affirmative action Democrats black votes Diversity training Glenn loury Intelwars Reparations

‘If we fall for this, we are FOOLS’: Glenn Loury warns Dems are ‘buying black votes by waving a bloody shirt of racism’

On “The Rubin Report,” Glenn Loury, professor of economics at Brown University, joined BlazeTV host Dave Rubin to talk about why it’s controversial for a black man to be against diversity and inclusion training, affirmative action, and reparations.

Glenn also shared his thoughts on the narrative of systemic racism and racial disparities, why it’s wrong, and how the Democratic Party pushes lies to get the support of black voters.

In this clip, Glenn shares his thoughts on how Democrats have fanned the flames of the racism bogeyman in a cynical attempt to get more of the black vote.

“They’re buying black votes by waving a bloody shirt of racism, that’s what they’re doing,” Glenn said of the Democratic Party. “If we fall for this, we are fools. We’re being led around with a ring through our noses. They show nothing but contempt for black people.”

Glenn argued that if black people in this country want to start eliminating disparities, they need to stop using the issue of slavery to play the victim as that mentality only encourages society to lower the bar for black America.

“The racial conflict coming out of [the issue of] slavery threaten the existence of the republic,” Glenn said. “Three hundred thousand people in a country of 3 million were slaughtered on the battlefields of the civil war. The consequence of which was the emancipation of the African slaves. Here we are now, 150 years later and the descendants of those slaves are citizens of the freest, richest and most powerful republic in the history of the world.”

Glenn also explained why he believes former President Barack Obama missed many opportunities to engage the country in an honest conversation about race, and called out former first lady Michelle Obama for saying that she fears for the safety of her daughters.

Watch the video below to catch more of the conversation:

Want more from Dave Rubin?

To enjoy more honest conversations, free speech, and big ideas with Dave Rubin, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution and live the American dream.

affirmative action California voters college students Election 2020 hiring Intelwars Proposition 16 Race rejection

Believe it or not, deep-blue California rejects affirmative action, upholds ban on considering race in hiring, college admissions

It might be hard to fathom in California — where close to half (46.3%) of all registered voters are Democrats as opposed to just 24% of voters registered as Republicans — but voters on Election Day rejected affirmative action, the Fresno Bee reported.

What are the details?

Proposition 16 — which aimed to repeal Proposition 209, a 1996 ban on considering race and gender in public hiring, college admissions, and contracting — was soundly defeated: It was failing 56% to 44% as votes were still being counted, the paper said.

Proposition 209 barred the state from discriminating against or granting preferential treatment to any person or group based on race, sex, ethnicity, or nationality, the Bee noted.

And it isn’t as though the “Yes on 16” campaign was short on cash. The paper — citing campaign finance records — said the campaign raised more than $16 million between January and October while the “Californians for Equal Rights, No on Proposition 16” campaign raised a comparatively paltry $1.5 million.

Arnold Steinberg, a strategist with the “No” campaign, declared victory Tuesday night, the Bee said.

“We faced a daunting uphill battle against an initiative put on the ballot at the last minute by the state Legislature,” Steinberg, who worked as a Proposition 209 strategist, told the paper. “In a state hardly seen as conservative, voters rejected a repeal of the state constitution’s guarantee of equal treatment by race.”

Why did Proposition 16 fail?

Lawmakers and advocates told the Bee public opinion groundwork was insufficient to win over hearts and minds for Proposition 16, particularly on a ballot dominated by the presidential election.

Assemblywoman Lorena Gonzalez and state Sen. Maria Elena Durazo, both Democrats, argued
Proposition 16 would create equal footing among Latinos and blacks and increase racial and gender representation in higher education and in the public workforce, the paper said.

“It’s unfortunate that we didn’t have a chance to explain it to more voters, but we’re hopeful that justice works out,” Gonzalez said on Tuesday night, the Bee reported.

More from the paper:

Former University of California Regent
Ward Connerly, the lead advocate for Proposition 209, helped lead the campaign against the effort to overturn it.

He and other opponents called Proposition 16 divisive and discriminatory and argued that diverse communities in California have already made strides in representation since its ban.

In July, for instance, the University of California system announced a
record number of incoming Latino freshmen admitted to the fall 2020 semester, surpassing Asian American students for the first time.

affirmative action hiring Intelwars nbc news Quotas Women people of color

NBC News chief announces new affirmative action goals for workforce

The chairman of NBC Universal News Group announced new affirmative action goals Tuesday for hiring at the corporation, aiming for a workforce comprised of 50% women and 50% people of color.

What are the details?

