All Episodes
Previous Next
June 30, 2023 - Sean Hannity Show
33:03
The Great One - June 29th, Hour 2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
This is an iHeart Podcast.
For you, and I believe the you, is more than 200 million people that love our country.
They're out there.
The Hunter Biden story, the scandal, the this, the that.
It's also the story of a father's love.
I was just thinking anyway, I started off without you.
And I sold a lot of state secrets and a lot of very important things that we shared.
Freedom is back in style.
Welcome to the revolution.
Where we're coming to your city.
Going to play our guitars and saying you will come to soul.
Sean Hannity.
The new Sean Hannity Show.
More behind the scenes information on breaking news and more bold, inspired solutions for America.
And our two Sean Hannity Show toll-free.
It is 800-941.
Sean, you want to be a part of the program?
It's always an honor and a privilege and a pleasure to welcome the man that I call the great one, Mark Levin, on the program.
Clearly, the news by the Supreme Court today, a really good decision as it relates to affirmative action.
I want to get his thoughts on that because Mark Levin is sort of like Chat GPT when it comes to our Constitution.
What is that?
I don't even know what you're doing.
You don't even know what Chat GPT.
You don't know what ChatGPT?
I live in a bubble.
I don't know what the hell's going on.
No, you live in a bunker bubble.
They got it.
That's right.
With my guns, my safe.
I got my guns.
Get off my McDonald's.
I'm going to get a little bit of a game, you big dope.
That's about it.
Mark still eats a McDonald's.
This is what he says to me.
He's going through a McDonald's.
No, no, don't do that to me.
You'll get me in trouble with my wife.
Well, she already knows, Mark.
She's not a secret with you.
No, was she already?
Nothing.
Okay.
Mark, you're not losing weight.
She knows you're still going to McDonald's.
That's why I'm called here the great big one.
That's not true.
Anyway, but Mark goes, I want a hamburger, no cheese.
I'm lactose intolerant.
I don't tell them I'm lactose intolerant.
The guys earn a minimum wage.
You don't give a crap what I do.
And then all of a sudden he'll pull out of the place.
Damn it, they put cheese on it again.
Oh, that's true.
That happens all the time.
A large fry and a small diet of Coke.
I'm like, yeah, that diet of Coke is really going to mitigate all our diet.
I'm a small diet of Coke and a small fry, but who cares?
Okay, who cares?
So not only did I want to have you on about today's decision, I'd actually had you on because I want to promote a book that you have coming out.
I Coca?
No.
It's called The Democratic Party Hates America.
Correct.
This is coming out just a little over a year before what I think will be the defining presidential election in our lifetime, Mark.
It's called The Democratic Party Hates America.
Amazon.comHannity.com.
If you want a first print edition, let me tell you something about this book.
I love this book.
And I have never said that about any book I've written before.
I like them all.
Liberty and Tyranny, American Marks.
I actually love this book.
My wife has read it.
There's literally a handful of us.
You've seen parts of it as well.
It is a crucially important book.
The timing is unbelievable.
That is really coincidental, accidental.
You know, you start a book 15, 16 months before it comes out.
And it's not just a regurgitation of everything everybody knows.
It is time to call a spade a spade.
The Democrat Party hates America.
Democratic Party hates you.
The people out there hate your audience.
Hates capitalism, hates liberty, hates the Constitution and the Declaration, and they demonstrate it every day.
They hate national sovereignty.
They hate our flag.
They hate our founders.
They hate our history.
It is time to explain.
Even since before the Civil War, the Democratic Party has never embraced America.
It was in charge of the Confederacy.
It promoted slavery.
It promoted segregation all the way into the 1960s.
I want you to slow down here because this history about the Democratic Party, because this is the lie, the big lie we get every election season.
And frankly, it used to be every two and four years.
Now it's almost every day that Republicans are racist and sexist and misogynist.
The whole list of the litany of names from the playbook.
Every single civil rights bill that has ever been passed has been passed by Republicans since 1868, 1875, Dwight Eisenhower's two civil rights bills, the 64 and 65 civil rights bills.
If it had been left of the Democrats, there would have been no civil rights bills anytime in American history.
Period.
Franklin Roosevelt, as you'll learn in this book, the great liberator and so forth, Franklin Roosevelt, the first major program under the New Deal was the Federal Housing Authority.
You've heard of FHA.
I believe it was 1938, give or take.
