About 1973, I took the Civil Service exam for employment at the Post Office. The guy that sat next to me asked if I thought I could score 100%, and I said I doubted it and why did he ask. He answered that most of the males in the room were Vietnam Era vets, and they got an automatic 20 points added to their scores.. So I would have had to have been a flawless candidate for the job to beat out one of these guys who was a mediocre candidate. Sure it seemed unfair at the time. But in hindsight, do I think those guys deserved a better shot at those jobs? You bet I do. Large numbers of vets were returning to the States, many having suffered all the horrors of war. It was the right thing to do for them . It was also in our society's interest to see that the transition from soldier to productive citizen was accomplished quickly. I contend that THAT affirmative Action program was quite worthwhile, and yielded positive results AT THAT TIME.

I think it is a mistake to toss all such programs into one basket and label them dangerous or worthless.

Regarding the Spanish language question, I am afraid that I come down against the teaching of regular classes in Spanish NOT because it deprives some students of the "language of power" in this country, but because it adds to a feeling of cultural separateness that endangers our continued existence as a society. I believe that many who advocate Spanish curriculum do so because they feel it is their right to do so because of their growing numbers, because of a feeling of Anglo chauvinism that they feel diminishes their culture, and because of a kind of a Kosovo attitude that many hispanics hold regarding the Southwest of the US; they feel that they were the earliest inhabitants, and therefore have an older claim to that area. I am not arguing those issues. But I suggest that language is the PRIMARY unifying force in the life of a nation, and we overlook that fact at our peril.

LEJ