example of the likely changes that a packed court will bring in reversing anti-discrimination and other rulings.
The Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty represented the taxpayers in this successful challenge of the Wisconsin Minority Undergraduate Retention Grant Program. That program administered taxpayer-funded grants of up to $2,500 per academic year to eligible students of Black American, American Indian, Hispanic, or certain Southeast Asian backgrounds.
The state paid out roughly half a million dollars in scholarships, now found to be racially discriminatory.
Citing the 2023 U.S. Supreme Court decision Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard, the Court reaffirmed that “The Constitution requires that every person ‘must be treated based on his or her experiences as an individual — not on the basis of race.’”
While many have heralded the new bright line against racial discrimination in higher education, two of the most liberal justices, Chief Justice Jill Karofsky and Susan Crawford, lamented the loss of racially discriminatory programs.
In her concurrence, Chief Justice Karofsky captured the sweeping, open-ended rationales used for such programs:
“Why have we not learned from our past? Why are we not willing to recognize the harms this country has caused to those who are marginalized, disempowered, or disenfranchised? Why, instead of wielding the Equal Protection Clause as a sword against racism, do we employ it to shield against the promise of equality for all? The answer appears to be because we have failed to fully recognize how societal and governmental practices have long continued to enforce a preference for White Americans and to burden Black Americans and those of other disadvantaged races or backgrounds.”
These justices would continue race-based programs indefinitely under the claim that there is a “preference for White Americans” in programs that focus purely on academic achievement or specific non-racial criteria.
The two justices quote from the dissent of Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson that requiring race-neutral rules is just more “let-them-eat-cake obliviousness” by a white privileged society. She added, “I fully recognize and acknowledge that I am bound by the precedent set forth in SFFA and other cases decided by the U.S. Supreme Court…However, I also choose to write separately. I do so because I find it impossible to ignore the truths that Justice Jackson identifies.”
Notably, those “truths” from the Jackson dissent have been challenged as containing glaring false claims.
I have previously discussed my disagreements with Jackson and her jurisprudence, including her dissent in the SFFA case. However, this concurrence vividly shows the jurists whom the Democrats could call upon to pack the Supreme Court to reverse decisions like the one in SFFA.
With various Democratic leaders now openly pledging to pack the Court to reverse such decisions, the 2028 election is becoming a referendum on the future of an institution that has proven key to maintaining this Republic for 250 years.
Democratic politicians and pundits have made clear that they need the immediate control of the Supreme Court to carry out an agenda that would be struck down as unconstitutional. That includes reversing core constitutional rulings. The Karofsky concurrence offers a glimpse into our future if we allow the Court to be the object of a political hostile takeover.
OT. Barack speaking from the lectern at the Obama Presidential Center and the president’s bunker in Chicago is running the country? Does this guy ever know when to stop? Btw it’s completely privately owned and operated , headquartered Chicago. Needs full investigation for foreign laundered money as do Clinton, Bush foundations.
Ball game, strike 1. 😂
OK, Thought experiment: You’re hired as HR in small company and tasked with implementing DEI. How do you go about it?
You must create a perfect racial mix of employees, they all must be paid the same whatever minimum ‘living wage’ is declared, and all employees have the same say in how the company is run and no one must advance over another. If you fail any of these marks you have failed and are a reprehensible racist. Go.
OK. Thought experiment: You have two applicants for an opening. One is white, the other Black. How much less do you offer the Black candidate to be sure they won’t take it?
That’s how many companies are run.
What you described as DEI isn’t DEI. DEI is offering them both the same wage. It’s not a quota. It’s not that all employees are paid the same, just the ones doing the same level of work in the same level of job.
That you fail to understand this is proof you are a reprehensible racist.
Roosters crowing cause the sun to rise.
I would hire the most qualified. If equal qualifications I would hire the one with the most experience. If equal experience I would hire the one with the best personal not professional references because I want employees that can work together and get along with others. Race would never enter into my decision because I would want my company to not only succeed but to excel. Same thing goes for sex as for race.