It specifically prevented subsidizing mortgages in black neighborhoods or areas surrounding black neighborhoods.
You know what they used to do at the FHA in Washington, Sean?
They would take a big red magic marker and make lines.
Redlining.
It's called redlining.
That's where redlining comes from.
The Democrats did that.
What else did they do in the New Deal?
They re-excuse me.
Woodrow Wilson and in the New Deal, they re-segregated the military.
They re-segregated the federal government.
The Republicans had desegregated them.
And you go through this, and I go through this history.
You look at Joe Kennedy Sr.
Joe Kennedy Sr.
was sympathetic to Hitler and the Third Reich.
It got so bad that FDR had to yank him as the ambassador to Britain.
What about the New York Times, by the way?
Yeah, but I'm talking about this book.
Yes, the New York Times also covered up the Holocaust and did FDR's bid.
I do more to expose the true history of the Democratic Party, but that's not good enough.
Because, great, here's the history, but I want you to know it.
But what's happened since?
The same damn party is destroying America.
Now, look at this decision.
This is the great thing about this book.
This book will apply to everything that's happening and is going to happen, even though I don't even intend it that way.
You have a fantastic opinion.
Finally, by the Supreme Court, six to three.
The three leftists on the court vote for what?
Racism.
Anti-Asian racism.
That's exactly what's going on in our colleges and universities.
40, 50 years ago, you had anti-Jewish, anti-Semitism at Harvard and Yale and these same universities.
These are Democrat Party objectives.
You have TV today filled with these morons.
I call them legal analysts.
They get on TV, and what do they say?
Oh, this is horrible for this community and that.
No, it isn't.
Today, the Democrat Party tells you that a colorblind society is a racist society.
Where does that phrase come from?
It comes from Frederick Douglass.
It comes from Abraham Lincoln.
It comes from Martin Luther King.
Why?
Because the Democrats have gone from this anti-black, racist, anti-Semitic, pro-eugenics party, pro-segregation party, to a Marxist, re-segregation, racist, anti-American party.
It never embraces our principles.
Joe Biden, does he ever talk up America?
What did he say today?
He's trashing America's races today.
They all do it.
It is constant.
How ironic.
Could you imagine if at any point in your career, my career, that we ever partnered with a former Klansman to stop the integration of public schools and actually said the words the way Joe Biden did, that you didn't want public schools to become racial jungles.
How come nobody paid attention to that in 2020, Mark Levin?
First of all, half of the country did.
The other half doesn't give a damn, apparently.
But I will say this.
It's worse than that, and you'll learn it in the book.
Joe Biden didn't just oppose integration.
Joe Biden was one of the leaders with Eastland in Mississippi and others who were leading the effort to keep public schools in our cities segregated.
People need to understand this.
Joe Biden wasn't just an observer who voted.
Joe Biden was an activist.
And so when he says today, he talks about Jim Crow and attacks the Republican Party.
Show me one leading Republican.
Don't give me Strom Thurman, but any leading Republican who supported that sort of view.
Nobody.
I get into, just so people know, Lyndon Johnson, the great emancipator.
No, he wasn't.
He was a racist his entire life.
And I will explain that, and I do in the book, too.
And I'll go on and on and on.
But even putting race aside, do they ever support capitalism?
No.
Do they ever support the private sector?
No.
Will they ever leave us alone?
No.
Now they're in our kitchens.
Now they're in our bedrooms.
I thought they're supposed to stay out of our bedrooms.
Now they're in our automobiles.
Climate change, which is really a form of Marxism, gives them the, they claim, the authority to do anything.
We need to clean the air.
We need to clean the water.
It's existential.
We don't have any time.
So nobody can actually sit back and think about what they're saying and what they've lied about in the past.
And so I call it the degrowth movement.
They're making us poorer.
And you can see it already.
And they're in a hurry.
They don't want people to have any time to think about these things.
Joe Biden likes to talk about bottom-up and middle-out.
Nobody knows what the hell he's talking about.
He's all top-down.
They're imposing us, posing these things on us.
You know who taught Joe Biden this, or at least the people advising him?
Sean Hannity.
By the way, do you have a middle name, by the way?
I do not.
Well, actually, Sean Patrick Hannity, but go ahead.
You must be Irish or something.
Anyway, so what?
You making fun of me, peeps?
I don't like my old country.
I think Joe Biden's great.
Anyway, so where are you?
Oh, you damn fool you are.
Yes.
Anyway, so I'm just making the point that it's all top down.
