Jesse Jackson Fumbles A Sports Analogy

Jesse Jackson recently spoke at a church rally “on the rights of undocumented workers, universal health coverage and affirmative action,” urging his audience to oppose the Michigan Civil Rights Initiative (MCRI). (For some reason those usually acutely sensitive about the separation of church and state have not so far been heard to complain.)

As part of his remarks the good reverend committed one of the worst, and least apt, sports analogies I’ve ever heard.

To encourage the 1,700 people who attended to vote no on Proposal 2, which would ban affirmative action programs, Jackson pointed to a local example of how diversity can lead to success: Men of all skin colors play for the Detroit Tigers, he said, and no local baseball fan would think to root for a white St. Louis Cardinals player simply because of his skin color.

“Affirmative action is a majority issue, not a minority issue,” he preached. “It’s not a race issue; it’s a plan for growth. … Whatever the playing field, it’s the same distance between the bases for all.”

Several times during his speech, Jackson had the audience repeat after him: Affirmative action. Expands. Education. Affirmative action. Expands. Productivity.

One problem here, but only one, is that if college admission is getting to first base, then under affirmative action it’s definitely not the same distance between bases for all. As I’ve just had occasion to quote (here),

From the data we obtained [from the University of Michigan] under a Freedom of Information request, we calculated that the odds of being admitted if you were a black student with the same qualifications as a white applicant were 174-to-1.

If Jackson thinks it’s a Good Thing that “[m]en of all skin colors play for the Detroit Tigers,” why does he not complain that the Detroit Pistons are decidedly undiverse?

The Pistons’ roster lists 14 players (and one “unsigned draft pick” whom I’m not counting; no picture for him anyway). Based on a look at accompanying photos, 13 of them are black and only one, Carlos Delfino from Argentina, is not. (The roster page does not have a picture of Will Blalock, but one is here.) Is Jackson not worried about all the aspiring young white baskeballers to whom the Pistons so cruelly deny a “role model”? Is he not worried that the obvious lack of “affirmative action” by the Pistons undermines their “productivity”?

Sure he is.

ADDENDUM

According to Jill Greenberg in The New Republic blog, Jackson is even wrong about fans rooting based on race, religion, ethnicity, etc.

… tonight, I was at a party and ended up talking to a rabid Detroit fan and he brought up to me a very interesting point: I should root for the Tigers because Detroit is a town of Jews. He raved to me about the virtues of the Stage Deli and he insisted to me that there were more Jews in Detroit than St. Louis (and that they knew how to do deli right)….

The number of Jews rooting for the Tigers was not enough to convince me. But, the history of the Jews and the Tigers just might do it. Hank Greenberg (of no relation), one of the greatest Jewish baseball players of all time, played for the Detroit Tigers. So did Larry Sherry as well as the precursor to Rod Carew, Elliot Maddox.

I’ve always said that “affirmative action,” as practiced, is little more than “What’s good for the Jews?” in blackface.

Say What? (10)

  1. superdestroyer October 23, 2006 at 12:00 pm | | Reply

    John,

    Isn’t the real question: If racist holds back black and hispanic scholars, then why doesn’t it hold back black athletes?

    If the legacy of slavery is so onerous on blacks, then how do they find the drive and/or the time to achieve in basketball and football?

    I think the best use of the sports analogy it to show what blacks can achieve when black culture places an emphasis on it and when black families are willing to support it.

    If black families spent as much time emphasizing reading and academics is it did on playing basketball, there would be no need for AA in Michigan. If you doubt me, just watch the award winning movie “Hoop Dreams.”

  2. Agog October 23, 2006 at 12:55 pm | | Reply

    Superdestroyer raises issues that are all too undiscussed in the affirmative action debate — values, priorities, and the effect of family and culture on educational outcomes.

    An illumninating anecdote.

    I live in an affluent, suburb of Detroit. Within the last five years there has been substantial growth in the Asian population in our community, particularly from the Indian subcontinent. Many of these are well educated professionals who work for the auto companies and related suppliers or as physicians or other professionals.

    As one might expect of an affluent community, our local rec center is quite busy on Saturday with active and well attended leagues in basketball,

    t-ball, soccer, and swimming. Almost no Asian-Indian kids participate in any of these athletic activities.

