Was The Supreme Court Right? Yes.

I want to take this opportunity to finally address the Supreme Court of the United States’ recent rulings concerning free speech, affirmative action and student loan forgiveness..

If you have listened to my shows following the rulings and the aftermath recently, then you know where I stand, and I do so firmly.

Student Loan Forgiveness (6-3)

Let’s begin with student loan forgiveness. Other than it is not what some wanted – even hoped for and counted on – what is the real issue? Some have actually whined that President Biden promised he would see to it these loans would be forgiven. One actually said, “I feel disappointed. I feel the President made a promise to cancel student loans and three years after the election, we find ourselves in a situation where because of that promise, a lot of us, literally tens of millions of us, made decisions with our lives to move forward.”

I would suggest you stop worrying about your student loan not being forgiven but that you might be better off worrying about your stupidity.

Seriously, this person, and many more like him, feel disappointed? For what? That his president breached a promise? Shocker! I am guessing not one of these tantrum-throwing geniuses are taking anything that might resemble economics or wealth management.

Did any of these people set any money aside just in case they did not hit the student loan lottery? I mean, there was that chance, right? If the pandemic never happened, those student loan payments would have still been made; that loan would still exist, correct?

One woman, who works at a bank in Ohio and has about $50 thousand dollars in student debt says she is saddened by the SCOTUS decision. “I was looking to be a first-time home buyer. I really was looking for this to go through to help me achieve the American dream.”

Newsflash…the American dream is still there! You can still buy a home. You work at a bank for Pete’s sake! Did no one there advise you or did you just plan on having the 50K obligation wiped from your debt ledger?

By the way, if you have 50 grand wiped from your debt, does it count as being satisfied, therefore, more than likely increasing your credit rating? Just wondering.

And there are others. Lots of them that feel very much as these people do. Some have even said they just won’t pay the loan back in protest. A threat – possibly a promise – that is absolutely akin to pouty face. Dropping to the floor, kicking legs and flailing arms. 

It would be easy and accurate to sum this up as a generation that has no true resolve and has chosen to fully invest in this administration’s efforts to curry their favor and encourage it to suckle at the government teat. Here’s the real mind blower, most of the people being used as propaganda most likely won’t even qualify fir the forgiveness. Hell, some of them being quoted, photographed and interviewed by various outlets may not be students at all but just bandwagon antagonists. 

“Affirmative Action” UNC and Harvard Cases (6-3 and 6-2)

FYI, the vote in the Harvard ruling was 6-2 because Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson had to recuse herself, having served on the board of overseers and earning her undergraduate and law degrees at Harvard.

To be accurate, Affirmative Action as it was viewed and defined 40 plus years ago is not how many are trying to define it today. When first created by President Kennedy in 1961, it was part of an executive order, a provision intended to make certain government contractors such as universities “take affirmative action to ensure that applicants are employed, and employees are treated during employment, without regard to their race, creed, color, or national origin.” 

In today’s world, “diversity” is not what it was back in the early to mid 1960’s. Today, diversity seems to focus on skin color as well as gender-identity and sexual preference more than one’s true biography. We now have something called Diversity, Equity and Inclusion compliance positions, on campuses and in the workplace.

Some argue the SCOTUS ruling erases the legal precedent established over the decades, impacting schools that depend on race-conscious admissions programs they consider vital to building a diverse student body. May I suggest it actually protects campuses and others by not forcing them to focus solely on skin color, but to take into consideration an applicant’s total story. 

Let me make this a little easier. It removes racism from the process. That will certainly get me some negative backlash but only because some of us are able to see the entire picture – understand the whole story. Others only want to focus on a single rallying point without the benefit of, well, anything else. 

The Supreme Court with this ruling actually protects the affirmative action Kennedy and Johnson put into place. It still seeks to reward academic accomplishments, you know, the hard work many students invest so much of their lives into, but does allow for race consideration. The key component here is Diversity.

So, a white person who applies for admission to a university with a portfolio of mediocre or below average grades BUT identifies as a Native American or even African American…is he or she then a candidate for affirmative action? Does he or she not then contribute to the campus diversity? Does this applicant receive stronger consideration than an applicant, no matter the skin color or biography, but strong academics? Does an employer or university risk denying the application in today’s overprotective, sue-happy society? Before you accuse me of overreach or grasping at straws, you might want to take a few minutes and do some research. You might be surprised to find this is not only a possibility, but very much a probability.

Free Speech; Website Designer (6-3)

This, to me, is the most purposely convoluted of the three I am focusing on here. The media, the left and the three left-friendly justices immediately went to the people with malice to rally hate and support.

Because the case heard by the Supreme Court involved a website designer in Colorado that refused to create a site for an LGBTQ+ wedding. Keep in mind, Colorado is a very progressive state where alternative lifestyles have become the voice; voices that demand and refuse to take no for an answer, no matter the opposition’s morals, beliefs, preferred and legal business protocols or laws that might stand in their way.

