Category Archives: Affirmative Action

Conservative Argument From Feelings Against Fem Affirmative Action

Affirmative Action, Ann Coulter, Argument, Conservatism, Feminism, Gender, Reason

Presumably pursuant to the posts “Conservatives and Lefties United Against The Beauty Ideal” and “With Some Exceptions, ‘Women Are Fascists At Heart,’” Ben Cohen of “American Thinker” has been kind enough to send me his piece, “The Legitimacy of White Male Anger.”

Thanks.

My problem, however, with “The Legitimacy of White Male Anger” is its non-stop apologetics, which come close to accepting the premise of “gender parity through affirmative action,” provided women are a little more gracious about all the concessions they are getting.

“Those demanding that more women be hired in various academic fields” are “sanctimonious and callous,” “blatantly self-serving”; not nice, demanding.

This amounts to psychologizing, not arguing.

Moreover, why is it “bad” for men to have given an “unfriendly reception” to women who’ve been forcibly integrated into the traditionally male trades?

If they don’t deserve to be on the job, on merit, why does friendliness matter; why is it the focus here? And why have men taken to arguing like women? (“You hurt my feelings. Be nice.” Or, “do feminists ever stop and consider the men’s perspective?”)

It’s disconcerting.

As an individualist, I am all for recruiting your lesbian, Amazonian lady to the traditionally male occupations. She is a rare creature who can match men in physicality. Seek her. Keep her. In an increasingly feminized, soft society, warrior women need the military, for example, as an outlet for their abilities. Let these women join the police, military or the fire brigade. An exception, not the rule, however, is the woman who can match a man in strength, speed, physical endurance and handiness.

So why on earth is male “unfriendliness” toward women who force them to do double duty on the job relevant? Even the woman-glorifying, TV cop series we all watch can’t help but display men outrunning their partners, catching up to the criminal, pummeling the thug, and saving the more feeble female cop’s life.

A male cop who serves along a 100 pound woman with silicone for breasts is risking his life. Receiving her with hostility into the force is hardly the issue here. Neither is it wrong.

I hardly think an “unfriendly” reception is the crux of the matter in the grander program of engineered gender parity.

Read “Freeze! I Just Had My Nails Done!” by Ann Coulter, where she gets straight to the matter:

How many people have to die before the country stops humoring feminists? … The inestimable economist John Lott has looked at the actual data. (And I’ll give you the citation! John R. Lott Jr., “Does a Helping Hand Put Others at Risk? Affirmative Action, Police Departments and Crime,” Economic Inquiry, April 1, 2000.)

It turns out that, far from “de-escalating force” through their superior listening skills, female law enforcement officers vastly are more likely to shoot civilians than their male counterparts. (Especially when perps won’t reveal where they bought a particularly darling pair of shoes.)

Unable to use intermediate force, like a bop on the nose, female officers quickly go to fatal force. According to Lott’s analysis, each 1 percent increase in the number of white female officers in a police force increases the number of shootings of civilians by 2.7 percent. …

MORE.

UPDATED: Banana Obama’s Latest Ex Post Facto Exploits (Idiocracy über alles)

Affirmative Action, Business, Constitution, Healthcare, Law, Taxation, The State

Every self-respecting banana republic, as the US is fast becoming, operates on an unconstitutional ex post facto basis. The victims of its agencies have no way of foreseeing or controlling how vague laws will be bent and charges conjured in the course of seeking desired prosecutorial outcomes.

Wikipedia:

An ex post facto law (Latin for “from after the action” or “after the facts”), also called a retroactive law, is a law that retroactively changes the legal consequences (or status) of actions that were committed, or relationships that existed, before the enactment of the law. In criminal law, it may criminalize actions that were legal when committed; it may aggravate a crime by bringing it into a more severe category than it was in when it was committed; it may change the punishment prescribed for a crime, as by adding new penalties or extending sentences; or it may alter the rules of evidence in order to make conviction for a crime likelier than it would have been when the deed was committed.

“Two clauses in the US Constitution prohibit ex post facto laws: Art 1, § 9 and Art. 1 § 10.” But the Constitution—itself no great shakes for lasting liberty—is dead.

Via the indefatigable Betsy McCaughey, who knows Obamacare backwards, comes foreboding news about President Camacho’s latest ex post facto exploits. These entail new Obamacare regs making it “a requirement that employers attest to the IRS, meaning under penalty of perjury, that they have not reduced the number of employees or cut hours to shield themselves from the extra costs of Obamacare.”

