the whole affirmative-action thing

.

[i know i still haven't posted part 3 of the whole gay-marriage thing, but tying up all the loose ends in that messy little package is gonna require more alcohol than i can allow myself mid-week.

this one, on the other hand, was quick and easy, so it's going in.]

* * * * *

if you're a good fag who reads all the right blogs, you've already seen the following clip--i'm merely posting it here for reference.

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

the point is, after their debate over sonia sotomayor and affirmative action was done, aired and in the can, rachel maddow, in a particularly brilliant and sneaky maneuver, later went back after pat buchanan without allowing him to defend himself, all under the pretext of merely correcting his "factual errors."

in the spirit of fairness, i dashed off the following to her (and--because, what the fuck--cc'd him) tonight:

i think when pat claimed that "white men built america," what he was really trying to say--albeit badly--is that white men were the brains behind the country; he and people who make this argument tend to ignore the contributions of the brawn.

but he's got a point--most of the countries in which american minorities such as blacks, hispanics and middle-easterners natively predominate tend to be of the sort to which no one in his right mind would want to emigrate--hell, they're all dying to come here, and i can hardly blame 'em.

the basic problem with affirmative action (aside from its intrinsic discrimination against merit) is that it requires a dumbing-down of well-established standards and practices in order to accommodate the minorities it seeks to serve.

is this lowering of america's standards to more closely match those of the cultures from which these minorities are trying desperately to escape worth the inevitable trade-off?

seeing as how i'm a middle-aged white american male, i might be the wrong person to ask.