This is why I’m always skeptical of “family-run” businesses. Everyone’s brother-in-law is a idiot, how does nepotism benefit customers?
“Get in where you fit in” eliminates your self righteous bloviations. Successful business owner for 45 years. It was ALWAYS about competency, never skin color or so called “higher education”
“That’s how many companies are run. ” sure they are youngy.
Well first of all you don’t know what DEI is. it’s diversity (unachievable in any fairness), equity (equal outcomes, unachievable) and inclusion (to include everyone you would need to include every human on earth or you would be exclusive.) So basically no way to measure DEI success except by your incremental marxism creep.
Anyway, You’re thinking of affirmative action. That’s the wage argument. tell me, why wouldn’t a company want to pay any employee commensurate with their tasks in order to retain said employee and why would any employee stay and accept a wage below their abilities? DEI is just marxist division tactics, it’s all in your little red book.
Are you a capitalist?
equity, redistributing wealth, just ways of leftys describing marxism.
Another way to put it is ‘theft of individual property’.
Notably, those “truths” from the Jackson dissent have been challenged as containing glaring false claims.
There was a time when radical-left Scotus justices at least felt the need to be factually accurate even if their legal analysis based on those facts was questionable.* That time has passed. Jackson is the new breed of radical-left Justice who makes up facts to justify shredding the Constitution.
*Except with regard to abortion.
Jackson has no business being on the court in the first place.
She’s a Justice advocate requesting amendments, as are Kagan and Soto. It’s none of their business.
Yes that’s to either the Senate or the States. It’s hard to amend the Constitution and should be hard so it’s not full of passing fads like trans which is already fading away as an issue.
Jackson isn’t intelligent enough to be factually accurate.
Somewhat surprising seeing the Wisconsin Supreme court is a majority of far left liberals.
Maybe I’m missing something but it seems to me that the point is not whose opinion is the most valid or something. The point is that we have something called a Constitution and the job of the courts is simply to ensure that the Constitution is being adhered to. The job of the courts is neither to legislate nor to preach nor to rewrite the Constitution according to their own ideas and beliefs. It is simply to interpret the law, in the instances in which it is not crystal clear. A justice who intentionally issues a ruling in contradiction to the constitution because they feel it’s “wrong” should be impeached.
The Constitution is like the Bible: ‘Any fool can interpret it any way they want’.
That is what the Protestants believe.
The Catholics redefined fish as not meat to allow a distraught fishing industry to survive Lent.
Every religion has those who reinterpret what their holy book has in it to fit the needs of the management.
Not really. The abstinence from meat is not a biblical regulation, so there was no reason to “redefine” meat to exclude fish.
No it’s not. But a lot of people have started their own new churched because of that. One even wrote a new book and then ‘found’ it so they could have multiple wives
“…courts…must…declare all acts contrary to the manifest tenor of the Constitution void.”
“…men…do…what their powers do not authorize, [and] what [their powers] forbid.”
__________________________________________________________________________________________
“[A] limited Constitution … can be preserved in practice no other way than through the medium of courts of justice, whose duty it must be to declare all acts contrary to the manifest tenor of the Constitution void. Without this, all the reservations of particular rights or privileges would amount to nothing … To deny this would be to affirm … that men acting by virtue of powers may do not only what their powers do not authorize, but what they forbid.”
– Alexander Hamilton
You’re not missing anything. The specific provisions of the constitution are to be applied according to the meaning of the text, as gleaned from the meaning and context of the time they were written and adopted. Problems arise when the Constitution is treated as a “living document” that changes with the times. That kind of thinking gives politically-motivated judges license to reach interpretations according to their own policy preferences. Such judges then become politicians wearing black robes.
Right on oldmanfromkansas! self-evident truths, or natural law, are never going to change with the times.
