Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsNYT Rewrites Scalia to Make Him Sound Less Racist
New York Times Supreme Court correspondent Adam Liptak (12/9/15) recounted a startling moment in the Courts oral arguments over the University of Texas affirmative action plan:
In a remark that drew muted gasps in the courtroom, Justice Antonin Scalia said that minority students with inferior academic credentials may be better off at a less advanced school, a slower-track school where they do well.
I dont think it stands to reason that its a good thing for the University of Texas to admit as many blacks as possible, he added.
But part of the reason that the remark drew muted gasps, surely, is that thats not what Scalia saidhe didnt say minority students with inferior academic credentials would be better off at worse schools, he said African-Americans in general would. Heres the whole passage:
There are those who contend that it does not benefit African-Americans to get them into the University of Texas, where they do not do well, as opposed to having them go to a lessa slower-track school where they do well. One of the briefs pointed out that most of the black scientists in this country dont come from schools like the University of Texas . They come from lesser schools where they do not feel that theyre being pushed ahead in classes that are too fast for them.
He goes on to suggest that really competent blacks would be better off if they were admitted to lesser schools:
Im just not impressed by the fact that that the University of Texas may have fewer [black students]. Maybe it ought to have fewer. And maybe some, you know, when you take more, the number of blacks, really competent blacks, admitted to lesser schools turns out to be less. And I dont think it stands to reason that its a good thing for the University of Texas to admit as many blacks as possible.
This is not a person talking about a subset of blacks with a particular kind of educational background; taking his words at face value, this is a person asserting that African-Americans as a whole belong in lesser schools that are not too fast for them. (Or that there are those who contend that that is the case, if you want to give Scalia credit for that circumlocution.)
The fact that a Supreme Court justice justifies eliminating affirmative action on the basis of openly racist views ought to be big news. By sugarcoating what Scalia actually said, the New York Times disguises that newsmaking the ethnic cleansing of Americas top schools a more palatable possibility. Perhaps that shouldnt make me gasp.
From: FAIR Fairness & Accuracy In Reporting
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
4 replies, 755 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (2)
ReplyReply to this post
4 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
NYT Rewrites Scalia to Make Him Sound Less Racist (Original Post)
Warren Stupidity
Dec 2015
OP
RiffRandell
(5,909 posts)1. Just an FYI: Dupe.
I always want to know if I duped something, so just informing you.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10027443630
Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)3. thanks - I was looking for that and didn't see it.
RiffRandell
(5,909 posts)4. You're welcome. nt
tazkcmo
(7,300 posts)2. This and other edits by NYT
is why I do not read it or give it credence just as I no longer listen to anything Sec Clinton says since her bold face lie about sniper fire.