Whatever, Dawg

15 Jan 2003 By

Am I supposed to give two shits what President Bush thinks of U of M‘s two admissions lawsuits in the Supreme Court? Does it even matter what he thinks anyway? I thought the Supreme Court was solely responsible for the ultimate decision. He can’t kick any of them off can he? Is he not paying attention to what happened in his own state and in California when they repealed all race-based admissions consideration in state schools? CNN has an interesting article about how regionalism may affect these cases and several others based on Justices O’Connor and Kennedy’s voting records. Fucking dumbass. What’s funniest about all this is that the two plaintiffs in the undergrad admissions case (’cause remember, there’s two, one undergrad and one law school) ended up going to Michigan State and UM-Dearborn (which is where everyone else from around here goes when they can’t get into U of M) (I will now sit and wait for some misplaced Spartan ire, and no one can successfully defend UMD).

  • http://www.livejournal.com/users/bridgettes Bridgette

    A slight rant, by Bridgette Thom

    Direct from my away message: “‘I strongly support diversity of all kinds, including racial diversity in higher education. But the method used by the University of Michigan to achieve this important goal is fundamentally flawed.’
    FUNDAMENTALLY FLAWED, GEORGE II?! I’LL GIVE YOU FUNDAMENTALLY FLAWED! Where would you like me to start, bitch?”
    The tax plan? Your appointment of judges? Drilling in Alaska? Iraq? N. Korea? Corporate welfare? Health care?
    NO, really, where would you like me to start?

    No, he cannot kick them off. And, no, it doesn’t matter what he thinks because of this little thing called a system of checks and balances that is built into the Constitution. Slightly ironic, I suppose, since George II mentioned the document when he called the admissions programs “divisive, unfair and impossible to square with our Constitution.”

    Ari Fleischer: “The president is dismissive of any notion involving the political implications of a decision on a matter as important and sensitive as something involving race and admission to college campuses, which is how Americans get their opportunity to make it in our country.”
    Oh really? There are NOOOOO political implications? Are you sure, Ari? You don’t think this has anything to do with appeasing all those Southerners who are pissed at you guys for letting Lott get away? And don’t get me started on the notion college gives you the opportunity to “make it in our country.”

    John Kerry: “This administration continues a disturbing pattern of using the rhetoric of diversity as a substitute for real progress on a civil rights agenda.”
    Indeed. You can talk the talk, but what the fuck are you going to do to get anything done?

    The best, though, comes from Bollinger: “Mr. Bollinger, who is now the president of Columbia University [WORD UP to Columbia!], said in a telephone interview that Mr. Bush ‘is simply incorrect’ and that ‘these are not quotas.’” (NYT) Keeping it simple, stupid.

    My God! It’s not even as if these programs make a noticeable difference. Look around a classroom someday.

  • http://www.swirlspice.com Erica

    I hate that he used the word quotas. That was purposely inciteful.

    People get points added to their score for being legacy. Nobody seems to have any problem with that. Would Shrub have gone to Yale or wherever he did if it wasn’t for his family?

    People get points added to their score for being a valedictorian or doing community service or having a part time job because these things lend to their being a special person and having more to contribute to the university community. Doesn’t being a minority do that, too?