More on these “bone chilling intrusion into your freedom to run your business”:

Monday’s announcement is actually a hush money scheme. Under the Affordable Care Act, as written, employers are penalized a whopping $3,000 each time one of their workers goes onto the Obama exchanges and gets a taxpayer subsidized plan. Now the administration is offering to waive that penalty, provided employers stop complaining. Employers who want to take this deal must attest that they haven’t laid off workers or cut hours to squeeze under the 99-worker threshold.

Here’s where Big Brother starts running your business. The IRS will forgive you if you make changes “because of the sale of a division, changes in the economic marketplace in which the employer operates, terminations of employment for poor performance, or other similar changes.” It’s none of Big Brother’s business why you hire or fire. This is a bone chilling intrusion into your freedom to run your business.

UPDATE: Idiocracy über alles. And how can an affirmatively appointed judiciary, members of who “confuse the Constitution for the Declaration of Independence,” know the meaning and prohibition on mischief-making with the law?

Both federal judge Judge Arenda L. Wright Allen and the one-time newspaper of record confused the Constitution for the Declaration of Independence during their haste to celebrate the overturning of Virginia’s gay marriage ban Thursday night.

“Our Constitution declares that ‘all men’ are created equal. Surely this means all of us,” wrote Allen in a tautological pronouncement that cited a unilateral assertion of sovereignty penned in response to 18th-century British abuses of power, rather than the supreme law governing the U.S.

MORE.

The Co-Conspirators In Military Mass Shootings

Affirmative Action, Crime, Military, Political Correctness, Race, The State

“The Co-Conspirators In Military Mass Shootings” is the current column, now on WND. An excerpt:

At Dummies.com you can learn how to “refresh a computer system.” It is hardly a super-specialized IT job.

“Refreshing computer systems” for the Navy Marine Corps’ Intranet network was the job description of the Washington Navy Yard killer, Aaron Alexis. Alexis, who gunned down 12 military contractors in the capital, on Sept. 16, was not an irreplaceable cog in the US military-industrial complex. Given his checkered record, Alexis ought to have been a liability to any organization.

Nevertheless, the former Navy reservist would have been coveted by military contractors for his prized possession: the secret military security clearance and common-access card (CAC), courtesy of the U.S. government.

Access is invaluable. If you’re cleared to work on military installations, you’re gold to contractors—who are themselves cogs in the corrupt military juggernaut.

A government grant of privilege, not his skills, turned a mass-murderer in the making into an asset to The Experts Inc., for which Alexis worked.

Unburdened by brains, liberals are demanding to know “why was Alexis able to buy guns?” Again, ask the government. Gun sellers must use the FBI-run National Instant Criminal Background Check System for background checks on customers. Sharpshooters Small Arms Range, from which Alexis bought the Remington 870 shotgun used in the crime, was in compliance. The shop checked Alexis out with the feds. The government gave them the go-ahead.

Equally compromised, Republican Senator Susan Collins was prompted to “question the kind of vetting contractors do.” Ask the government you serve, Susan, for it, not the contractors, conducts background checks.

“The government maintains the final approval authority,” said Rear Admiral John Kirby to CNN’s Wolf Blitzer.

And for government officials, no infraction committed by Alexis was too egregious to ignore. …

… Not only is it preposterous to float the idea that the point people at OPM, DOD, DONCAF or NCIS “dropped the ball” (as media are framing it)—the truth is almost entirely the opposite. …

Read the entire column. “The Co-Conspirators In Military Mass Shootings” is the current column, now on WND.

If you’d like to feature this column, WND’s longest-standing, exclusive paleolibertarian column, in or on your publication (paper or pixels), contact ilana@ilanamercer.com.

JOIN THE CONVERSATION:

• At the WND Comments Section. Scroll down and “Say it.”

• On my Facebook page.

• By clicking to “Like,” “Tweet” and “Share” this week’s “Return To Reason” column.

Stupid Bitch At Foggy Bottom*

Affirmative Action, Foreign Policy, Gender, Intelligence, Media, The State, War, WMD

The display below is far more off-putting than Miley Cyrus’s hootchy hoopla. We pay for this stupid bitch to crack her whip at Foggy Bottom.*

In this State Department news conference, a reasonably intelligent, veteran newsman attempts to engage the schoolmarmish (but tartish) young spokeswoman in reasoned repartee. But he fails miserably to get a coherent reply from the low-watt bimbo (who, no doubt, hails from an Ivy League school).

And I thought Dana Perino, who came out of the Bush administration, was dumb. Affirmative action for ditzes like Dana means that press conferences look increasingly like the one you just watched.

Low-Watt Woman attempted to disguise in phony outrage her ignorance about the US’s historical use of the WMD ploy to invade other countries. She got defensive because someone dared to demonstrate that he was on to her.

* The U.S. Department of State.