“Interpretation,” or modification by whim, does not exist in the Constitution; justices and judges are corrupt dictator wannabes who are not worthy of their charge, which is simply to “judge,” or ensure that actions comport with the “manifest tenor” of statutory and fundamental law.
Some Judges and Justices think or believe they can seek amendments to the Constitution as advocates. This, too, is incorrect.
The liberal judges have shown they don’t care about the Constitution or law. They care about feeling and equity. That is why this ruling is surprising from a heavily leaning liberal court of six women and one man who is the swing vote on the court. Maybe the justices finally realized that the women being displaced and beaten up on have feelings too and are getting none of that equity. Those trans men do have a space in sports, men’s sports. Women can’t compete in men’s sports.
Italian Foreign Minister Antonio Tajani canceled his planned trip to the United States on June 19, 2026, in response to “serious and offensive” remarks made by U.S. President Donald Trump. The sudden cancellation has sparked a sharp diplomatic row between the two longtime allies.
In an interview broadcast on the Italian network La7, Donald Trump claimed that Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni “begged” him for a photograph during the recent G7 summit in Evian-les-Bains, France. He added that he only agreed because he “felt sorry for her”
Prime Minister Meloni released a video statement strongly rebuking the claim as “completely fabricated” and “made up.” She pointedly declared, “Neither I nor Italy ever beg.” Meloni also criticized Trump for acting more accommodating toward the West’s adversaries than its established allies.
Trump has an uncanny knack for cozying up to our adversaries and offending and insulting our allies.
And that’s relevant to this post how? Trump’s a swine. We get it. But the potential for the Marxists to pack the Court is terrifying for those of us who love our liberty and our free country.
Trump is a swine.
Obama is a pig, opportunistic grifter who fomented divisive, anti-America sentiments, and became a millionaire while destroying US Democracy
George W. Bush put the Beta in β-males
Bill Clinton is a smooth, manipulative, untrustworthy “slick Willy” who worked American female voters like a sεχ pimp. Hillary is a modern day Jezebel
George HW Bush was faithful to no one, not America, not Ronald Reagan, least of all his to his wife Barbara Bush given his affair with Jennifer Fitzgerald, his blonde aide for more than 20 years, an affair that cost him an election against Bill Clinton, an affair that was leaked by Hillary Clinton
Worst of all US Presidents was Lyndon B. Johnson, a man so depraved that his infamous quote on blacks makes him the most vile man to have become President in 20th Century
I’ll have those n**gers voting Democratic for the next 200 years.
– Lyndon B. Johnson
Americans fetishizing of political ideologies has been the demise of our nation.
Withoug the swine, Jezebel would have been our queen.
I see Trump more as a Frank “Tony Lip” Vallelonga. A bodyguard, guarding the nation from the destruction of the Left. He can be boorish and his speech can be crude, but he gets the job done. That’s why the far more refined Dr. Don Shirley chose him for the job. Tony was the right man for the job at that moment. Imagine Hillary or Carmela as our Potus. Ugh, gives me the chills to think about the two bullets we dodged.
That was a fantastic movie
Trump cannot defend a pool from algae and has lost to Iran after a preemptive strike that failed.
Trump is guarding no one from anything except himself from the public finding out what he did that is in the Epstein files.
Trump is defending America from people like you, people who lie and destroy, people like you, people who have no life and whose souls are corrupted, people like you, who hate America and want to destroy it.
LOL that has been disproved so many times you make yourself look both ignorant and stupid.
You can believe what you want, but the Choice was Kamala or the “swine”; actually, one of our better Presidents. It sounds like you picked Kamala.
The good Trump has done to protect this nation outweighs your opinion of him being a swine.
Heels up Harris is her name for a reason.
You have to realize leftist trolls will they to peddle their propaganda, lies and hate on every post to find at least one person that will buy into it. They have no chance with intelligent discussions and honesty. Trump doesn’t have to be the best politician in the world but he has better policies than the left and the trolls will never discuss that, so they try to change the subject.
