Legal Commentary

The Boston Globe Opposes Preferences!

Reader Fred Ray points to a hard-hitting attack by Jules Crittenden against an editorial opposing preferential treatment in the Boston Globe, which Crittenden calls a ?Lefty Rag? and others refer to simply as the New York Times outpost in New England.

Oh, wait. ?No, not race, gender or sexual-orientation preferences,? Crittenden explains. ?Don?t be ridiculous.? What it slams is ?civil service police preferences for that other much-abused minority, Military-Americans, in a bigoted, ill-informed editorial that plays on some of the worst stereotypes about veterans....

Why? Well, the editorial explains, because ?there is ... the potential for giving preference to veterans who might lack education or be suffering from stress or aggression issues.? And besides, preferential treatment ?isn?t necessary for the most deserving veterans and serves to push out more suitable candidates.?

Do you think the Boston Globe opposes preferences for other minority groups for similar reasons? Your guess, I?m sure, is as good as mine.

Full post as published by Discriminations on August 15, 2009 (boomark / email).