    Instead about two dozen Asian-Indian kids participate in a very small but telling league that takes place on Saturday mornings in our local rec center. It is attended only by Asian-Indians. It is a Saturday morning math tutoring program that the fathers of the Indian kids in our local school system put on for the Indian kids.

    So, while the white kids are playing sports, these Asian-Indian kids are studying math. And when the time comes and many of the Indian kids are admitted to the University of Michigan and many of these white kids are rejected, the parents of the white kids — many of who are also U-M alumni — will wonder why.

    But the answer to that question is staring the white parents in the face every Saturday morning as they walk little Sally and Johnny to soccer while the Asian-Indian kids are studying algebra.

  3. Agog October 23, 2006 at 5:27 pm | | Reply

    Jesse Jackson citing the racial and ethnic diversity of a baseball team to support a system of state bestowed preferences reflects a profound ignorance of the subject and a shameless cynicism about the stupidity of his audience.

    It is sports, more than any other area of our society, where the notion that any factor other than excellence should dictate outcomes is most clearly rejected. The Yankees even got rid of Babe Ruth when he could not perform anymore.

    There is nothing more repugnant to the ethical athlete than the notion that factors unrelated to excellence — like the cosmetic composition of the athlete — should dictate who makes the team.

    Fine athletes like Josh Gibson and Buck O’Neil were victims of such a system; a system that was only ended through the courage of Jackie Robinson and Branch Rickey.

    “There is no accountability in the public school system- except for coaches. You know what happens to a losing coach. You fire him. A losing teacher can go on losing for 30 years and then go to glory.”

    ~~ H. Ross Perot

  4. Cobra October 24, 2006 at 12:08 am | | Reply

    John writes:

    >>>”From the data we obtained [from the University of Michigan] under a Freedom of Information request, we calculated that the odds of being admitted if you were a black student with the same qualifications as a white applicant were 174-to-1.”

    John, as I said when you first posted this, those are TERRIBLE ODDS.

    Since we’re in athletic mode, the New York Knicks are a 150-to-1 shot to win the 2006-07 NBA World Championship according to Bet 365. What’s the chance of THAT happening, sports fans?

    Agog writes:

    >>>”So, while the white kids are playing sports, these Asian-Indian kids are studying math. And when the time comes and many of the Indian kids are admitted to the University of Michigan and many of these white kids are rejected, the parents of the white kids — many of who are also U-M alumni — will wonder why.”

    I agree with most of your point here, and would add that this is NOT a recent pheonomenum. My question to you, Agog, is that after a generation or more of Asian-American academic commitment and achievement, why are these types of claims being made:

    >>>”In a study conducted in 1992, two social scientists (Duleep & Sanders) made the following observation:

    High educated men in all Asian groups earn less than comparable whites when occupation and industry are taken into account. Conceivably, extensive formal schooling and particular fields of study enable American-born Asian men to enter high-paying occupations and industries, but within these occupations and industries, Asian men may be underrepresented in higher-paying positions because of discrimination.

    These scientists said, out loud, what other observers were only whispering at the time: that the glass ceiling was as real for Asian Pacific Americans (APAs) as it was for women, other minorities, and other disenfranchised groups. But that was over ten years ago. How does the APA scorecard look today?

    Unfortunately, the current situation does not look much better. Dr. Clifford Cheng (1997) studied the Fortune 500, and found that only 0.3% of senior level executives were of APA descent. This number is particularly disturbing when one considers that 8.9% of the scientific and engineering labor force was APA (Tang, 1997). What accounts for the disparity between the APA labor statistics and the dearth of APA executive representation in corporate America?

    In a more recent study, one researcher found that 87.1% of APAs personally witnessed the use of the “Old Boys’ Network” in their workplace (Takamine, 2000). In that same study, 78.6% of APAs reported that they worked for companies with executive teams composed entirely of white males or a combination of white males and white females. So, is the problem with discrimination, or is the problem with APAs not positioning themselves for career advancement opportunities?”

    http://www.imdiversity.com/Villages/Asian/careers_workplace_employment/takamine_asians_glass_ceiling_1004.asp

    Now, this article, written by Kurt Takamine, Ed.D., Chapman University, doesn’t only point out the problems, but presents possible SOLUTIONS.