Quite the opposite. Our “allies” would even let use our own bases in their countries to stage the war against Iran. Some people have an uncanny knack for believing everything negative they hear about Trump whether it’s true or not. And most of it is not true.
Pardon the typo. Our “allies” wouldn’t even let us use our own bases in their countries to stage the war against Iran. I might as well add that the wouldn’t do anything else to help either.
Our ‘allies’ will ‘help’…. themselves to the now cheaper oil though…and all the economic benefits along with it.
Trump didn’t protect the Middle East allies who did let the US use their bases.
Trump would have lost with the use of the European bases, and the Europeans would have lost more as well. Seems like they had the good judgement to stay out when Trump didn’t consult with them on a plan before putting nearly $1 Trillion into making sand move around and killing the people he now wants to negotiate with.
It’s far from settled you fool.
“Trump has an uncanny knack . . .”
Drop the context — the Left’s favorite tactic for smearing trump.
This animosity was caused by *Italy*. It was *Italy* (allegedly an ally) that refused permission for the U.S. to use a joint military base in Sicily — during our war against Iran (allegedly Italy’s “adversary”).
Trump is hilarious. He controls the straits and is getting ready to charge 20% passage fees. 😂. I think he’s penurious. 😂
It’s only Italian politics getting into positions for their chosen voters, and Trump is disliked as he raised their gas prices.
Few european politicians are able to say how they really feel and still get elected.
Our shortsighted ‘allies’ have been insulting us for too long. Maybe they should act like allies to get treated as such.
You have an uncanny knack for missing the point of the discussion. Additionally, you don’t know how the real world functions. When dealing in different business affairs, it is not uncommon for disputes to occur. I had one that was bitter to the core, and the lawyers got in the middle. The hostility was great. We both decided litigation was not the way to go and dealt phone to phone. Gradually, we put everything aside, and after about 6 months this executive from a billion-dollar company finished his job and was ready to return to Texas. He called me to say goodbye and invited me to lunch. That is reality.
Your world is exceptionally narrow and hateful. I wouldn’t change places with you.
Who cares what Italian politicians think? It’s not like they are a great or powerful ally or have ever helped us.
RFK Jr Is Menace To Disabled Kids
The Trump administration’s decision this week to put Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., in charge of special education programs has sparked a sharp backlash from advocates for students with disabilities, who say the move will hurt children and that his views on autism make him unfit for the job.
Mr. Kennedy said earlier this year that children with autism would never hold a job, play baseball or go on a date. He quickly walked back the remarks, saying he was only speaking about the most severe cases — only to insist the next day that special education should be moved into his department. “They’re health-related programs rather than particularly educated programs,” Mr. Kennedy said.
Advocates for students with disabilities said that Mr. Kennedy’s comments show how the change puts disabled students at risk of being viewed as medical conditions to be treated instead of as boys and girls to be educated.
https://www.nytimes.com/2026/06/20/us/politics/special-education-rfk.html?smid=nytcore
………………………………….
Donald Trump plans to gut the Department of Education by farming out all its functions to other federal departments.
This raises the obvious question: ‘Why not keep all education-related services under one roof?’
Answer: ‘Because Republicans have pledged to abolish the Department of Education’.
That’s it; an ideological choice with no practical underpinnings.
LOL. Education, where dems fleece the USA and ruin outcomes.
The only lack of underpinning is the efficacy of the DoEd.
Education is a State purview by policy and funding. States can disadvantage pupils by choice. 😏
OT
MEMO TO DESPERATE PRESIDENT TRUMP:
GO BIG, OR GO HOME.
We have Iran right where we want them. Finally, a hero has knocked down the Iranian bully and disarmed them and they now know they will be cowed, they just don’t know how much. As the bully rubs his sore chin and considers his next move, we have all the time and power. The clock is ticking but we have already won.
