DBlaze

That was the whole point of Jussie getting off scott free.  Someone made a phone call after a Trump win, to 1. Get him out of the headlines, 2. prove that people with influence are above the law, or don't have any accountability.  This whole thing was manufactured, Jussie knew what the outcome was going to be, that is why he maintained his innocence, even though the investigator laid out all of the evidence he had against him on national news, which right away I thought was going to screw up the whole investigation and get it thrown out anyway.  That was the plan.  

He basically judged him before Jussie had a chance to defend himself, no investigator comes out with all of the evidence they have before the time in court like he did.  He acted outraged, just like the mayor is acting outraged, but I think they are all in it.  Very smart way to make a Trump win seem like it doesn't matter because people with influence and power can make things go away.

But there is more to that case as well, and there are double standards.  Do you think if Smollet were an average Joe they would have spent that much time and effort in the investigation?  Hell no.  But then again, when it is a high profile case it has more pull than the normal.... the only thing that is the same is that if an average Joe did this, he would have probably been let go with a slap on the wrist or dropped charges as well, but no one would have known about it because no one would really care.

The whole thing stinks of conspiracy of the left.  

You are right... that is my mistake.  Both of them are pretty old though.

I think they are aware of her... they don't like her more than we don't like her.  Pelosi sees her as a little kid with a lot of enthusiasm, said with kind of a hint of sarcasm.  I think Pelosi pictured her when she told off those elementary school kids.

I don't think that debunks the theory at all.  They could do that just to get her out, but not claim it.  

It's kind of like the theory, where dems are not actually the ones paying for the caravans.  It could be the Trump Administration, or right wing organizations trying to make a crisis at the border in order to support The Don's objective.  I wouldn't rule either of them out.

So, where to stand on abortion again?  I think this is the biggest issue.  And this is where the SJW separates themselves.

I don't think there are any leftists out there that are pro-life, but I do believe there are quite a few out there on the right that are pro-choice, I am one of them.  I think the left adopts the feelings and the mentality of the left because they believe in a woman's right to choose, and anyone else who doesn't is crazy, so everything else they believe must be crazy.  I do think this is the same of the right with some people too, but not as high a percentage... I could be wrong.     

If it came out that Neeson agreed to an abortion back when he was 17, the right would have had his head as well. The pro-choice right would have just kept their mouth shut.

You are right.  I agree that he deserves a great deal of praise for admitting this, but I have been in that position, and I have never thought once about just beating on someone because they were the same race as the person that committed the atrocity.  We'll see how it playzOut, Outplayz. 

But, just because I have never done that does not mean I don't have empathy for him and the situation he was in.  

Ultimately, I think it will hurt his career because Hollywood is relentless on these kind of things.  They are not forgiving, and agents will be very reluctant to suggest films for him.

The intolerance is getting worse..... but.

I think it is getting better for everyday citizens that concentrate on localized elections, that don't pay the national news much mind. I think it is getting better on a person to person (face to face) interaction... though twitter, FB, and camera feed posts make it seem worse... I would venture to say the problems are less frequent than it used to be a year ago, unfortunately it looks more pronounced because of those social media outlets, the politicians and news outlets misrepresenting news stories out of non newsworthy events, portraying them as something they are not in order to cause an uproar and get more of an audience.

Politics used to be, and still is something that you just avoid talking about, but no one cares if you don't know the person, so the FB war ensues.

Have you seen the movie "The Oath"?

I agree that being a member of the KKK is in bad taste, and racist.... But what Bill Maher said on his show was a joke, people took it as offensive, then he apologized, but he would say it again in a heartbeat to the right audience.  Ice Cube said that blacks own that word and white people have no business saying it...... but if it is in the context of a joke, like it was for him, I don't think he needed to apologize or wanted to, he just did it to save face...Then after that, all was forgotten because he is a left progressive.

I had a friend who is Filipino, he dressed up as Lil Jon, didn't have to paint his face black, he was already dark, but not quite dark enough.  He went around saying OOOKAAAY! all night long, it was hilarious. If he had actually painted his face darker to look more like him, would that have been racist?  In contrast, if he were white, would it be different as well?

I think Neeson was just conveying how good people can sometimes have impure thoughts  due to circumstances they have been in, and emotions can sometimes takeover leading to irrational behavior  (that is what happens to people with PTSD too, we don't call them racist).  Maybe a bit of a confession as well hoping that the majority of people will think he is overall a good person (I guess because he is an actor?) 

But this is a problem that minorities do face.  Back then, blacks were about 11% of the population of the US.  So, when the majority of people that you see, day after day are white, and nothing like this ever happened before (I'm not sure exactly where he was at the time, I'm assuming US),  the one time that this does happens to a loved one, and the person happens to be black(11% of the pop, and maybe even less depending on where he actually was).... it is going to negatively affect your thoughts of people in that culture, whether you know it/like it or not.  At least that would be a normal reaction to a horrible personal experience.   It doesn't make it right, it is just human nature.  People don't seem to have any empathy for that.

No, I didn't read about it, but you talk to people about it, some say it is the best, some say it is the worst and go to the hospital because they don't know what to do with themselves.  If taking something like that requires a spotter to make sure you don't freak out, and seeing things that are not really there, it should really be considered a problem drug.  Also, the more you do it, the more you change.  Yes it brings different perspectives in your head, it brings different thoughts, but do these different perspectives change you for the better, or for the worse.  

I myself, wish I hadn't done them because I feel different for the worse.  And yes, that did happen to me.  I was really scared for no reason.... And not paranoid like I was going to get arrested for taking an illegal drug, but scared of the people around me, and how I was acting, and what to do if certain situations arised. 

Yes... Good video.  I still believe there is a far right though, which is just as crazy as the left.  I know that all of those people advocating for Northam to resign have thought something like Neeson did at some point or another in their lives.  

I can kind of see back in the 80's, doing a talent show, or dressing up during halloween, where people didn't take offense to really anything because it was Halloween. You just didn't dress up as a famous person who died too recently, you have to give it some time.   Now people are getting offended for other people instead of looking out for themselves.  There is something called a distasteful joke, but really, only to the wrong audience.  

Your are probably right about the Clinton impeachment to an extent, but I think it is mostly social media and technology.  It has made the world much smaller, and has brought attention to things that wouldn't have been known at earlier times... and would not have been news worthy.  Now people can argue with each other about the smallest tweets or videos of situations, call each other names, tell them they are going to find them and punch them in the face, as far as I know they never do (you wouldn't see these arguments in the street, only online).. Actors and entertainers that opinions are respected (I honestly don't know why people look up to them), chiming in like they know more than everyone else, without having any idea of what the situation really is. 

It's also the never ending want and need for a utopia....... Which is and always will be a wish, it does not exist.  As long as people exist, a utopia will not.  

 

It didn't teach anyone anything.  Now, since NY passed a law to kill babies after they are born and VA is trying to, some loony person on the right dug up some old material from Va Governor Northam's old yearbook that portrayed him being racist to get him out of office.  It almost worked, and may still work... Now, his predicessor to be, Fairfax has been accused of sexual assault back in 2004. 

The loony right and the loony left do their best to ruin people's lives.  People act like it happened yesterday.

No one is going after Sam Malone for dressing up as black face when he was dating Whoopi!  It was a joke people, and it was ok back then.  Get a grip. 

FYI, I don't agree with killing babies after they are born, or even in the third trimester unless the woman may not survive, or both.  Though a law like that should never be passed, stop trying to dig up old dirt on people that have probably changed (with the times) over the passed 40 years.

He also said how horrible he felt for that time period, looking back at it and how irrational it was. 

It was hie emotions that were getting the better of him and he realized the error of his ways.  This is the error of the left, letting emotions lead you in your thought process and ways to combat them, regardless of how irrational they are.  

This will probably hurt his career, and it should, but at least he had the balls to come out and say what he actually thought in that state of madness, disheartening, fear and anger.  No one is a stranger to this feeling if someone has hurt a loved one and there is really nothing you can do about it.  Lashing out seems to be the right response at the time, but it never really is.

The problem with that is, you really don't know the potency of the mushroom you are taking.  And it's not like drinking alcohol for the first time, you get sick and feel horrible pretty really quickly.  With Mushrooms, you can take a lot in the time that it actually starts to affect you.  You can sit there waiting for it to take affect and think nothing is happening, so you take more, then it finally hits you, then you realize you have taken too much, and you hallucinate and these hallucinations can be dangerous depending on what your mental state is, which is not a good thing.

And yes, I am sorry, I got a little ahead of myself when you mentioned decriminalization.  Sorry about that.  I would be more inclined to accept that than legalization. 

Depends on who you are.  I know when I did them I thought everyone was the devil, saw and heard things that weren't there, smelled things that were not there, I wanted to be left alone, only I didn't like being alone.   That is pretty much the definition af a psychotic mania breakdown.  

The other things is, you can't go to sleep, so you are stuck in a state of mania until it wears off.  This is dangerous, not only to the person doing it, but others around them.

Anything that has the possibility of doing that to anyone (on the first time), should not be legal.

Yeah, if being completely insane for up to 12 hours is not harmless, then by all means, legalize it.

Free speech is one thing, and I agree with you on the liberal attitudes and shutting down conservatives at universities and whatnot.

But.... 

You want me to put myself in a fetus' position?  Not knowing anything that is going on.... Funny, you should have said shoes instead of position, I would have said they can't even wear shoes because they are inside the mother being sustained by the mother biologically.  It doesn't have a choice of life, it doesn't have a choice of death either.  Maybe it never wanted to be born.....

You might as well call masturbation murdering.  Is sperm not alive?  Where does the murder actually begin? 

Conservatives are not usually protesters, except when it comes to the pro-life aspect, which I do not agree with because they are invading others privacy.  They do like to speak at venues and share their thoughts in mostly aspects that affect their own lives as individuals.    

Believe me, overturning R v W would be a bad decision on a number of fronts.  I just say let people decide for themselves.  You don't agree, that is fine, enjoy life of calling everyone who has one a murderer.  You probably know quite a few already, you just don't know it... and if you did, would you condemn them?  Hate them for the rest of your life because they made a decision that did not involve you at all?

Sex addict, bipolar, and pro-life is not a good combo.

Because she is pro-life.

Every single one of those abortions, there was a reason for.  Would you rather some unfit person have the baby, refuse to give it up for adoption, do their best to take care of it, just to find out that they couldn't and the kid is ruined for the rest of his/her life?

That has been my experience with the renters I have had in the past.  That is also the experience with a friend of mine who had 4 kids, couldn't support them, Dad had to sell drugs on top of his pretty good salary, then got caught up in them and went to jail... Mom is now in now in jail because she went crazy and Grandad who just retired is caring for them, but is complaining that he can't enjoy his retirement.... The kids are suffering, they lost mom and dad.... They are not happy kids, and will probably end up just like their parents.

But the main reason, is I don't believe someone should have to change their whole lives because they were making love.  Is having sex deserving of a life sentence?  Parents have to drop out of school to support the new family, when they could have waited until they actually graduated, got a job, had the means to take care of the kid, then brought the kid up correctly.  

If we all dealt with the problems that only we were having, society would be grand.... instead you are standing up for something that no one is forcing you to do.  No one is yelling at you, no one is saying you are evil for what you believe, but you are calling good people murderers, and it is pretty darn mean.  If you don't want to have an abortion, then don't... your belief is still with you.  Let god do the judging and stop the marching, its not going to do a lick of good.

Roe v Wade will not be overturned.... ever!  It just makes too much sense.   Just deal with it.

It is not selfless, I would call it more selfish to impose your thoughts on to other people.... think of them as murderers and hate them for it when you have no idea about the circumstances that made them make the decision.... I can tell by the way you say it "commit abortion."

I don't believe in speeding... but I am not going to go lay in the street to try to stop people from speeding, or march against speeders unless it is right outside my house where my kids play.....  That is when it affects me. 

 

Here is a better analogy.

If I believe the speed limit is too fast in front of my house, I may go argue that they lower it, but I'm not going to someone else's neighborhood to argue that point.  It does not affect me or my family.

Your analogy is not very good, you are talking about something that is legal and comparing it to something that is illegal, but I tried my best to respond.  

On another note, how do you make the response blue like you did so I can respond to a particular question or retort for better organization?

Again, you are thinking about other people and their problems..... it does not affect you in the least, have your beliefs and they can have theirs.

I respect your beliefs.  I just ask that you respect mine.  But I guess it doesn't work both ways, does it?

Here is my problem with pro lifers..... Pro-choice people are not forcing anything onto other people, they are saying ok, if you want to be pro-life... fine... but I want to be pro-choice.

Pro-lifers are complaining about other people and acting as if they know their situations and saying... hey, you can't do that!  and I am going to have my say in your life. 

Here is where I say to them, "mind your own business!"  "Deal with your own family, and I will deal with mine the way I see fit."

If everyone just worried about themselves, we would be a much better society.  Stop pushing ideology, social behavior, and what you believe is right and normal on other people when it does not affect you or yours in the least.  

Get involved when it does affect you or your family, otherwise live your own life.  Every person in the world has enough to worry about, why encroach on other peoples?

Ram,

Do you have any proof that actually says that Trump was considering signing a bill to keep the Government open?   Not so much as Rush or Ann saying that he shouldn't, but the fact that he was about to?  Is this on recorded anywhere?  Did someone in the administration say this? If so, when and where?

Or maybe to deflect that the border security issue is such a massive crisis, that Trump was willing to keep the government open until Ann Coulter and Rush Limbaugh told him to?

Why do they care so much?  If people (countries) would just take care of their own, we wouldn't be having these problems.  People are starting to care more about the people that they don't know than the people that they do know.  People are being empathetic to people in certain situations that don't even know why they are in that situation in the first place.  

My roommate, who used to be homeless, that I have provided free shelter for in order to get her life back together just lost her job today, that took forever to get.  She was complaining about the injustices in her work place to her boss, nothing about her own situation, but other peoples... basically talking down to him.  You just don't do that to your boss, no matter how bad it is,,, you work your way into it by using office politics, then correct it when it is part of your job... not before then.

She got fired because she cared more about other people that she doesn't even know than her own family, which she was trying to get back, now that is an impossibility and we are back at square 1.  I blame the education system for this, the politicians, the media, movies, advertisements, leniency, me too movement, the non bullying movement or whatever you want to call it etc. which make people believe that life should be fair.  Guess what, it isn't and it never will be.

Let's take care of our own first, then we can concentrate on other people... build the wall! 

This idio-ump and Trumpanzee thing you are doing was tiresome and childish from the start, now it is just getting ridiculous and starting to sound a bit like you need help, honestly, it is making it hard for me to take you seriously.  Can you have one post without saying both of those, I guess you would call them, insults?   What are you hoping for?  The made up names to go mainstream or something? 

Something normal posted from you might be a nice change of pace, instead of trying to be a.... poet?

many congressman are saying if the wording changed, they would support it.  If they just called it a fence.  It is something he ran on, and most have just given up in the past, or compromised in a way that wasn't really compromising.  

Law enforcement waved bye bye to me a long time ago.

Bill Clinton was a Democrat.

This is so true, that is why many government workers are useless, and many government jobs are useless.  Also, when a lifetime Government worker transitions to the private sector, they can't keep the job because they had no idea how hard it actually is.  All private companies have essential jobs, there would never be such a thing as a partial private company shutdown because all jobs are essential to keep the company going.  Apparently, this is not the case with the government.  Some jobs are deemed non essential, which tells me we need to get rid of some of them, in fact, we need to get rid of a lot of them. 

I'm hoping, in the future, your statement above will not be true, we don't need more useless people in the government not really doing anything. 

We do need to get rid of the minimum wage.  If the job you do is not worth the minimum wage, then you are just taking money away from people that deserve it, or you are raising the cost for the services that are offered making it harder to support the whole company.   

Is that some sort of joke?  If it is, it went over my head.  That doesn't usually happen.

You don't think technology can be overcome?  We don't have enough manpower to protect every square inch of the border.  Why do you think we have walls and technology around our embassies and our military installations, even in our own country.  These are all walls to keep people out.   It would even be easier to monitor with technology because there wouldn't be any hidden areas, or ability to block the technology, all they have to monitor is the top of the wall.  Even heat sensors can be overcome.  

This 5 billion is measly compared to the other expenditures we have approved.  Giving monetary help to other countries who spend it incorrectly is pointless.  This is actually not pointless.  I spent some time in jail, you have no idea how many illegal immigrants are being shipped around the country to certain states that are lenient, like MD.  I met some really messed up people that did some incomprehensible violent things in the name of MS-13. 

My property taxes skyrocketed all in the name of education for children of illegal immigrants.  There are so many that the school system cannot sustain them and it affects all the kids, and the teachers ability to do what they need to do.  The county I live in used to be one of the best public education systems in the nation (in MD)... That fell by the wayside about 10 years ago when Obama came to power.  His people with his vision were voted in, and tolerance was the name of the game.

Do you think that the 5 billion that Trump wants to spend on the wall is going anywhere else but to try to improve other countries, which we have been doing for years?  I don't even understand how we can give other countries money when we are so far in debt it is unbelievable.  One thing I am disappointed on about Trump is the inability to improve on the deficit.  I thought he would understand and treat the country more like a business.  That is only partially true.  Let's put this another way, if you were in debt as much as the country is now, would you take what you do have and donate it to other people?  You like to think you would, but you wouldn't.  We need to stop the needless spending, and work on our own debt, building a wall would help both to keep people out as well as decreasing the dependence on social programs, it's a win win. 