A New York Times media columnist posted an internal email from NBC News chief Cesar Conde on Twitter, wherein Conde explains to employees that the network would be formulating an action plan to achieve the goal of making “50% of our New organization employees be women and 50% of our total workforce be people of color.”

To that, Washington Examiner reporter Joe Simonson replied, “Quotas baby.”

Conde—who oversees NBC News, MSNBC, and CNBC—did not spell out a specific timeline for executing the new affirmative action goals, but asked employees to provide feedback over the next 100 days to “collectively decide on the key metrics to track (the organization’s) progress.”

According to The Wrap, NBC does not have far to go in meeting its mission when it comes to gender. The outlet reported:

Nearly half of the news division’s 3,000 employees are women, Conde said in a video message accompanying a memo to staff, while 26.5% are people of color—among them, 8% are Black, 8% are Hispanic, 8% are Asian, 2% are multiracial and less than 1% are Native American.

An article from U.S. News and World Report from 2017 reported that “men and women of color make up 19 percent of the population each.”

Conde said in his letter to employees that “over the past several weeks we have covered a country reckoning with systemic inequality and the painful consequences of a long history of racial injustice.”

He added, “as a news organization we have a unique responsibility to reflect the country and all of the communities we serve.”

Aca 5 affirmative action California California civil rights initiative Discrimination Intelwars Proposition 209

In bid to bring back affirmative action, Calif. Legislature votes to strip discrimination protections from state Constitution

California voters will be given the opportunity to repeal the California Civil Rights Initiative, also known as Proposition 209, that amended the state Constitution to prohibit discrimination or preferential treatment of people based on race or sex.

Proposition 209 states: “The State shall not discriminate against, or grant preferential treatment to, any individual or group on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin in the operation of public employment, public education, or public contracting.”

On Wednesday, the California Senate voted 30-10 in favor of putting the constitutional amendment that reinstates affirmative action up for a vote on the November ballot. The California Senate surpassed the required two-thirds majority. The California State Assembly voted 60-14 to pass Assembly Constitutional Amendment No. 5 on June 10, 2020.

Prominent California Democrats supported repealing the California Civil Rights Initiative, including Sen. Dianne Feinstein, Sen. Kamala Harris, Rep. Ted Lieu, Rep. Eric Swalwell, and Assemblywoman Lorena Gonzalez, who said she cried tears of joy with the possibility to “restore affirmative action in public contracting and education.”

“I know about discrimination. I live it every day,” Democratic state Sen. Steven Bradford said. “We live it in this building. Quit lying to yourselves and saying race is not a factor. … The bedrock of who we are in this country is based on race.”

ACA 5 was co-authored by Assemblywoman Shirley Weber (D). ACA 5 is attempting to reverse Proposition 209 that was passed in 1996 by 55% of California voters.

Affirmative action detractors brought up the iconic Martin Luther King Jr. quote: “I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.”

Weber responded to that point by saying, “When he talked about ‘I don’t want to be judged by the color of my skin but by the content of my character,’ that was contained in the ‘I Have a Dream Speech.'” That was a dream. That was not reality. That was aspirational.”

“The collective actions against inequality and injustice that we’ve seen around the world represent an urgent call for systemic change,” state Sen. Holly Mitchell (D) said. “We must be affirmative in our actions we take to bend the arc towards justice. It’s time for a new generation of California’s voters to stand up and advance equity.”

Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti (D) said earlier this month that the city would embrace affirmative action.

“Our city is hungry for change, and we must knit racial justice and affirmative action into the fabric of our policies, our institutions, and our society,” Garcetti said. “With the possible repeal of Proposition 209, we will begin preparing now for affirmative action in City government to open the doors of opportunity to African Americans and anyone too often left out and left behind in our economy. But no matter what happens at the ballot box, my executive directive ensures our City leadership looks at every issue through a lens of racial justice, acts to end structural racism, and brings more Black Angelenos and people of color into the halls of government.”

Republican state Sen. Ling Ling Chang, who was born in Taiwan, said, “The problem with ACA 5 is that it takes the position that we must fight discrimination with more discrimination. Preferences for any purpose are anathema to the very process of democracy.”

Irvine Republican Assemblyman Steven Choi pointed out that “giving special or preferential treatment to someone based on their race is racism itself, or on their sex is sexism.”

“I’m Peter Kuo, an immigrant, a father of three bright students, a proud Californian and a proud Republican, Vice-Chair of the @CAGOP and I am strongly opposed to #ACA5,” tweeted Peter Kuo, who is the vice chairman of the California Republican Party. “Admission to all public colleges and universities should be based solely on MERIT.”