Lincoln presented the definitive resolution for affirmative action and related problems:
“[Racial separation] [is necessary], and [though difficult] must be effected by colonization… The enterprise is a difficult one, but ‘where there is a will there is a way’; and what colonization needs most is a hearty will… Let us be brought to believe it is morally right, and at the same time [not against] our interest, to transfer the African to his native clime, and we shall find a way to do it.”
– Abraham Lincoln, Springfield, Illinois, June 26, 1857
In 1857, moving Blacks back to Africa might have seemed like a progressive idea.
Currently, it is referenced as “remigration” in Europe.
In such a case Haitians should re-migrate back to France. 😏
Yet, the ‘progressives’ of the time just wanted to keep them around for menial tasks. We see that as primitive.
Imagine a world so primitive as to have slaves based on race.
A few thousand years before that you could have your head bashed in just for being too near another tribe, slavery would have meant consistent food. And a few thousand years before that, man was struggling to survive the planet’s environment.
The context of the moment in history is what matters most in perspective and in understanding.
Lincoln was concerned the freed slaves would still be abused here and sought to protect them based on the ideas of race at the time.
But those slaves would not have had freedom upon return to Africa, as it was not a free country.
America made it right when we instead shared with them the greatest treasure we had ever found, Individual Freedom.
What happened was a long road to get us to the least racist country on earth and now most Americans have loving friendships and relationships with humans of all types. America chose wisely and this is why these race-baiters are as reprehensible as actual racists, they seek to return us to racial dis-harmony but that is not the American way. We are a shining beacon of inclusion to the rest of the world.
Africa is not a country at all. Some went back to form Liberia, where Trump was surprised at how well they spoke English.
It’s done. Clinton, Bush, Biden helped the Africans with reparations 😂 ripping off every possible system for 30 trillion dollars and innumerable American lives. It’s over.
Chief Justice Jill Karofsky is living in a time warp. She writes as if it is still the 1950’s… not grasping the fact that the Racial Rollercoaster hit its apex and started going downhill in the 1960’s and indeed by the 1990’s accelerated big-time as we’ve seen for the last 30 years.. In reality her quote should be ‘..we have failed to fully recognize how societal and governmental practices since the 1960’s have enforced a preference for Black Americans and to burden White Americans and those of other disadvantaged races or backgrounds……” I grew up in this downhill ride.. I sat in it in Academia. I sat in iit in the Big Corporate World. I still remember the huge scandal in the 1990’s when it was leaked that Georgetown University Law School had been denying entrance to many qualified White Students with higher grades and test scores in favour of Black Students to meet ‘quotas.’ . This was 30 years ago. Someone please tell Chief Justice Kartofsky to get a grip and see that real ‘Justice’ means it’s time to take the Race Card out of decision-making… we have seen it doesn’t work, either way.
Eighteenthhole is Estovir with another personal testimony of how ‘he’ was a witness to some crucial moment in the history of the issue at hand.
^ The moron who thinks everyone else is named Estovir ^
It’s not that counterintuitive, illogical, and irrational communist redistribution of wealth through affirmative action is immoral and illicit; it is that the greedy, unethical, vile and undeserving beneficiaries owe monumental, colossal reparations to those who were incorrectly and improperly compelled to provide it.
Bad-Anon, you have just explained (it) why Laws on the Case Books do not in reality have efficacy (are effective). What the Dem’s seek maybe Nobel but will have little effect on People (even if they turn the number of SC Jurist to their favor). Human Nature is difficult to Rule-by-Law, and when faced with the Law, Humans find clever ways circumvent it to the path of least resistance.
I don’t even have to think about it, having served in Public and Private employment. Its Human Nature intrinsically embedded (wired) into the system.
Good luck with taming the masses with the Laws of Democratic ideals.
That is precisely why “case law” does not exist in the Constitution; it is invalid and illegitimate, and conjured to serve the intent and goals solely of its purveyors.