    >>>”This three-pronged attack must be conducted simultaneously to experience its full synergistic effect. APAs must take responsibility for their situation, and utilize resources at their disposal (legal, educational, social) to influence the power brokers. European American executives need to avail themselves of expert studies and education resources to reshape and expand their thinking and alter misperceptions. And the courts and commissions relating to labor issues must intervene to eliminate this clear disparity with APAs and executive advancement. In this way, corporations will “do the right thing” as they productively invest in their key resource: their people.”

    The thing that I take from this article, is that no ONE party; the aggreived minority, the majority employer, or the government is absolved from responsibility. It’s an extremely informative piece that should be read by all “Discrimination” readers, because I feel it’s HONEST and REALISTIC in its approach.

    –Cobra

  5. David Nieporent October 24, 2006 at 5:00 am | | Reply

    Incidentally, contra Jill Greenberg (and Adam Sandler), Rod Carew is not Jewish.

    Cobra:John, as I said when you first posted this, those are TERRIBLE ODDS.

    Since we’re in athletic mode, the New York Knicks are a 150-to-1 shot to win the 2006-07 NBA World Championship according to Bet 365. What’s the chance of THAT happening, sports fans?

    You completely misunderstand the statistic; you’re reading it backwards. The Knicks’ statistic is saying that the Knicks have a 1 in 151 chance of winning. That’s tiny. The Michigan statistic is saying that given a black and white applicant with equal scores, the black student is 147 times more likely to get in; in other words, the odds are against the white, not the black.

  6. Cobra October 24, 2006 at 7:59 am | | Reply

    David writes:

    >>>”You completely misunderstand the statistic; you’re reading it backwards.”

    No, I’m reading it as it was posted.

    >>>”From the data we obtained [from the University of Michigan] under a Freedom of Information request, we calculated that the odds of being admitted if you were a black student with the same qualifications as a white applicant were 174-to-1.”

    174-to-1 odds are extreme LONGSHOT ODDS.

    –Cobra

  7. superdestroyer October 24, 2006 at 8:21 am | | Reply

    Cobra,

    Let me see if I understand your post on Asian-Pacific-Americans (a new group that lumps Samoans and Filipinos in with Koreans and the Chinese). Since you are claiming that they are being discriminated against in job promotion (but not in hiring) you support a program (AA) that will admit fewer of them to the University of Michigan-Ann Arbor and more of them to the University of Michigan-Dearborn? I don’t see how AA for blacks helps Asian-Americans in Michigan.

    Also, I believe the statistics is that a black student with a score of 1150 is 174 times MORE likely to be admitted to UMich-Ann Arbor than a white student with the same 1150. Over course the Supreme Court told the State of Michigan that race cannot be an overwhelming consideration but I guess the University of Michigan believes that they only have to obey laws and ruling with which they agree.

  8. Agog October 24, 2006 at 11:44 am | | Reply

    Comparable value numbers are the most complicated and easily manipulated statistics in the race/gender preference discussion because it is very difficult to get any meaningful comparables. The legitimate analysis is to compare what company X pays two persons of substantially similar qualifications in the same job classifications and then control for race/gender.

    But comparing what Ford pays a male Asian electrical engineer with a MS. degree from Stanford with what Lear pays a female materials engineer with a BS from Podunk U introduces so many variables into the equation as to make a mere salary comparison essentially meaningless.

  9. Cobra October 25, 2006 at 12:50 am | | Reply

    Superdestroyer writes:

    >>>”Also, I believe the statistics is that a black student with a score of 1150 is 174 times MORE likely to be admitted to UMich-Ann Arbor than a white student with the same 1150.”

