Discriminations

"I don't know whether I'm more struck by the goodness of this news or the sadness that a non-discriminatory policy from a major university is news."

I am always excited to see conservatives arguing for and cheering for aid to the poor. It may be the most redeeming feature of affirmative action.

Actus,

C'mon now. You know that affirmative action has absolutely nothing to do with aiding the poor. It sounds like you're just throwing a little bait in the water.

"C'mon now. You know that affirmative action has absolutely nothing to do with aiding the poor. "

I think you misunderstand. Its precisely because affirmative action isn't a precise enough aid to the poor that it gets conservatives to say that they are fine with aid for the poor.

No actus, it's actually a desire to aid the poor that causes conservatives to say that aiding the poor is fine with them. It's liberals' holier-than-thou attitude, ably demonstrated by your comment, that causes them to say that you are elitist twits.

"No actus, it's actually a desire to aid the poor that causes conservatives to say that aiding the poor is fine with them."

Really? must be a new kind of conservative then. Whichever way, its very welcome.

A quick lesson in conservative ideology:

Government Charity - Bad
Private Charity - Good

"Government Charity - Bad
Private Charity - Good"

Thanks! so university of michigan charity, Bad?

The M-PACT plan will be funded by $3 million per year for the first three years from private gifts to U-M.

Oh! so this has nothing to do with affirmative action in university finacial aid. its a private enterprise.

It is actually racial quotas that are racist.

The political classification system enumerated by actus is false.

Opposing racial quotas is liberal. In fact, both conservatives and liberals should oppose racial quotas.

The Democratic Party is now the party of overt racism, i.e., it supports racial quotas. This is not "liberal." I don't know exactly what it is.

In fact, I am a liberal. I oppose racial quotas.

Actus, I still don't get your point. You say AA isn't a precise enough aid to the poor; I still say it has nothing to do with the poor. Actually, it discriminates against the poor (as long as they're white or Asian) in order to "aid" people who could be poor, middle-class or rich. It can discriminate against one minority in favor of another, without looking at the individual to see who would be a better recipient of the aid. Just as long as the right box gets checked. Great system.

"You say AA isn't a precise enough aid to the poor; I still say it has nothing to do with the poor. "

One of the arguments for AA is that it helps the poor (rightly or wrongly, its an argument that is used). Often times when presented with this argument, conservatives then say "no, AA Doesn't help the poor, if you want to help the poor lets do X."

And then we get the right to help the poor by doing X, which they otherwise wouldn't do. This is a nice feature of AA, it gets the right to support policies that help the poor.

The whole argument doesn't depend on AA helping the poor, it depends on AA being touted as helping the poor.