Dems, Libs Fear Rising Asian Opposition To Race Preferences

[NOTE: This post has been UPDATED]

Last spring a seemingly spontaneous eruption of Asian American opposition in California to affirmative action in college admissions, i.e., lowering admission standards for black and Hispanics and thus in effect raising them for Asians, caught Democrats by surprise and forced them to scuttle their proposed repeal of Prop. 209.

Now comes a new Field Poll from California indicating just how afraid Democrats, liberals, and their client interest groups are of this Asian American opposition. What is striking about the survey is not what it found but what the Field organization was paid by the National Asian American Survey to seek. Here is the question NAAS paid to have included on the Field poll:

Do you favor or oppose affirmative action programs designed to help blacks, women and other minorities get better jobs and education?

This is rather like an organization claiming to conduct independent political research attempting to discover voter attitudes toward political parties by asking “Do you favor of oppose the Democratic Party’s programs designed to protect blacks, Hispanics, and gays from discrimination, promote full employment, and resist attempts to outlaw contraceptives?”

Actually, the Field Poll did find declining Asian American support for even the deceptively tenditious definition of affirmative action. Imagine what the result would have been if the question had been designed to solicit opinion about affirmative action as it is actually practiced, such as:

“Do you prefer: a) lowering admission requirements for blacks and Hispanics in order to promote ‘diversity” or: b) judging all applicants, regardless of race or ethnicity, by the same standards?”

“Would you favor ‘affirmative action’ if you believed its purpose and effect were to increase the numbers of blacks and Hispanics and reduce the number of Asian Americans admitted to California’s selective colleges and universities?”

“Would you favor ‘affirmative action’ if you believed its purpose and effect were to increase the numbers of Filipino-, Cambodian-, and Hmong-Americans and reduce the number of Chinese-, Japanese-, and Korean-Americans admitted to California’s selective colleges and universities?”

UPDATE 27 Sept.

I should have known better than to write the above before checking to see if Roger Clegg had written anything on Field’s embarrssing (to Field) survey question on affirmative action, or waited until he did. Sure enough, he has, here, asking whether that loaded poll question was

objective or simply an attempt to get the result the professor wanted? A more objective question would be: “Do you believe there should be discrimination or preference on the basis of race, ethnicity or sex in deciding who is admitted to public universities, awarded public contracts and hired for state and local employment?”

That question would more fairly mirror the language in Proposition 209 that was at issue here.

“And, based on many other surveys,” Clegg concludes, “it would not have been likely to lead to the positive response” sought and paid for by the pro-preference interest group.

Our Supreme Leader At the U.N. Claims A Wholly New Title

In his speech on climate change at the UN yesterday, our Supreme Leader, giving further evidence of his narcissistic delusions of grandeur, announced that “I’m here personally, as the leader of the world’s largest economy….”

Really? I was not aware that our economy had an individual “leader.” Did I somehow miss Obama’s election/coronation/appointment as our economy’s “leader”?

The president, according to his own self-description if not his c.v., is a Constitutional law scholar (Obama in 2007: “I was a constitutional law professor, which means unlike the current president I actually respect the Constitution.”) Perhaps the former professor can point to the provision of the Constitution or some subsidiary law that provides for the election of a “leader” our economy.

I suspect that his dubious claim of authority comes from the same source as his asserted authority to rewrite, amend, or suspend duly enacted laws that he finds politically inconvenient, or to legislate vial executive order when Congress refuses to enact what he thinks it should.

Will Death Panels Practice Racial Preference?

Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, one of the architects of Obamacare, has revived the controversial issue of death panels by writing an article in The Atlantic announcing that he hopes to die at 75, and, while taking care to insist that is only his personal preference, he leaves no doubt that he thinks others should avoid old age […]

At UVa, More “Diversity” Confusion

Perhaps if universities practice what is euphemistically known as “diversity” long enough their officers and administrators will be able to discuss it coherently, but recent developments at the University of Virginia do not inspire much confidence. For a discussion of one of those developments, see my essay on Minding The Campus, “Diversity — The Vague, […]

Constitution Day Query For The President

Yesterday, as many of you know, was Constitution Day, and the president issued a proclamation filled all the predictable pieties. With this president, however, more than most, I believe it is reasonable to ask if he really believes them. We are united, he proclaimed, “by our fidelity to a set of tenets” and “we are […]

Millennial Confusion

The Wall Street Journal‘s James Taranto picked up a nice bit of Millennial confusion today (but not before Roger Clegg of the Center for Equal Opportunity had already emailed me about it). The Red and Black, the University of Georgia student newspaper, wrote a few days ago about a survey of Millennials conducted by MTV: A survey […]

Another Day In Obamaland: Two Old Scandals Erupt

1. From The Daily Caller: Bombshell Emails: White House Coordinated With Department of Labor To Hide Illegal Obama Fundraiser Hilda Solis’ Schedule 2. From Sharyl Attkisson: Benghazi Bombshell: Clinton State Department Official Reveals Details of Alleged Document Review What? Benghazi documents withheld? A State Dept. coverup? Who’d a thought? Next someone will probably come forward with evidence […]

The Dark Side Of UVa’s Bright Racial Data

Legacy Preferences Are Not Like Race Preferences

Does Higher Education Lower Intelligence?

Biraq Obama

Discrimination Against Asian-Americans, Understated

A Race-Norming “Experiment” Defends Affirmative Action

Has Obama Resigned & Signed On With Nike?

Unconscious Devotion To Colorblindness

“Special Treatment” For Gay Illegals?

Slaveholder Descendants Qualify For Affirmative Action