REDEFINING DIVERSITY
©2018 Burt Prelutsky
IF YOU WANT TO COMMENT TO BURT PRELUTSKY ARTICLE, PLEASE MENTION MY NAME RUDY...   Contact Burt at burtprelutsky@icloud.com  

At one time, not that long ago actually, diversity meant variety. What’s more, it usually referred to opposing points of view, not to pigmentation. In recent years, that has all changed.

According to those who insist that our borders, along with ICE, disappear entirely, diversity means more and more Latinos, even though they already constitute the largest minority group in the U.S. You’d think they’d be calling for more Finns and Eskimos if diversity was really the ideal they claim it to be.

Diversity, according to those promoting greater numbers of blacks and Latinos on college campuses through affirmative action, a prejudicial policy that is antithetical to everything Americans used to hold dear, inevitably comes at the expense of Asians, who actually represent a much smaller minority group than the other two.

The fact is, a black applicant with the exact same grade point average and test scores as an East Indian or a South Korean has a four times better chance of being accepted.

Proof of that was established when an Asian student decided to beat the system by passing himself off as black; he got in with a 3.1 GPA when 3.7 would have been required if he’d identified himself as an East Indian.

The way things are headed, the day may soon arrive when the only true diversity on college campuses will be represented by white males.

⦿  In a related matter, it seems that, in spite of the brouhaha being waged by liberals against President Trump over his immigration policy, his approval numbers among native-born Latinos jumped 10 percentage points in the past month.

It seems that in spite of the outrage among those on the far Left, it’s only number five on the priority list of those one might assume to be most concerned. Among native-born Latinos, it trails jobs, the economy, healthcare and education, which reflects the way that most Americans think.

In addition, it should not be assumed that even those who have it in fifth place want the borders open. Many of them want the wall built because the interlopers are lowering their wages and overwhelming their schools and medical clinics.

⦿  For the longest time, I used to defend TV against those who deemed it a vast wasteland by pointing out that, whatever its other failings, it provided us with most of the best comedy to be found in America.

Occasionally, a movie, a Broadway show or a book, would come along that could make us laugh. But even in the earliest days of the medium, TV was offering us the best of Jack Benny, Sid Caesar, Steve Allen, Jackie Gleason, Phil Silvers, Eve Arden, Bob Hope, Jack Paar, George Burns and Gracie Allen, on a weekly basis. And if you tuned in Ed Sullivan on Sunday evening, you would occasionally catch the likes of Alan King, Don Rickles, Jackie Leonard, Shelley Berman, Gallagher & Sheen, Jan Murray, Henny Youngman, Jackie Mason and Señor Wences.

In more recent times, so-called comedians like Whoopi Goldberg and Joy Behar, along with late-night TV hosts Jimmy Kimmel, Stephen Colbert, Bill Maher and Jimmy Fallon, have turned into public scolds.

I guess it began with David Letterman, who never struck me as very funny, but along the way he grew a beard and at least when he wasn’t sexually harassing the females on his staff, adopted the role of a left-wing pundit.

These days, the comics don’t even try to get laughs; instead, like Mort Sahl in the old days, they happily settle for nods of agreement from their bobble headed fans.

Inasmuch as garnering laughs seems to have vanished from the job description, it occurs to me that they shouldn’t be allowed to identify themselves as comedians on their tax returns.

I suspect that the day can’t be too far off when the laughter stops completely and the audience will simply show their appreciation by snapping their fingers the way beatniks used to do after some pretentious phony in a black turtleneck would recite a poem about the end of the world in a smoke-filled coffeehouse.

⦿  Speaking of my bleak expectations, inasmuch as the banishing of conservative speakers from college campuses and the public shaming of Trump’s aides is now perfectly acceptable to wide swaths of the fascistic electorate, how soon, I’m wondering, can we expect the book-burning to begin.