Wow, all dem Juneteenthers (is that even a word?) finna be really, really hella tight when dey find out bias and affirmative action Jacktion are wholly unconstitutionalful.
Wut up, doe?
Oh, the horror of being left to one’s own devices and being self-reliant.
I have one word- Don’t
Is that a contraction? I have one contraction for you- Don’t. Hahaha
June’teenth?
Black pride 🤜
Why, instead of wielding the Equal Protection Clause as a sword against racism, do we employ it to shield against the promise of equality for all?
Coming from someone who is supposed to understand the law, and is one of seven people telling all of Wisconsin what the law is . . . wow! Protective clauses of the Constitution, such as the Bill of Rights, the Due Process Clause, and the Equal Protection Clause, were specifically written to shield against government overreach or malfeasance, not to proactively implement “the promise of equality for all.” The only equality the Equal Protection cares about is that the government treat everybody equally, that everyone has equal standing before the law regardless of race, not that societal outcomes are the same for everyone. Chief Justice Karofsky’s phraseology is rank DEI, i.e., neo-Marxism.
Against racism? Are speech, thought, opinion, discernment, perspective, choice, differentiation, distinction, and “racism” unconstitutional?
The protective clauses of the US Constitution do not bind individuals, they bind government. So if you’re talking about an individual’s thought, opinion, discernment, perspective, choice, differentiation, distinction, or racism, then the Constitution says nothing about it. The one exception that comes to mind is the 13th Amendment, which outlaws slavery except as a punishment for crime. So in that instance, an individual holding another person as a slave would violate the Constitution.
Is mightily enjoying white people racism?
I think the world of Elon Musk, the world’s first trillionaire; the first man on the moon, Neil Armstrong; the man who got him there, Wernher von Braun; etc., exclusively.
With regard to state universities and community colleges, the tuition has got too high for everyone. The tuition should be very low.
For everyone.
The practice, borrowed from the privates, of over charging Mary, in order to redistribute in favor of John, is antithetical to the principles of public education.
Tuition should be low for everyone. Period. Full stop.
At public universities and community colleges, maybe more glittering buildings are not needed. Administrative bloat must be looked at. The various majors must be looked at.
The publics should stop aping the privates. If they do change course, there is a better chance that the publics will once again become accessible to the public– without students being saddled with ruinous debt. There is a better chance that tax-payers will once more support the publics as in earlier times.
Tuitions are high because at some point they became first rate accommodations and entertainment centers, where student comfort became a deciding factor. Instead of being crowded into small rooms with communal showers, they now have lazy-river water parks and upper scale accommodations. Many have become real estate companies with classrooms on site.
Making student loans dischargeable via bankruptcy would cut the funding for this expansion and increasing grants to impoverished students would make up the difference.
It might as well go that way and cut the number of students as having college degree is no longer the deciding factor for employment it once was.
While I disagree with the concurrence, I appreciate that the leftists did their duty and followed the SCOTUS jurisprudence even though they disagree with it. That would seem to be a given but it has often not been. The concurrers did it the right way.
In an astounding achievement for a first-time author, Ayatollah Mojtaba Khamenei nabbed the #1 spot on the New York Times bestsellers list with a business book entitled The Art of the Deal.
The publicity materials provided by the publisher tout, “From the mind of a man who negotiated the sweetest deal in the history of the Middle East, learn how to fend off a hostile takeover—and win!”
“Don’t just be a leader,” the book jacket urges. “Be a Supreme one!”
Among the topics covered, the book “shows, in five easy steps, how to turn a tiny body of water into a money-spinning goldmine.”
An advance excerpt from the book’s first chapter begins, “Rule #1: Only negotiate with morons.”
Are abducting and kidnapping innocents; heinous and savage mutilation, mayhem, and murder; and illegally seizing and appropriating an international strait acceptable as legitimate components of “The Art of the Deal?”
