This piece is slated to be published in a book by Gary Wasson

The New York Times reported that President Bush’s National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice, the highest ranking American-African in the White House, said she believes universities "should be able to use race as a factor in admissions policies”, a view that the paper says may "put her at odds” with the President. But when one actually looks at the words that were used by Ms. Rice it becomes apparent that this is simply the interpretation of what she said according to the New York Times. They report that at the end of her statement she added, "I believe that while race-neutral means are preferable, it is appropriate to use race as one factor among others in achieving a diverse student body." This is a far cry from what the New York Times would have you believe.

As the coffee dribbled down my chin due to the fact that my jaw had dropped I couldn’t help but realize how far the New York Times had taken liberties with the facts of the matter. In its typical liberal style The New York Times has taken the facts of the matter and twisted them to create a story where once again there is none. The one larger aspect of this story that no one from the print media or the alphabet network news outlets is focusing on is that President Bush has never said that race was to be excluded from considering whether or not an applicant should be considered for enrollment at institutions of higher leaning here in the United States. Even the simplest minds would have to admit that diversity, something that the president was demanding be addressed even as governor of Texas and with some degree of success I might add, almost certainly cannot be achieved without race being considered. What the president contends is that giving an applicant twenty points towards the total sum needed for acceptance based solely on the color of the applicants skin is tantamount to racism and he is absolutely correct. It discriminates not on the basis of color but on the basis of academic achievement.

The way it stands now the University of Michigan gives twenty points to an applicant if they fit the universities definition of belonging to a minority, which at this point means being an American-African, Native American Indian or American-Hispanic. It also gives twenty points for exceptional athletic ability. It only gives 12 points for an exceptional SAT score. This criteria seems to express the universities desire to place ethnic diversity and a winning Athletics Department ahead of educational excellence.

By automatically granting an abundance of entry points based solely on race to an applicant means to conversely automatically deny an applicant entry points based solely on race. To deny someone anything because of the color of their skin whether it is black, white, red, yellow or brown is to discriminate. There really is no other way to look at it while keeping within the bounds of the definition of discrimination. But the more important concern that this raises is that it does not effectively help the very people that it sets out to help. Twenty percentage points applied toward someone’s entry application criteria means nothing if it is measured against the other aspects of the application when they are not at an acceptable level without those points being applied. By affording an inferior candidate enough points to "tip the scale” and gain entry to an institution of higher learning an inequity is created that establishes a class structure not unlike the caste system of the East Indian culture. Effectively, a second-class category of student is being created under the guise of diversity. This is exactly what we as a nation should be fighting against. If we are trying to eliminate discrimination and embrace the concept established by our Forefathers that all men (and women) are created equal then it is impossible to look at the way that the University of Michigan is assessing new student applications and come to the conclusion that it is anywhere near equitable.

While these points make sense to those who would like to see an advancement from the divisive practices of taking up opposing sides on a subject, a subject that should be too important to play politics with, House Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), in her partisan style, claims that President Bush is rolling back the achievements of the Civil Rights Era by pointing out the system the University of Michigan uses is extremely flawed. Anyone who has any vision at all can see that what President Bush and his Administration did by writing the friend of the court brief, and by having established a percentage criteria in the Texas school admissions system while in office there, is anything but rolling back the achievements of the Civil Rights Era. In fact, it is raising the standard bar higher and advancing fairness into the Civil Rights movement by refusing to be blinded by the color of ones skin and accepting the actuality of how hard someone works at their own education. It embraces the idea that the color of a persons skin should be transparent when they are being considered for entry into and institution of higher learning. It demands that admissions criteria be based on hard work and not the privilege of being a certain color. What President Bush and his administration, Ms. Rice included, are doing is demanding that there be a refining and clarifying to the existing admissions process, challenging the institutions of higher learning to evolve into something better rather than simply resting on the righteous laurels which they now cling to so dearly. What Nancy Pelosi and the liberals who stand by the University of Michigan are doing is maintaining the status quo, which we all can see is working poorly at best.

So, while a high school student who is at the top of her class, with excellent SAT scores and who is active in her school’s political environment gets a letter saying, "Sorry, you are qualified to come to the University of Michigan but you are the wrong color”, another student gets a letter informing him that he has been accepted to the University of Michigan so he can play football and, "Thank you for coming to play here, by the way, have a car on us.” The sad thing is he has to have someone read it to him. No wonder it is becoming a requirement by most successful corporations that an applicant have a Masters Degree or a Doctorate if they want to get to a level that would eventually afford them the opportunity for advancement, Bachelors degrees don’t mean anything anymore in he United States.

In an MSNBC poll an estimated 68% agree with the president that the racial bias admission criteria used by the University of Michigan is too extreme and flawed. Oddly enough, this is not too far off from the number of people polled who say that the president is doing an excellent job of leading our great nation.

A footnote: The Chicago public school system is considering opening debate on the dismantling of the diversity program within its jurisdiction citing the fact that the demographics involved with the plan have outgrown its usefulness.

Frank Salvato is a political media consultant and the managing editor for The New Media Journal.us. He is a contributing writer for The Washington Dispatch, GOPUSA, OpinionEditorials, Men’s News Daily, Canada Free Press & AmericanDaily. His pieces are regularly featured in Townhall.com. He has appeared as a guest on The O’Reilly Factor, The Kevin Matthews Radio Show (Chicago) and The Brad Messer Radio Show (San Antonio). His pieces have been recognized by the Japan Center for Conflict Prevention and are occasionally featured in The Washington Times and The London Morning Paper as well as other national and international publications.