MICHIGAN'S ANTI DISCRIMINATION PROPOSAL

I have written about Michigan’s proposal #2 in previous blogs. The proposal would constitutionally ban discrimination in university admissions, government hiring and government contracting. Discrimination defined as pertaining to race, ethnicity, color or gender.

The proposal has been termed the “anti-affirmative action” proposal because it supposedly would deny minorities and women the extra help they need to make up for past discriminatory practices.

I have supported affirmative action in the past but feel strongly that those days are gone and the field is pretty well level at this point and to continue affirmative action practices in the areas mentioned above, would in fact be discriminatory.

I would like to comment on the campaign AGAINST the proposal; there is NO campaign FOR the proposal except opinion pieces, pro and con, in the print media.

Specifically, I want to comment on the TV spots against the proposal.

What is quite obvious when you view the TV spots is that blacks are NOT pictured or discussed at all. Affirmative action is and has always been associated with discrimination against African-Americans (blacks),

In the TV ads we see only white women (mothers) and daughters; not one black.

In our history, gender discrimination did and probably still does occur but not even close to the discrimination involving race or skin color.

The ads use blatant misinformation (lies) that women’s and girl’s health would be at risk and science education for females would suffer – total bullshit!

In my mind, this ad was formulated to appeal to the white population of Michigan that would normally not respond to an ad favoring affirmative action for blacks.

To understand the motivation for these ads, we need to follow the money trail and see who is paying for this campaign and why.

Obviously the continued affirmative action practices in the areas mentioned at the beginning, is very important to some one or some group(s).

The university admission rules have been discriminatory at the University of Michigan (UofM) in the past and the University has had legal dealings with the Supreme Court in the past. They are flush with flaming liberal money and would definitely contribute millions to this campaign. If this proposal passes, they would be forced to deal with admissions in a FAIR manner – something they do not wish to do.

In the case of UofM, they actually are acting in what they strongly believe in; social activism in favor of minorities (blacks). Their role in this campaign is altruistic and not for monetary gain.

The next two (2) areas are a little different. UofM would still want to see blacks having an advantage in governmental hiring and contracting but who else?

Obviously black businesses that would have an edge in winning government contracts would want this proposal to be defeated and would contribute money to the campaign.

Government hiring policies would benefit the average black worker but they would not have the money to support this campaign.

Another suggestion would be rich, liberal fat cats that have money to burn and really believe in social activism.

The ads that are running are devious, well thought out and cunning. They play on existing prejudices and are not afraid in fabricating facts; professional.

I find this whole business disgusting because the proposal is not judged on its merits but on the spin that people with money put on it; the people are being manipulated!

I guess I should know better by now how politics work and how you really win in politics.

Janusz