We have Iran right where we want them. We have turned Iran into the equivalent of one of their proxys, striking out with whatever little they can fashion out of what’s left of their military scraps. We barely got our hands dirty. We have all the time in the world to watch them flounder as democrats midterm hopes will be dashed with the public’s rejection of their latest insanity. The dumbs are now a long way down the road from ‘defund the police’ and into commie-land which is the dems ‘final boss’. Our constitution fights the communists FOR us as communism is illegal here.
I find the opinion of Wisconsin Supreme Court Chief Justice Karofsky revealing of her thinking. She states: “Why, instead of wielding the Equal Protection Clause as a sword against racism, do we employ it to shield against the promise of equality for all?” The term equality is much debated but as I see it equality is characterized by the equal treatment under the law of all people. This view of equality, I believe, fits comfortably with the US Supreme courts Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard ruling.
Justice Karofsky’s view of equality is different. If I may guess, she has the view of equality such that the statistics (economic, income, membership on boards, representation in legislatures, judges, teachers, …) of every demographic group is identical or at least close. And therefore any activity that does not produce outcomes consistent with population demographics must racist. A little thinking can provide counter examples close at home for her consideration such as the roster of the Milwaukee Bucks, while certainly established based on performance, is highly skewed demographically. Few people would look at the Buck’s roster and call racism.
But her views do conform to Ibram X. Kendi’s, “The only remedy to racist discrimination is antiracist discrimination. The only remedy to past discrimination is present discrimination. The only remedy to present discrimination is future discrimination.”, from “How to Be an Antiracist”, 2019. This is discrimination ad infinitum.
Whereas Chief Justice Roberts simply stated in the Seattle School District case (28 June 2007), “The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race.” It can’t be any clearer than that.
It is an exceedingly injurious fallacy to suppose that all individuals will attain equal outcomes in life.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
All Men Are Created Equal
It asserts a moral and political principle: every person has the same fundamental worth and equal natural rights (not that everyone is identical in abilities or status). Historically, it declares that political authority derives from consent and that no one is born with an inherent right to rule over others—so laws and government should treat individuals as equals before the law and protect their basic rights.
Affirmative action is immoral because it says humans are always immoral and provides no room for a truly moral one to be acknowledged because now, heck, he’s just following the law. Why be moral? Why stand out with your personal morals?
It also says to all: you can only get ahead in this racist society with government help so don’t strive for better yourself. It tells everyone the capitalist game is rigged. It advances government over man and there’s no room for a non-racist society to advance. It doesn’t tell you that you are, and always have been, in charge of your own destiny like a free person would be. Marxism in a nutshell.
The way to stop a pendulum is not to put a wall in the way. When that happens the pendulum rebounds to where it was before, on the same side of center as it was. Instead it it to let it cross center and apply some damping to it, so that with each swing the movement is less and less until it gradually stops, without violence.
The current Republican/conservative view is not just putting up a wall, but add to the momentum.
^ This dweeb lives in a fantasay land of her own creation. She thinks that if she cooks up some brain-dead analogy in her feeble little mind, then – poof! – governmental racism is suddenly okay. Pffft, moron.
Oooh an analogy! stop supporting racism. It makes for racists and we don’t like racists of any sort and we are stopping that insane pendulum.
Wealthy Hispanics were taking grants from poverty whites? Not enough info.
Democrats keep promising “reparations”, no matter what nefarious method is used to reach that goal.
And their “reparations” are always based on taking from those who have earned, and giving to those who haven’t.
Their preferred Socialism takes from industrious creators/innovators and gives to those who refuse to work hard, achieve and earn on their own.
Naturally, they do the same with education, by taking from white or Asian people who have earned scholarships by choosing to work hard and study, and giving to minorities who have chosen not to do that.
We can easily follow the money and power Democrats continue to reap by promoting such unfairness, which is the only reason they do it.
All reasonable people know discrimination by race is wrong, no matter the excuse.