The majority does not matter, that is why we have the electoral college.  It was a good sample size, but 67% of the people in that poll were either Democrat or Independent, and from my experience, independents usually tend to lean a little left.  The margins are still pretty close, just like the election, but the media is saying that no one wants the wall, and if you do, you are racist and immoral.  If that is the case, then so is all of congress that all of the sudden doesn't want it, changing their position in the past 5 years.  As of the about the past 10 years, the new take on America is a country of tolerance, a melting pot of cultures and ethnicity... It is Un-american to build a wall, but this wasn't the case not too long ago.  

What is funny, is I think the people in the US think of it as the above, but people who want to come here, which is almost everyone, still see it as the land of the free, a great chance for opportunity and economic prosperity.  It can only stay this way by capitalism and individualism, but as time goes on we are getting separated into groups.

The other thing is, the stats are still pretty close on who wants the wall and who doesn't, so where are the media outlets reporting on the people that do want the wall.... It is non-existent because they have an agenda to make people think Trump is dumb, and to blame him for everything that goes wrong, when in actuality, it is the liberal congress who wants to continue having illegal immigrants come into the country, and advocating no identification for voting.  They are trying to keep people down and at the same time, rise themselves up, and build government towards communism.

They are doing new polls as we speak.  They continue to do them, I don't know who these people are or the sample size, but they are still polling, almost every day in order to see how many people are losing it because of the shutdown.

The media continuously mentions how the majority does not want the wall, based off of polls.  I do not believe polls, they poll people that they want to poll, and whom they have access to poll using methods not available to everyone.

This is why the wall is needed:  No one really has any clue about how many people make it in to the US by sneaking over the border.  No one has any clue about how many drugs make it across border lines.  They make stats based off of assumptions.  There is a stat that 40% of the illegal immigrants that are here are just overstaying their visas, and they call these people undocumented immigrants... that is far from the truth, they are documented, we know exactly how many people are still here that overstayed, and these are the people that already passed the security checks in order to be here in the first place, which probably means they are still productive citizens and not running around breaking other laws or committing violent acts.  

The people that we don't have a true count on that crossed the border by sneaking over are the ones that are probably committing most of the crime and are not contributing productively to the country.  They never passed a background check, or were approved for visas to work in the US.  These are the true undocumented immigrants.  

A wall just makes common sense.  If we were able to count the people that made it across, they never would have made it across in the first place.  The truth is we just don't know.  Even if that stat were true about the 40%, that means, that with a wall, we would be preventing at least part of the 60% from making it across the border, which is better than nothing.

I'd like to know, out of the stats that the President said in his speech regarding the illegal acts by illegal immigrants, how many of them were overstayed visas and how many were border crossers.  I think that would be a good stat to announce.

Some of them may have made quite a bit of money, but nowhere near what Trump has made. I bet withholding a paycheck would hurt everyone in someway.  I'm not "hurting" right now either, but not getting paid would be a big problem for me.  It hurts everyone based on what they expect to get at what time.  They make what 170 a year, maybe some other means like you said... 

If it wouldn't hurt them, then why would they make themselves exempt to this?   Because they were afraid it might happen.  

Congress should not be paid either.  That might put a fire under their butts.  The President shouldn't be paid, they should all have to pay consequences for not coming to an agreement and causing this shutdown.  They've known they were not going to come to an agreement since he was elected, so they wait until the last minute.  Everyone is to blame for this.  No one should be paid that has anything to do with this shut down.

The president won't care, he has enough money.

I think that statement is hypocritical.  If people felt the need to conform to the stereotypes of a gender, and the only way to do that is to become a different sex, then everyone is still conforming to the old stereotypes and nothing has changed.  In that way of thinking, the very fact that a man feels he needs to change his sex because he does womanly things supports the stereotype.  

If we want to change things, then it is the stereotypes that we need to denounce, not change the biological sex that someone was born with.  We shouldn't call them man or woman based on what it is they do or how they act.  Unfortunately, the majority of the population do act as the stereotypes suggest.... 

So, in my opinion, transgenders are not helping their own cause, they are actually doing it harm, if all they really want to do is change the stereotype.  Do you really need to be a girl to act like one?  Or is that still an insecurity due to societal norms?   