It was Lenin who talked about that.
He's surrounded by these Leninists.
It's disgusting.
The Obama people, Bernie Sanders has his people sprinkled throughout the government.
The Department of Justice, everybody under Merrick Garland, every one of them is an Obama radical Marxist.
People are like, what's happening?
That's what's happening.
And so I think it's time rather than to talk sort of superficially at a surface level, how's this happening?
We got to take it to this party, and we not only have to defeat it, we have to obliterate it.
Because if we don't obliterate it, it is not really an American system party.
In fact, it's more than a political party.
It's more than a cultural party.
You know what it is, Sean?
It's the party of the state.
It's the party of government.
That's what it is.
That's why it keeps building the bureaucracy.
The bureaucracy needs the Democrat Party, and the Democrat Party needs the bureaucracy.
Why?
Because the biggest lawmaker in the nation today is a fourth branch of government that isn't even in the Constitution.
It's the bureaucracy.
Call it the swamp, the administrative state, whatever you want.
They are there to sabotage Republicans when they get elected, and they are there to do everything they can to advance the radical left agenda.
The EPA spitting out regulation.
Pizza parlors now.
They reach into hairplaces.
They reach into everything.
And they're not going to stop unless we destroy that party.
And so I want to explain it, how they are stealing the language, how they are trying to control thought like totalitarian regimes do.
Where here we sit like a bunch of dummies.
We can't define what a woman is or what a man is.
We have a Supreme Court justice now who wouldn't define, I don't know what a woman is.
I need a biology.
What are you, an idiot?
And they do this purposely.
So I pull it all together.
I pull the history together.
I explain what's taking place in our country.
It's a revolution.
It's not a revolution by arms, but there were communists in the past.
Remshe from Italy, Mark Koos, who was from Berlin.
They all had an effect in our colleges and universities.
And the bottom line is they said this.
You don't have to overthrow society violently.
It'd be nice if you do.
But in democracies, it's not going to work that way.
Why?
Because the proletariat, the middle class, they like their country.
So the way to overthrow them is what?
It's to secrete yourself in their culture and their government and bureaucracy and do it top-down where they have no say and no control.
Quick break more with the great one, Mark Levin.
The Democrat Party hates America.
Hannity.com, Amazon.com, coming out in the early fall.
We continue with Mark Levin talking about the Supreme Court decision and his new book coming out at the end of the summer.
The Democrat Party Hates America.
Let me get one question in about this.
So Biden gives his little talk today, his little speech that you referred to, and I mentioned it in the last hour.
But then they tried to throw questions at him.
And one reporter threw a question at him, said he wasn't going to take questions.
The question was: President Biden, the Congressional Black Caucus said the Supreme Court is thrown into question its own legitimacy.
Is this a rogue court?
Biden, this is not a normal court.
Next question: Should there be term limits for justices, sir?
Now, we know the Democrats want to pack the courts.
We know they want D.C. statehood.
We know they want the biggest power grab they can possibly have.
Isn't all of this on the ballot in a year and a half, Mark Levin?
I wrote a book called Men in Black, my first book, a couple of decades ago, and I called for term limits for justices.
It was trashed by every liberal law professor in America, Sean.
But now that they don't have the court, these people are, you have to understand, they're chameleons.
Now they want term limits.
Here's the bottom line for the black caucus and everybody else.
They want to resegregate the country.
They believe in critical race theory.
You and I believe in a colorblind society.
Our audiences do.
This was flat-out, bigoted racial discrimination against Asian Americans.
And Harvard said they had a question on their admission forms and so forth.
Asian Americans were stereotyped.
They didn't have, quote-unquote, the personalities that they needed for a diverse classroom.
And so their concern really was you might have a class full of 40% Asians.
So what?
They're individual human beings.
Who cares who they are?
So now conservatives are fighting the civil rights battles of the 60s and 70s against the George Wallace Democrat Party.
That's exactly what's going on today.
Well, Mark Levin, this is going to be a blockbuster.
It's called The Democratic Party Hates America.
It's coming out at the end of the summer.
And we're looking forward to doing an hour interview.
I'm actually going to interview you on your show, which is the number one show on weekends of Fox.
And I'm looking forward to that.
It's called The Democratic Party Hates America.
No, no.
The Democrat Party.
They like Democratic Party.
Sorry, the Democrat Party hates America.
I stand corrected.
