I saw this really intriguing post today and I wanted to link to it….

idk…

“There are instructions within the download what exactly to do. Very easy, just follow the instructions”…

BWA HA HA HAH HA HA HAH BWA HA HA HA

BWA HA HA HAH HA HA HAH BWA HA HA HA

If any of these guys proposing it were alive in Johnsons day they would be the first ones yelling “String him up!!” Why don't they pardon Mumina or any of the thousands of others in jail today unjustly.

http://newsroom.ucla.edu/portal/ucla/more-than-…

It is real clear that the changes in admissions are definitely white affirmative action, and that mastery of specific subject areas is not a forte of whites..ergo subject tests no longer are mandatory.

IOW's Asians were kicking butt on those!

I would prefer that as well. But Obama is clearly comfortable being advised by former Citi Group employees and the Wall Street speculators that pushed through the policies that destroyed the economy that he's supposedly trying to fix. Irony or insanity?

I know many apologists of these activities believe that Obama had to have people helping him that understood the financial status quo. However, shouldn't there also be people advising Obama that have a different mindset (someone like Paul Krugman perhaps) to help us break away from the status quo? Wouldn't that truly be a “team of rivals”?

I understand pragmatism, but Obama just seems more and more like an all out sellout on the economy when you really look at the people who are advising him and what they have advised him to do thus far in his presidency?

I mean think about: a 787 billion dollar “Stimulus” (which hasn't created that many jobs yet) compared to about 23.7 trillion dollars to investment banks and Wall Street – which many of Obama's economic advisers made millions working for. Obama’s loyalty is quite evident and the facts do not lie, nor does the money. – never does. People really need to wake up and start challenging Obama more about his policies and loyalties.

Gutierrez, who is bilingual, told his colleagues, “I've had the bill thoroughly examined by those who do speak the English language and have only spoken the English language all their life, and they cannot find the 'bailout fund' in the bill.”

Ryan Grim added, “What the bill does do, [Gutierrez] explained, is create a fund that major firms must pay into. If banks get into trouble, the fund is used to take them over, break them up and sell off the parts. If such a fund was socialist, Gutierrez said, then so is Geico. But unlike Geico, he said, drivers who crash the economy don't get their bank repaired and returned to them under the Democratic plan.”

In the hopes of making this easy enough for his GOP colleagues to understand, Gutierrez explained, “What they won't tell you is unlike everybody in this room who has to go and take out an insurance policy to drive a car, they want Wall Street and Goldman Sachs to be able to drive our economy into the ground without paying a cent of insurance in case they act recklessly. And all we're saying as Democrats is: 'It's simple. If you want to do business in America and you threaten the economic stability of our country, then you've got to pay into an insurance fund.'

“But let me tell you: it's not the kind of insurance fund where you get into an accident and they take your car and they fix it and they kind of give it back to you new. No no. In our insurance fund, you know what happens? We chop up your car into pieces and sell it and then we pay back the fund with the pieces. That's our fund. Read the bill. It's a funeral fund. You guys love to talk about the death and death and death when it came to health care. Why don't you talk about our death panels now?”

Now that Gutierrez has explained reality, I'm sure House Republican will stop telling people there's a “bailout fund” in the bill, right?

The real affirmative action that’s ignored.