⦿  Someone sent me the following quote: “The absolute worst mistake of my presidency was appointing Ruth Bader Ginsburg to the Supreme Court,” and attributed it to Abraham Lincoln.
IF YOU WANT TO COMMENT TO BURT PRELUTSKY ARTICLE, PLEASE MENTION MY NAME RUDY...   Contact Burt at burtprelutsky@icloud.com  

Views: 22

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

ICE- hope I got this right ...:0...a long time ago.

LOL Tif

affirmative action is racist but reverse.   somehow that makes it ok no it does not

these people hate America but u cannot change history although they keep trying our founders were white period. that is not changing.    

the left hates America i have the solution LEAVE as for abolishing ICE keep saying that it will win the GOP for yrs to come.  

Bonnie

thats is so true ICE will never-never be abolished.

RSS

LIGHTER SIDE

 

Political Cartoons by Tom Stiglich

ALERT ALERT

 Judge Orders Mueller To Prove  Russia Meddled In Election 

Judge Dabney L. Friedrich

A Washington federal judge on Thursday ordered special counsel Robert Mueller’s team to clarify election meddling claims lodged against a Russian company operated by Yevgeny Prigozhin, an ally of Russian President Vladimir Putin, according to Bloomberg.

Concord Management and Consulting, LLC. – one of three businesses indicted by Mueller in February along with 13 individuals for election meddling, surprised the special counsel in April when they actually showed up in court to fight the charges. Mueller’s team tried to delay Concord from entering the case, arguing that thee Russian company not been properly served, however Judge Dabney Friedrich denied the request – effectively telling prosecutors ‘well, they’re here.’

Concord was accused in the indictment of supporting the Internet Research Agency (IRA), a Russian ‘troll farm’ accused of trying to influence the 2016 US election.

On Thursday, Judge Freidrich asked Mueller’s prosecutors if she should assume they aren’t accusing Concord of violating US laws applicable to election expenditures and failure to register as a foreign agent.

Concord has asked Dabney to throw out the charges – claiming that Mueller’s office fabricated a crime, and that there is no law against interfering in elections.

According to the judge’s request for clarification, the Justice Department has argued that it doesn’t have to show that Concord had a legal duty to report its expenditures to the Federal Election Commission. Rather, the allegation is that the company knowingly engaged in deceptive acts that precluded the FEC, or the Justice Department, from ascertaining whether they had broken the law. -Bloomberg

On Monday, Friedrich raised questions over whether the special counsel’s office could prove a key element of their case – saying that it was “hard to see” how allegations of Russian influence were intended to interfere with US government operations vs. simply “confusing voters,” reports law.com.

During a 90-minute hearing, Friedrich questioned prosecutor Jonathan Kravis about how the government would be able to show the Russian defendants were aware of the Justice Department and FEC’s functions and then deliberately sought to skirt them.

“You still have to show knowledge of the agencies and what they do. How do you do that?” Friedrich asked.

Kravis, a prosecutor in the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia, argued that the government needed only to show that Concord Management and the other defendants were generally aware that the U.S. government “regulates and monitors” foreign participation in American politics. That awareness, Kravis said, could be inferred from the Russians’ alleged creation of fake social media accounts that appeared to be run by U.S. citizens and “computer infrastructure” intended to mask the Russian origin of the influence operation.

“That is deception that is directed at a higher level,” Kravis said. Kravis appeared in court with Michael Dreeben, a top Justice Department appellate lawyer on detail to the special counsel’s office. -law.com

Concord pleaded not guilty in May. Their attorney, Eric Dubelier – a partner at Reed Smith, has described the election meddling charges as “make believe,” arguing on Monday that Mueller’s indictment against Concord “doesn’t charge a crime.”

“There is no statute of interfering with an election. There just isn’t,” said Dubelier, who added that Mueller’s office alleged a “made-up crime to fit the facts they have.”

Dubelier added that the case against Concord Management is the first in US history “where anyone has ever been charged with defrauding the Justice Department” through their failure to register under FARA.

© 2018   Created by Steve - Ning Creator.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service