By the way, Mark is the only one that's a guest on TV that tells the host when he's on.
That's it.
I don't know why.
Thank me.
You got other guests there who just, they got to have their face on TV.
They regurgitate.
They respond.
They return.
All right.
But stop making fun of my guests.
Let me get the hell out of here.
All right.
I'm done.
Get it.
I made the mistake once.
I said, Mark, I got a follow-up question.
I just told you I'm done.
I'm not trying to be rude.
You're going to be, you're in big trouble over the McDonald's story today.
You know, you are such a pain in the ass.
I mean, you have no idea.
You're not going to get in trouble.
Yeah.
You are?
My wife says, oddly, she wants me to live.
Well, I want you to live for crying out loud, but I can't.
What am I going to do?
You're a grown man.
I'm supposed to stop you from ordering a.
You're not my wife.
Thank God.
Goodbye.
Take care of yourself and give Linda a big hug for.
The Democrat Party Hates America, Hannity.com, Amazon.com.
If you want a first print edition, the great one, Mark Levin, thank you, sir.
God bless.
Thanks, brother.
God bless us.
All right, 25 to the top of the hour.
I've been telling you for many months now about the importance of every school having a Knox entry access system that quickly allows law enforcement into lock campus doors during any active shooter incident.
Now, tragically, the school shootings continue to happen.
Now, the Knox company has been trusted by first responders since 1975.
And with the new advanced electronic E-key technology, local, state, federal law enforcement, they can all access locked doors during any crisis situation.
And statistics illustrate the need, the importance for every school to install this invaluable resource.
And a Knox entry system can be installed and managed by the schools of the school district and save lives.
Parents, grandparents, you need to know if your kid's school has installed a Knox entry system.
Go to their website at schoolentry.com, schoolentry.com.
All right, we continue our discussion about the Supreme Court decision from earlier today as it relates to affirmative actions six to three and six to two.
In one case, Judge Jackson recused herself from the Harvard part of the case, Harvard and the University of North Carolina.
Anyway, they rule against affirmative action.
Race cannot be a factor for college.
Very interestingly, Roger Severino, vice president of domestic policy at the Heritage Foundation, Trump's former director of the Office of Civil Rights, he actually wrote an article about this.
Said, for me, last month's Supreme Court argument in the Harvard affirmative action case was personal.
Growing up poor in Los Angeles, the son of Columbian immigrants, I faced my share of racist taunts and stereotyping.
I refused to let my worth and my story be reduced to a neat little box.
I refused to risk taking a spot from a more qualified student because they happen to be Asian American or white.
But most of all, I didn't check the box because I wanted to be able to say without any hesitation that I got into Harvard Law School because of my father's hard work, my mother's fervent prayers, and my own exertions, and no stigma, no guilt, no self-doubt, and most of all, no guarantee of failure or success, just a fair shot.
That's the freedom that comes with not checking the box.
That's what equal opportunity truly means.
And I hope the Supreme Court agrees, and they do.
Bill Jacobson also is with us, Cornell Law Professor who had written extensively about this case and founder of equalprojects.org.
Welcome both of you to the program.
Thank you.
You for having me on.
Roger, you mean literally not check the box?
Correct.
I did not check the box literally.
But the wonderful news is the box is banned.
It is dead and buried after this decision.
And my daughter, who I only speak Spanish to, and she only responds to me in Spanish, she's going to apply to the Ivy Leagues based on her merit, and she's going to have that beautiful freedom of being able to be judged on the content of her character and not the color of her skin.
And that's what this decision really represents.
You know, I was not surprised by the decision.
And you never want to listen to oral arguments and think you can get a read on how justices are likely to vote in the end.
But I thought it was pretty transparent that this was likely going to be 6'3, 6'2 in the one case.
And I think for a lot of reasons.
Now, you know, there's certain objective criteria that should be factored into admissions and probably should be the biggest factor.
And you can correct me, Roger, if you think I'm wrong.
I mean, every kid has an opportunity to take the harder classes in high school, the AP classes in high school, and get even better than a 4.0 grade point average and get straight A's through four years of high school.
You know, every kid up to recently, anyway, was taking an SAT test or an ACT test.
And it's the same test for every kid across the country.
And for those people that aced that test or those tests, I think that's a criteria that, you know, if you scored above, that probably means you studied more and probably, you know, put in the time and effort to do well on that exam.
Because it's not particularly easy to score, you know, over 1,500 on your SATs, or in the case of one of my nephews get a 1,600 or another nephew getting a 1580, if you can believe that.