Holding to my belief that the LGBTQ+ community is, for the most part, a special interest group currently drunk on the power the Biden administration and others hell-bent on division in the guise of what they call inclusion, I present to you this website designer was targeted with intent. Why do I say this? Because technology today is such that anyone with any measure of understanding basic instructions and an internet connection can create a website; certainly what appears to have been a relatively basic site such as the one requested by the customer in this case.

No, I believe it’s possible this group in Colorado targeted this designer hoping for the outcome they received, including the publicity. Expect more of it as we move deeper into the presidential election cycle. Democrats are laser-focused on this group and anything – any story – that negatively impacts it. This will allow the Dems to use it in the pretense of support. Numbers are numbers. Votes are votes. Much the same way the left – our vice president included – had no shame or hesitation to get behind Black Lives Matter, even encouraging the violent protests. Where is BLM now?

Kelly Robinson is the president of the Human Rights Campaign and she said, “This decision by the Supreme Court is a dangerous step backward, giving some businesses the power to discriminate against people simply because of who we are.” She added this nugget, “This decision continues to affirm how radical and out-of-touch this court is, especially when 80 percent of Americans support robust and LGBTQ+ inclusive nondiscrimination laws.”

Justice Sonia Sotomayor noted in her dissent this is the first time in history the court has granted a business open to the public a right to refuse service to members of a protected class. Look, I respect all the SCOTUS justices. I would hate to be in their shoes and robes. Still I have to ask, when did the LGBTQ+ folks become a protected class? Seems a little dramatic to me, especially from a Supreme Court justice.

Sotomayor went on to suggest, “A website designer could equally refuse to create a wedding website for an interracial couple, for example.” Again, stop with the dramatics.

When I was part of a screen printing and embroidery business, we used to get some very unusual requests. Did I refuse any? You bet. Anything trademarked was refused. We did turn away customers that wanted to produce shirts that painted Trump, Obama, Biden as well as local elected officials and others in ways that might have been funny, but we just did not want our business attached to the projects. Inevitably, someone would say who made their shirt, However, we did refer these projects to others we felt might be able to help.

So, no, justice Sotomayor, your attempt to stoke that hate and put images in the minds of those not able to think for themselves does not fly with the common sense thinker.

As for the ruling coming amid an increasingly hostile political climate against this demographic, which has seen a rise in violence and threats? Again, stop with the dramatics. Wait, are you talking about the nonbinary murderer in Colorado Springs recently sentenced for killing patrons of an LGBTQ club? Or the nonbinary former Biden admin employee who can’t stop stealing or lying about it? Or is it the trans person that brutally murdered 6 in Nashville? 

And Kelly Robinson, nice try. Your effort to twist the Supreme Court’s ruling in this case to rally your troops is not going to serve you well. Giving some businesses the power to discriminate? 80 percent of Americans support robust and LGBTQ+ inclusive nondiscrimination laws? I call BS on the latter. You are clearly confusing tolerance and willingness to simply allow folks to live with your 80 percent rationale.

As for allowing businesses to discriminate, we have allowed it for decades, we just haven’t cared or been led to believe that every little thing that upsets someone should be grounds for forced change or compliance. 

Have you forgotten those of us that understood masks were useless – even harmful – and those of us that chose not to or might not be able to get the jab, were not allowed in many businesses or even to travel unless we masked up and presented our papers?

How about “No shoes, No shirt, No service.” “We do not accept bills larger than a $20.” What about the myriad stories of conservatives being refused service in restaurants and coffee shops, even being asked to leave or have someone literally screaming in their ears. People being harassed and physically abused for wearing a Make America Great Again cap. Is that not discrimination?

In summary, each of these rulings, in my opinion, are not nearly as divisive or detrimental as some are trying to make them out to be, including 3 Supreme Court Justices. I can’t blame them, they are voting their party, which makes Joe Biden’s “This is not a normal court” rant useless. Those arguing politics have infiltrated the court, really? Do you think? Who do we blame for that? Maybe the same party that had no interest in discovering where the Roe V. Wade leak came from? 

Frankly, if examined with common sense, each ruling does, in fact, protect. It protects businesses. It protects the general population. It should provide the impetus to succeed…to achieve the American Dream but do so on your merits, effort and desire; the want to stand tall at some point and say, “I did that. No one gave it to me.” Skin color should not circumvent your story. Stop buying into the notion you are owed something because of what happened in the past or because your family has struggled since the depression or because your parents or others have shown you how easy it is to take advantage of government programs or other people’s benevolence and kind hearts.

Free Speech is an absolute right but no one has the right to force their agenda on you.

Affirmative Action. Do not buy into the attempt to handicap you with your pigment. Rise above your circumstance. Academics should still be part of your biography.  

Student Loan Forgiveness. If everything is simply handed to you…if your debts are just wiped off the ledger…then what value can your efforts really have? What are you handing down to your children if nothing more than mediocrity and laziness?

I hope this made sense. 

The thoughts and opinions shared here may or may not reflect that of KGNC, its staff, management or Alpha Media.