The president of the HLR is elected. The 34 editor slots are not. They're two different things.

One is qualitative and one is quantitative. You can't tell the difference.

You keep retreating and retreating expecting no one to notice, from "he got the gig at HLR because of affirmative action" all the way to "It could be that no one there considered race. But I have no proof of that either."

And you still can't admit that those 34 slots have nothing to do with race - and that if he was one of those 34 that means his admission has nothing to do with race.

To believe that race played a role you have to believe that he wasn't one of the 34 and that he was an underperforming student who needed help to get in (with no evidence to back that up), so instead he was one of the affirmative action hires.

That's the only way your opinion makes sense. Either he was in the 34 and race wasn't a factor, because it's not a criteria, or he wasn't.

We don't know if he was in the 34 or not, though all the evidence suggest that he probably was.

And yet you continue to assume, because you're a tad racist, that this isn't likely.

Nader on Obama:
(Picked up from an interview, here)

quote:

Barack Obama really now has to be examined very carefully. He has worn out the word “change.” We now want to know what change is involved. And it’s quite clear that he is a corporate candidate from A to Z. In his voting record, he voted against reform of the Mining Act of 1872, which gives away our hard rock minerals. He voted for a terrible class-action restriction law that the corporations wanted him to vote for. He, in many ways, has disappointed people who had greater hopes for him. He’s voted for reauthorizing the PATRIOT Act. He refuses to even discuss—he’s vigorously against impeachment of Bush and Cheney. He won’t even support his colleague Senator Russ Feingold motion to censure the Bush administration for systemic repeated illegal wiretaps. He—you know, he’s letting the corporate-dominated city of Washington, the corporations who actually rule us now in Washington, determine his agenda. And that does not augur well.

Those in bold really stood out. Anyone aware to the validity of those statements?