And they both went to Ivy League schools as a result of it.
Now, then you have kids that maybe have a 1,400, but based on racial considerations, you know, why should they take the spot of somebody that had objectively better grades and better test scores?
And you're right.
And the test scores, those are the great levelers.
It doesn't matter where you come from.
You have the opportunity to be measured like everybody else, the same test that everyone takes.
It takes the subjectivity out of it.
And that's where minorities can thrive if given the opportunity.
And we have a broken education system.
We need more school choice to give more minorities that opportunity because we're trapped in failing government schools.
That's a bigger problem.
That's a front-end problem.
They were trying to fix that front-end problem with a back-end solution of racial preferences that says we're going to privilege some races and not others.
So I grew up in LA, very terrorist community, and my Hispanic friends and Asian friends, we're all in the same boat, all effectively poor, struggling.
The Asian students who did well were blocked by Harvard from getting in.
That is the moral of this story that came out of this decision.
Harvard said there were too many Asians, and they were capping them, and they used a quote, personality score to get around those objective measures because Asians were scoring higher on average.
But did you see Harvard's comment today?
Yes, we'll abide by the law, but they put in there the caveat that they will continue to look at other factors, which tells me they're just going to look to skirt around the law and to keep doing what they've been doing.
Oh, absolutely.
So I'm part of their alumni newsletter, and I received an email where a lot of hang ringing going on at Harvard.
And they said, and I could quote it for you, that they must admit and educate a student body whose members reflect and have lived multiple facets of human experience.
Okay, that is legitimate, except what they interpret that to mean is race.
And they make it very clear that they're still going to try to find a way to have racial identity be front and center because they really do believe, as Judge Justice Katanji Brown Jackson, and so do we are, that it's about structural racism and critical race theory.
There is no way out of this unless you do putting your thumb on the scale and lifting some races above others and putting others below others by force.
So, Professor Jacobson, Bill Jacobson, my understanding is you are a professor at law at Cornell University.
And about a year ago in October, this coming October, it'll be a year, you delivered a speech on the issue of affirmative action, dealing specifically with the North Carolina case and the Harvard case.
And you're also the founder of the website called Legal Insurrection.
You delivered your 30-minute remarks to a packed house and the Cornell Political Union, a nonpartisan debating society that brings speakers like you in to opine on political issues.
Tell us what happened.
Yeah, I mean, that's what's so amazing is so I participated in a debate, a so-called Oxford-style debate, where I gave my presentation against racial preferences.
And I made my presentation about all the reasons it's wrong, about counterproductive, et cetera.
And then the students there got to debate it and then they took a vote and they actually agreed with me, the majority of the students.
By the way, I hate to tell you, that kind of shocked me considering I know Ithaca and I know Cornell really well.
I've been up there many times for my kids' tournaments.
Well, because they could vote in secret.
It was secret ballot.
It wouldn't have been a majority vote on my side had they had to put their name on it.
And that's because everybody's scared to death on campuses to disagree.
But let me tell you, I run into students all the time.
People hate this.
They hate the racialization of education.
They would vote against it if it were on the ballot, like in California.
They voted against it.
I think Michigan, it was they voted against it.
People hate it, but they're afraid to say anything.
And that's why the administrators at Harvard who circulated that email right after the decision came down, which said, oh, well, the court says we can take someone's life experiences and they can work race into it that way.
These colleges and the administrators and the professors for the most part are so addicted to this sort of racialization of everything, they are going to try to find ways to get around it.
That said, this is a great decision.
I love this decision.
It was right, but it's not the end of the fight.
In some ways, it's just the beginning.
Do you believe, especially with the Asian American community, that there is institutionalized discrimination against them in admissions?
I think there is, and that's how the Harvard case proves it.
And the Harvard case, the only reason they could prove it were the SAT scores.
So what is Harvard and what are many elite schools now doing?
They're doing away with mandatory SAT scores.
Law schools are considering doing away with the LSATs.
Medical schools, some have already eliminated the MCATS test.
So they are not going to eliminate the discrimination in reaction to this decision.
They're going to eliminate the proof of the discrimination.
So this is going to go way underground.
This is going to take even more all this racism behind closed doors.
So again, I totally agree with this decision.
It's a great decision.