Prop. 209 was challenged in 2014 by the Senate Constitutional Amendment 5, but was dropped because of lack of support. The Sacramento Bee said SCA 5 fizzled out “after weeks of intense advocacy from Asian Americans who argued that a repeal would hurt their children’s prospects for getting into the most competitive public campuses.”

Seven other states have banned affirmative action, including Arizona, Florida, Michigan, Nebraska, New Hampshire, Oklahoma, and Washington.

California requires a two-thirds vote in both chambers of the California State Legislature in order to get a constitutional amendment on the state’s ballot for a vote by the public. The measure does not require Gov. Gavin Newsom’s signature for approval, only a simple majority from voters.

ACA 5 will be on the ballot in the general election on Nov. 3.

affirmative action Burgess owens Colin Kaepernick Intelwars Kneeling protests Marxism NFL

Former NFL star warns against the dangers of signing Colin Kaepernick: ‘Affirmative action for a Marxist’

Former NFL player Burgess Owens says that the NFL and Commissioner Roger Goodell should not be strong-armed into signing former NFL player-turned-Black Lives Matter activist Colin Kaepernick to a team.

What are the details?

Owens, who is running for Congress in Utah, told Sports Illustrated that hiring Kaepernick would be “affirmative action for a Marxist.”

“If it was a meritocracy, he would be out there anyway,” he said. “He would work hard; he would prove himself. He wouldn’t be taking someone else’s position. We’re looking at affirmative action for a Marxist. We’re approving their ideology.”

Owens said that if Kaepernick comes back, so should former NFL star — and outspoken Christian — Tim Tebow.

“If we’re going that route, we should also ask Tim Tebow to come back,” he said. “It doesn’t matter how long he’s been out of the game. It doesn’t matter his talent. He was a Christian who kneeled in prayer and was a positive on his team. The reason why Tim Tebow — as talented as he was with the Denver Broncos — the NFL didn’t like his essence. They thought he was too distracting … too distracting to his team and his organization.”

He pointed out that Kaepernick is just as big a distraction as Tebow reportedly was.

“Meanwhile, we’re willing to have the distraction of a Marxist, a Castro, brother-loving Marxist to come back and play that many Americans don’t want to see him play,” he insisted. “I just find it very disappointing. The NFL lost 15 percent of their audience last time, maybe a little bit more. The goal has been to increase their base, their revenue, by going overseas to places like China, Mexico, and England. They don’t care enough about their fans who love this country.”

He also added that if Kaepernick does come back to the league, he will not watch NFL games.

“If Goodell allows Kaepernick to come back, if they allow players to kneel during the national anthem, I’m willing to not watch the game,” he said.

Owens added that it all boils down to disrespecting the United States.

“We have too many Americans now accepting the notion that the flag should be a place where people should be ashamed of or take a knee, that’s what it comes down to,” he said. “I am disappointed that so many people are acquiescing today. They don’t understand the American way; they don’t understand the price paid.”

affirmative action College admissions Intelwars Race Racial inequality University of California

University of California votes to bring back affirmative action in admissions

The University of California Board of Regents voted Monday in favor of restoring affirmative action to the admissions process. Granting preferential treatment to applicants based on their race or gender in public education or employment has been outlawed in California since 1996.

The board voted unanimously in favor of affirmative action. The vote on its own doesn’t revive affirmative action policies, but rather is an endorsement by the 10-campus university system of a potential repeal of Proposition 209, the law that banned consideration of race and gender in admissions.

“There is amazing momentum for righting the wrongs caused by centuries of systemic racism in our country,” Board of Regents Chairman John Perez said in a statement, according to CNN. “The UC Board of Regents’ votes to endorse ACA 5 and to repeal Proposition 209 plays a part in that effort. As we continue to explore all the University’s opportunities for action, I am proud UC endorsed giving California voters the chance to erase a stain, support opportunity and equality, and repeal Proposition 209.”

ACA 5 is the amendment that would repeal the ban on affirmative action. It passed the state Assembly 60-14 last Wednesday. The bill has to pass the state Senate with a two-thirds majority by June 25 in order to be on the Nov. 3 ballot, where it would need a simple majority to pass.

University of California President Janet Napolitano applauded the vote, saying the ban on affirmative action has prevented schools from achieving their desired levels of diversity.

“It makes little sense to exclude any consideration of race in admissions when the aim of the University’s holistic process is to fully understand and evaluate each applicant through multiple dimensions,” Napolitano said in a statement. “Proposition 209 has forced California public institutions to try to address racial inequality without factoring in race, even where allowed by federal law. The diversity of our university and higher education institutions across California, should — and must — represent the rich diversity of our state.”