Cass Sunstein recently published an op-ed
on January 28 at Bloomberg.com saying that President Obama "firmly
rejects 'equality of result,' but is simultaneously committed to
ensuring both fair opportunity and decent security for all."
After that, Obama will pull a rabbit out of his hat.
If, according to Sunstein, the president "firmly rejects 'equality of result,'" how, then, will he be able to "ensure decent security for all"? Surely if decent security can be achieved for all, wouldn't that indicate that everyone has the same level of such security? Isn't that an exemplar of "equality of result"?
The phrases "rejects equality of result" and "ensure decent security" are diametrically opposed even when you discount the ambiguity inherent in the words "equality," "result," "decent," and "security".
After that, Obama will pull a rabbit out of his hat.
If, according to Sunstein, the president "firmly rejects 'equality of result,'" how, then, will he be able to "ensure decent security for all"? Surely if decent security can be achieved for all, wouldn't that indicate that everyone has the same level of such security? Isn't that an exemplar of "equality of result"?
The phrases "rejects equality of result" and "ensure decent security" are diametrically opposed even when you discount the ambiguity inherent in the words "equality," "result," "decent," and "security".
No comments:
Post a Comment