supposed to talk this way. i didn t think anyone wanted to live in a country where you re judged exclusively on factors you can t control.n how did we get here? that s a good question, because i thought the get was the p color-blind society that people were based on the content of their character not the color of their skin. i guess that s not the case when it comes to the left. this woman who t said they met l their diversity goals, i understand she s a white female. does that mean she s willing to step down for a better qualified woman of color? it s never the case. the people implementing this are almost if my experience exclusively white or put themselfel in that same category that won t give up their overpaid low-work jobs to help anyone else. i think it s misleading to say this is just like huff po is the joke obviously or the left that is discredited. this is like universal and corporate america. securely academia. i don t want to get into an
and seems like some of the justice has no memory at all or had no thoughts that there s anything relevant about past discrimination. that the portion of affirmative action that s directed toward rectifying past discrimination. well, really the standard now is that universities can use race in a limited way to achieve diversity. it s not remedial any longer. we lost that battle in university versus bach i-back in 19 p 78. but four times since then the supreme court said it is perfectly constitutional to use race in a limited fashion to achieve diversity goals. and those diversity goals benefit black students, latino students, asian students, white students and benefits the country at large. that s why you have what did scalia say about the affirmative action for football players? precious little. yeah. precious little.
particularly the leadership of this country is hanging in the balance with this case. and seems like smome of the justice has no memory at all or had no thoughts that there s anything relevant about past discrimination. that the portion of affirmative action that s directed toward rectifying past discrimination. well, really the standard now is that universities can use race in a limited way to achieve diversity. it s not remedial any longer. we lost that battle in university versus bach i-back in 19 p 78. but four times since then the supreme court said it is perfectly constitutional to use race in a limited fashion to achieve diversity goals. and those diversity goals benefit black students, latino students, asian students, white students and benefits the country at large. that s why you have what did scalia say about the affirmative action for football players? precious little. yeah. precious little. that s the part they can t
fresh breath. you and a koala bear together. you came back to the united states in the a good time. yes, you did. the fcc this week caused quite a bit of controversy when it announced that it was going to look into this controversial study which would have gone into numerous across the united states and to figure out exactly what content was going on the air, talk to reporters, media managers, and also study stud diversity of the newsroom. but that, of course, raised the eyebrows of many. well, the federal government putting monitors in numerous to monitor news content. this was all in the name, of course, of racial bean county. the federal government feels a need to make certain the diversity goals it holds out to the country are met in numerous. they have suspended it though in the wake of outcry. here is a statement from the fcc: