Friday - May 29, 2009

Sotomayor: a leftist crackpot even in college

Somewhere in the Lefty Mind there is this concept that any “minority” group should have representation at all walks in life, at least equal to their numbers in the overall population. Otherwise evil discrimination exists!!

Ok, let’s time-jump back to 1974, long before Political Correctness was coined. Back to the end of the Hippie Era, post-Vietnam, pre-Watergate. An unruly time, to say the least. Slide on over to Princeton University, an Ivy League school for rich kids. After the tumult of the ‘60s, they now have an Affirmative Action plan in place. But that isn’t good enough for young student Sonia Sotomayor ...

Latin student groups assail University hiring performance

By David Liemer

April 22, 1974

Accion Puertorriquena and the Chicano Organization of Princeton have filed a complaint with the New York office of the Department of Health, Education and Welfare (HEW), charging the university with a “lack of commitment” in hiring Puerto Rican and Chicano administrators and faculty and recruiting students from these minority groups.

While Provost Hackney, the university’s Affirmative Action officer, denied the charges yesterday, he admitted “we can make better efforts in the future.” He added that university’s new Affirmative Action plan, now being drafted, will “reflect our renewed commitment.”

The letter petitioned HEW to correct deficiencies in the present plan, and to determine whether “genuine, not contrived” efforts to utilize Latinos are being made in the new plan.

The letter also scores the university for not pursuing “active recruiting or advertising,” claiming as a result there are no Puerto Ricans or Chicanos on the administration or faculty.
...
The Latino groups’ charges include:

- Princeton’s present Affirmative Action plan does not include a break-down of positions available to Spanish-surnamed groups nor a timetable of goals, although these are present for other minority groups.

- Attempts to locate qualified Latinos have consisted solely of contacts with the Ford Foundation and one Chicano student, Larry R. Garcia ’73.

- The University has made no attempt to contact groups such as Aspira and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico Office, which have lists of available professors and administrators in the New York-New Jersey area.

- No regular university course “even alludes to” Puerto Rican or Chicano culture, because of the lack of a qualified faculty member to teach it.

- Out of a large concentration of Latinos in the New York-New Jersey area, disproportionately few hold university staff positions (secretarial, janitorial, etc.)

Anti-Latino discrimination at Princeton

By Sonia Sotomayor

May 10, 1974

On April 18, 1974, the Puerto Rican and Chicano students of Princeton filed a complaint with HEW charging the university with an institutional pattern of discrimination.

The facts of the complaint are these: 1) There is not one Puerto Rican or Chicano administrator or faculty member in the university; 2) There are two million Puerto Ricans in the United States and two and a half million more on the island itself. Yet there were only 66 Puerto Rican applicants this year, and only 31 Puerto Rican stuents on campus. While there are 12 million Chicanos in the United States, there were only 111 Chicano applicants and 27 students on campus this year; 3) Not one permanent course in this university now deals in any notable detail with the Puerto Rican or Chicano cultures.

Self-evident lack of commitment

The lack of commitment on the part of the university to the Puerto Rican or Chicano heritage seems self-evident from these facts. Yet statistical evidence is not the total concern or complaint of the Puerto Rican or Chicano students — what is terrifying to us are the implications. The facts imply and reflect the total absence of regard, concern and respect for an entire people and their culture. In effect, they reflect an attempt — a successful attempt so far — to relegate an important cultural sector of the population to oblivion.

Looks to me like she was gunning for Diversity Studies even back then. Gosh, years ahead of her time.

So Princeton knuckles under, and tries to find a minority person to fill an Associate Dean slot that opened up. Think that would make everybody happy? Think again.

Student committee complains about Garcias selection role

By Dori Jones

Sept. 12, 1974
While the newest assistant dean of student affairs, Luis Garcia, settled into his new job, the student advisory committee which participated in the search for a “minority dean” has renewed its protest over the selection process.

The six students on the committee, including three blacks, a Chicano, and a Puerto Rican, complained that Dean of Students Affairs Simmons made the appointment without waiting for their endorsement and without answering their questions about student participation in the process.

“The dissatisfaction had nothing to do with the choice itself,” said Sonia Sotomayor ‘76, a committee member and also a member of Accion Puertorriquena.  “Most of the students were pleased with Mr. Garcia.  The dissatisfaction was with the amount of student input.”

The committee, which interviewed 12 to 14 candidates for the position last spring, refused to make a formal recommendation until Simmons clarified its role in the selection and answered its questions.

Princeton approached these minority-centric groups and got their input. They let these student look over the resumes and interview the job candidates. But that wasn’t good enough! Hella no. When asked for their recommendation, these groups instead issued a letter of complaint. And that got ignored? Well, no kidding. The university was trying to hire somebody, and wanted to extend the olive branch a bit to these separatist groups. And got back even more complaints. Gee, thanks.

Simmons never responded to the committee’s letter of complaint but two weeks later informed the committee that Garcia had accepted the job.

In its letter, dated May 30, and in a recent statement the committee complained that:
candidates for the “minority” position seem to be subjected to closer scrutiny that those for comparable positions. some of the candidates seemed to receive preferential treatment during the selection process. no Asian or American Indian candidates were recruited or considered. the members of the advisory committee were chosen by Simmons herself rather than by the minority organizations they seemed to represent

“It was not right for them to choose that way,” said Sotomayor.  Both she and Frank S. Reed ‘76 of the Chicano Organization of Princeton went back to their organizations to legitimize their positions as representatives.

I bet Princeton didn’t interview any Samoans either. And probably damn few Eskimos. Well, so what? They went and found a minority for the job. Pretty gross in my mind, but that’s the bottom line of Affirmative Action - color matters more than content. I bet that was the leading requirement in their Help Wanted ad. Not good enough for young Sonia though. No, she assumed that because she was asked for some input, the hiring decision was hers alone. How’s that for the Audacity of Hope?

In essence, our criticism dealt with two areas: 1) the aspect of student involvement, and 2) the position to be filled vis-a-vis the candidates themselves. Concerning the aspect of student involvement, we raised these questions: How was the search committee itself chosen? Dean Simmons did not consult with the actual membership of the various minority groups; rather, she appointed on an individual basis only those who raised concerns about Dean Moore ’s successor. What was our role as the student search committee? It was never clearly defined; consequently, we were led to believe that it would be more significant than it was in actuality. The only indication we received was a quote in The Daily Princetonian that Dean Simmons would not choose a candidate “unacceptable to the committee.”

...

In closing, we raise the issue to begin discussion and reevaluation that will prevent such unfortunate actions in the future. As a start, we feel a definite policy on administrative appointments should be set forth in writing. For instance, regarding student involvement, a detailed policy on the area and extent of our involvement, should be delineated. Also, clear channels should be established to ensure legitimate student input when it is sought. And finally, concerning the appointment process, the procedure established should insure uniform treatment of all candidates. A candidate’s background or the position he or she seeks to fill should be no reasons for preferential treatment on the part of the university.

Except that preferential treatment should be the sole reason for only considering candidates of a certain background for certain positions. Hypocrisy, thy name is Sonia.

We are so fucked. Original news article here.

Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor once accused Princeton University of attempting to “relegate” the Puerto Rican and Chicano population to “oblivion,” according to a decades-old letter to the editor released by the university’s newspaper.

The Daily Princetonian has posted a series of Sotomayor-related letters and articles from the 1970s that show her early interest in the issues of discrimination and minority representation as a student at the Ivy League school.

PS - You want to know just how close-minded, racist, and culturally isolated a white person I am? I had to go look up the definition of Chicano. I rarely ever even hear or read the term. It means someone from Mexico. Not to be confused with Hispanic, which means someone from the countries south of the border that were once controlled by Spain. Latino/a extends the Hispanic term to include folks from Brazil, which was once upon a time run by Portugal. So, um, what do we call people who are actually from Spain, Andorra, or Portugal? Are they just Iberians these days? Cuz, Gaea forbid, they couldn’t have a thing in common with New World Latinos/as, just because they share the same root languages and the same root cultures.

Posted by Drew458     on 05/29/2009 at 09:33 AM   
Filed Under: • Democrats-Liberals-Moonbat Leftists • Judges-Courts-Lawyers •  
• Comments (7) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

DISCLAIMER

THE SERVICES AND MATERIALS ON THIS WEBSITE ARE PROVIDED "AS IS" AND THE HOSTS OF THIS SITE EXPRESSLY DISCLAIMS ANY AND ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED BY LAW INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF SATISFACTORY QUALITY, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, WITH RESPECT TO THE SERVICE OR ANY MATERIALS.

Not that very many people ever read this far down, but this blog was the creation of Allan Kelly and his friend Vilmar. Vilmar moved on to his own blog some time ago, and Allan ran this place alone until his sudden and unexpected death partway through 2006. We all miss him. A lot. Even though he is gone this site will always still be more than a little bit his. We who are left to carry on the BMEWS tradition owe him a great debt of gratitude, and we hope to be able to pay that back by following his last advice to us all:

1. Keep a firm grasp of Right and Wrong
2. Stay involved with government on every level and don't let those bastards get away with a thing
3. Use every legal means to defend yourself in the event of real internal trouble, and, most importantly:
4. Keep talking to each other, whether here or elsewhere

It's been a long strange trip without you Skipper, but thanks for pointing us in the right direction and giving us a swift kick in the behind to get us going. Keep lookin' down on us, will ya? Thanks.

THE INFORMATION AND OTHER CONTENTS OF THIS WEBSITE ARE DESIGNED TO COMPLY WITH THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. THIS WEBSITE SHALL BE GOVERNED BY AND CONSTRUED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND ALL PARTIES IRREVOCABLY SUBMIT TO THE JURISDICTION OF THE AMERICAN COURTS. IF ANYTHING ON THIS WEBSITE IS CONSTRUED AS BEING CONTRARY TO THE LAWS APPLICABLE IN ANY OTHER COUNTRY, THEN THIS WEBSITE IS NOT INTENDED TO BE ACCESSED BY PERSONS FROM THAT COUNTRY AND ANY PERSONS WHO ARE SUBJECT TO SUCH LAWS SHALL NOT BE ENTITLED TO USE OUR SERVICES UNLESS THEY CAN SATISFY US THAT SUCH USE WOULD BE LAWFUL.

Copyright © 2004-2015 Domain Owner