But I think people would be deluding themselves if they think that administrators at colleges who have built their careers around diversity, equity, and inclusion, built their careers around viewing people as proxies for ethnic and racial groups, are all of a sudden going to say, oh, the Supreme Court disagrees with us.
We're going to stop.
That's not going to happen.
The fight's going to be just as intense, in some ways even more difficult, because they won't do things so openly.
You know, I tend to agree with your complete analysis over here.
Quick break.
We'll come back more with Roger Severino and Bill Jacobson on the other side discussing today's Supreme Court decision.
All right, we continue with the Supreme Court ruling against affirmative action that race cannot be a factor for college admissions today with Roger Severino and Bill Jacobson.
Let me go back a little bit here and Harvard's reaction to all of this because I find that somewhat amazing.
And I really just want to get a little deeper into this because I think it's relevant, Roger, and ask you.
And, you know, the court held, they pointed out that Harvard's college admission system does not comply with the principles of the equal protection clause embodied by Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, the statement said.
The court also ruled that colleges and universities may consider in admissions decisions, an applicant's discussion of how race affected his or her life, be it through discrimination, inspiration, or otherwise, who will certainly comply with the court's decision.
It just sounds to me like it's going to be business as usual.
And I think that Bill makes a good point.
You know, all these schools, they're now eliminating SAT scores, ACT scores, LSAT scores now are not necessary for many law schools.
So they're taking away the one objective criteria, an equal playing field for anybody.
Yes, and there is one sign of hope.
Harvard was going to lose its case because the numbers were so stark.
Their discrimination against Asian Americans was undeniable.
And once the case took off, they started allowing more Asian Americans in.
All of a sudden, Asian Americans became more qualified, and now you have 6, 7, 8, 9% more than they were admitting before.
So the pressure had an effect.
Do you think the pressure ultimately will be financial damages down the road?
Is that what's going to impact them the most?
This does open the door to private lawsuits under Title VI, a law I enforced as the head of a civil rights office, which said you cannot discriminate if you receive federal funds.
Now, the Biden administration, I have no doubt they will do nothing with this decision.
In fact, they were probably going to resist it as much as possible.
Harvard has already signaled that in their view, to count as a diverse student body, you need to have an effective quota system.
And if they start counting, they're going to open themselves up to a lawsuit.
We will know over time just how bad the discrimination is because more lawsuits will be able to come.
And through the depositions, they'll put the administrators on the stand effectively and say, did you actually count the numbers?
And the answer is yes, they are in serious trouble when it comes to rates.
How did you make a decision at such a young age not to check the box, the box about your race?
Well, it was difficult because I had been a beneficiary of affirmative action.
And throughout college, all these doors were open to me.
Everything handed on a silver platter.
And I felt conflicted because I had an Asian girlfriend at the time who was bright and came from the same town as I did, same background.
She was flatly ineligible to get any of these benefits that I was getting.
And I could not live with myself.
You see, my kids play individual sports.
Well, they did.
They were both D1 athletes.
And, you know, the great equalizer about it is you're either good enough to play or you're not good enough to play.
You either are good enough to start or you're not good enough to start.
You're either good enough to get recruited or you're not good enough to get recruited.
I mean, there's certain other criteria as well that coaches look for.
They try to build out teams that have harmony and stuff, but there are people that are brought onto teams that bring things to the team that will have nothing to do with competitive play as much as leadership roles that they might play on the team.
And God forbid somebody gets injured.
You got to build out your lineup.
It's like half the team is on the football team, but they're not playing.
And you're pointing to another really important angle.
The people that are supposed to be helped by racial preferences, let's leave aside the people that are directly hurt, right?
Asian Americans and whites that are explicitly excluded.
Okay, how about the people you're trying to help?
It creates a mismatch.
This is absolutely proven by the social science.
When you put people in an environment where they didn't meet the qualifications, you are setting them up for failure.
A lifetime of self-doubt, what could have been, and resentment, right?
And then it just feeds upon itself this sense of racial division and creates racial animosity because you're setting up minority students for failure.
I saw it personally.
Those that were in the affirmative action programs with me did not thrive as the idea said that they would.
It didn't happen that way.
They were put in environments where they were falling behind, knowingly were put in those environments.
And that's unfair to them.
And it actually hurt them in the long run because they could have thrived in a different environment if you had.
Well said.
Maybe you're a D3 athlete.
By the way, that's something to be proud of also.
Anyway, appreciate both of you.
Roger Severino, thank you.
Bill Jacobson, thank you.
▲
Export Selection