There is no need to mix science and actual fact with the way that people feel inside.  If you are trying to make the outside look like how you feel inside, then you are conforming to what society believes you should be.  

Bottom line is, you were either born a man or a woman, no one can change that.... and on a rare occasion you can be born both.... like Jamie Lee Curtis.

This was the local news, which is usually not as fake as National News... but, apparently, it is just as bad.

Then ensues the sh!tstorm of incorrect, misinformed, posts to social media, where 50 % of the population get's their current events.  

I saw on Liberal news that Trumps executive order denies the caravan and people wanting to cross the border Asylum... And a Federal Judge has blocked that order.  I was thinking to myself, Trump has gone too far... and I was on the judges side.  Then I saw that he actually is only referring to people who have already crossed the border illegally in these caravans, but still giving asylum to those who cross through the known entry point.  

This is an example of fake news making people hate Trump, when the actual order is common sense.  Most of the orders are, I should have known better when watching the news.

 

Why does the name Drumpf assume Canada?  I have been hearing that for years from all walks of people. 

What do you think GP? Is Disgusted from Canada or Europe (specifically the UK)...  I say UK.  He didn't respond to my Brexit comment though, I thought it was a very good point.  So, maybe British Columbia?

Why sad about Hogan?  

How would the private companies make money?

I love hearing people from other countries trying to influence our elections, and telling us what we are supposed to think and how dumb we are if we don't agree.  It is your right to do so, but don't pretend you know anything about the USA, and what it is like over here. You can read all the books you want about us, doesn't prove that you know more than any American who actually lives here.

Brexit was a prime example of Nationalists speaking out in the UK.  Are the 52% that voted for it racist?

Nationalism is not intrinsically bad, unless you are a globalist and don't agree with it, even then I don't think it is bad to love one's country.  But, if you are identifying a certain race or color in front of it, that means you are singleing out your own race, and don't care about nationalists of a different race than you.  There is no reason at all to put a color in front of the word, unless you have bad intentions.  

In that sense Black, white, yellow, green, brown, red... doesn't matter the color, if it is before Nationalist, it is racist.

It's like being a white chef... Who cares if the chef is white?

Now, you could say someone is a white gangsta rapper, because that is not very common, so the adjective has meaning.  But in the nationalism case, it is more like the cook situation above.

I never learned anything about 1984 in school.  I thought you were talking about the Van Halen album.

I had to think about that one a little bit.  Interesting... I'm still thinking about it.

If you apply the same standard as White Nationalist, then yes it is racist..... It is either a Nationalist or a Globalist.  Adding a color to it changes the meaning.  You either are or you aren't a Nationalist.

I always thought the term nationalist was a good thing, until I got more into politics, and I never understood why the term was used differently than it's true meaning, but I was brainwashed into believing it is a supremacist thing, and now I understand.  That is the problem, it is not a supremacist thing, and the world needs to go back to the true definition, someone seriously messed with that word. I think people became too lazy to say the word White in front of Nationalist, that Nationalist all of the sudden became synonymous with White Nationalist.

It started as a Nationalist which to me always had a good connotation (unless you are a globalist), then someone added White to it, which made it racist,  then they took out White, and it still racist.  Just a strange progression all around.

His context was the difference between a Globalist and a Nationalist...  He said he was not a Globalist, and he is a Nationalist because he cares about our country and it's interests first, but you didn't hear that from half the media outlets, or the newspapers.  

I prefer to use the dictionary in defining words.... it's much more useful that way, and people can converse intelligently if both parties know what the words mean.  That may not be the case in this situation.

I did hear about that.

If anyone wants to regulate minority participation in anything, and promote diversity, they should adopt a regulation that requires people to hire or accept the reflected percentages of the nation, or state, or city, or jurisdiction and the outreach of the institution . For instance, if blacks are 13% of the nation, they should be required to accept  or hire 13% blacks, if they are a nationally recognized institution.  This would promote diversity while keeping American values, helping immigrants to learn English, assimilate and at the same time expose everyone to different cultures.

But.... I don't really believe in that, it just makes more sense than any other regulation, as much as it sucks, it is a plausible solution..  If they want to regulate anything at all, it should make sense, this is the only thing, albeit still a horrible policy.   Although there are probably good outcomes like the ones I point out above, there are some disastrous consequences.   Just like socialism, communism, and the like.  They sound great, but they are far from it.  Just like any affirmative action policy, they need to go away completely.

If Harvard and other Ivy schools are completely overtaken by Asians, so be it.