    I dealt with this stuff here way back in 2004:

    >>>”20,000 people applied to the U OF Michigan that year. If you eliminated ALL African American, Hispanic, and Native American applicants, the fact remains that ONLY 4000 students were accepted, meaning almost 12,000 white and Asian students would’ve still been REJECTED. Given the FACT that 1400 plus white and Asian students were accepted with LOWER TEST SCORES or GPA than Jennifer Gratz,(including two time Super Bowl MVP QB Tom Brady, who had a high school GPA of 3.5) OBVIOUSLY there are OTHER FACTORS involved with the admissions process.”

    http://www.discriminations.us/2003/04/not_martin_luther_king.html#comment-5239

    Now, there was a fellow named Robert Clemente who made this unfortunate post before mine, which perhaps…just maybe illuminates the true inner thoughts of many on his side of the argument.

    >>>”But those 1500 studnes hasd some special skill or taltent–sports, music, legacy, etc. All the minority kids had was different colored skin That doesn’t taken any skill or dedication or ability. It just takes biology. Why reward someone for that? ”

    Is that what it boils down to for many anti-affirmative action types? Hmmm?

    And please, if there’s a statistician or math professor out there, please…

    I’m BEGGING you…PLEASE explain to these folks that 174-to-1 are NOT that FAVORABLE a set of ODDS, but then again, compare it to some other odds in life:

    >>>”

    Odds of getting away with murder: 2 to 1

    Odds of being the victim of serious crime in your lifetime: 20 to 1

    Odds of getting hemorrhoids: 25 to 1

    Odds of being killed sometime in the next year in any sort of transportation accident: 77 to 1

    Odds of being born a twin in North America: 90 to 1

    Odds of being on plane with a drunken pilot: 117 to 1

    Odds of being audited by the IRS: 175 to 1

    Odds of having your identity stolen: 200 to 1

    Odds of dating a millionaire: 215 to 1

    Odds of writing a New York Times best seller: 220 to 1

    Odds of finding out your child is a genius: 250 to 1

    Odds of catching a ball at a major league ballgame: 563 to 1″

    Odds of dating a supermodel: 88,000 to 1

    Odds of becoming president: 10,000,000 to 1

    http://www.funny2.com/odds.htm

    Superdestroyer writes:

    >>>”Let me see if I understand your post on Asian-Pacific-Americans (a new group that lumps Samoans and Filipinos in with Koreans and the Chinese). Since you are claiming that they are being discriminated against in job promotion (but not in hiring) you support a program (AA) that will admit fewer of them to the University of Michigan-Ann Arbor and more of them to the University of Michigan-Dearborn? I don’t see how AA for blacks helps Asian-Americans in Michigan.”

    You see, folks…I want you all to pay attention to what Supe WRITES, because it’s very telling.

    >>>”I don’t see how AA for blacks helps Asian-Americans in Michigan.”

    First of all, nobody, especially ME, every said that Affirmative Action was exclusively for “blacks”. This is the perception that Anti-Affirmative Action types want to convey to the undecided.

    Second, the article I posted, written by Kurt Takamine, Ed.D., Chapman University, with sources cited from social scientists explains why government intevention is neccessary on behalf of Asian-Americans.

    I feel it’s very important to show these REALITIES to Anti-Affirmative Action types and MCRIers, because the core strategy of their movement has always been to narrow-cast SAT score racial gaps to elite public institutions, (once again on this very thread.)

    The problem is, when the argument is expanded to Asian-Americans, the “highest” average scorers on their SAT chainsaw defense, the motor seems to peter out once they’ve cut through the tree of knowlege (college), because many Asian-Americans now have the audacity to claim that they TOO are victims of racial discrimination in the workplace.

    AAA types here can’t explain away racial discrimination in promotions, salaries and contract to Asian-Americans, because it’s outside of the talking points neccessary to properly propagandize this cunning scheme.

    –Cobra

  10. David Nieporent October 26, 2006 at 7:57 pm | | Reply

    No, I’m reading it as it was posted.

    I would argue that it isn’t well-phrased, but you’re not reading it as posted. You’re mentally inserting the word “against” in there where it doesn’t belong.

    174-to-1 odds are extreme LONGSHOT ODDS.

    174-to-1 odds AGAINST something happening are extreme longshot odds. But it doesn’t say that.

    Anyway, if you go read the original report, which is available at the CEO’s website, it’s clear what it means: given a black and white with equal credentials, the black is 174 times more likely to be admitted.

Say What?