The Absurd Report

Anyone who has been around for the last few decades has witnessed a sea change in attitudes by whites toward blacks. And, anyone aware of recent history knows that the days of “white only” and “colored only” water fountains, segregated schools and sitting in the back of the bus are ugly memories of hypocrisy for a country that proudly touted its freedom and the Constitution that guaranteed it. In addition, the women’s movement has successfully changed attitudes in the marketplace and in the political arena.

Undoubtedly, the country needed a balancing of the scales if those disadvantaged groups were ever to be competitive with their more privileged counterparts. The question that many are now asking is; how much more evidence is needed to end a policy that uses discrimination to, ostensibly, end discrimination? A few decades ago, the idea of a black man or a woman being seriously considered for president was unfathomable to most voters. After the recent tug of war between Senators Obama and Clinton, illustrating record turnouts for a Primary election, it seems evident that this generation is more enlightened than its predecessors.

If he is elected, how could we continue to use a policy that appears to refute and disregard the progress made by blacks since 1961? Imagine having an African-American lead the most powerful nation on earth for the next 8 years, while some qualified whites are being denied promotions in favor of less qualified blacks.

Inasmuch as the Senator has mesmerized a sizable portion of a nation with his eloquent oratory about “change,” why not begin that change by proclaiming that AA had its intended effect and is now as much a relic of the past as those “Negroes need not apply” signs that stood in the windows of retail stores in the old South?

Yet, many blacks are reluctant to relinquish the boost they get from AA because it cuts down on the competition.