If Obama wants to base public policy on sound science, not politics or ideology,?

I think he sees "ideology" and not science only where conservative and/or Christian principles are violated by what he plans to do.

As an example, some would say that the findings of the book The Bell Curve represent science, and that Martin Luther King's exhortation, based firmly on Christian teachings, that segregation was "sinful" and that people should be judged not by the color of their skin but on the content of their character were based on some "backwards superstition."

But I'd much prefer to live in a society guided by Dr. King's vision, whether it is more "scientific" or not.

Of course not.

It can be a conclusion of sound science to determine that members of some races are severely underrepresented in colleges, higher paying jobs, etc.

As long as you can scientifically determine that this can only be accounted for by conscious bias ("I don't like them people") or unconscious bias ("He doesn't really look like a CEO to me", "I don't see him finishing college"), than there is reason for keeping preferential treatment in federal laws.

This all, of course, to ensure that the best man or woman gets the job. Which is something different than what the majority unconsciously "feels" is the best man for the job.

right here right here. They play a interest of having their way screaming "racist" on the different facet. The ideology is to likely have skill with out sensible reason for it. i'm a Republican, yet i could have voted for Hillary Clinton. i comprehend it particularly is humorous, yet i could have known a great variety of the Democratic rules greater powerful if we hadn't long previous via the excellent silly interest that Obama and his supporters performed. Now, i'm as skeptical as could be.

No, that doesn't fit he real basis for public policy - emotion. Taxpayer funded stem cell research is actually an emotion driven issue. Stem cell is not going to raise Christopher Reeves from the dead, cure Michael J. Fox or cure paralysis, but it sounds good, so we get to pay for it.

Yes, he'd remove all references to race. Also he won't try to legislate global warming, and he'll give all the different energy proposals a fair shake.

But we already know that he is an idealogue, not a scientist. So that's all out the window.

it is sound science that their is discrimination

therefore no need to remove race from all federal laws

crash and burn

Indeed, let's stimulate science, not ideology.

No. The Democrats need to keep the victimization model going in order to pander to minorities.

The reference to race isn't there because he needs to add it because he believes in science, its because others don't.

In other words, there is no scientific reason to believe one race is superior to another. And for those who believe there is laws need to be passed.

That would be a positive step.