The article discussed two specific examples concerning recent court cases. The first court case concerned the preferences in the University of Michigan’s under graduate admission program, which the court struck down. However, and ironically, the court allowed for the university’s school of law to maintain it’s similar admission’s program. They disregarded the Constitution and the 1964 Civil Right’s Act, which state that no one can be penalized or benefited because of their race. This inconsistency clearly reveals the court’s uncertainty in regards to the comprehension/interpretation of the

For example, the article gives some possible answers to questions such as “How could bush go to war against one tyrant because he might be developing nuclear weapons while negotiating with another who just admitted that he has them?” The answer that it gives is that the North Koreans are showing a willingness to keep talking in that they admitted to their actions. However, Saddam is ducking and weaving and denying such accusations of producing nuclear weapons, which raises suspicions. The author explains that north korea has not attacked anyone in 50 years while Iraq is constantly invading it’s neighbors. He explains that the Administration believes that only a strong, forceful and brave response to such events that include terrorism and nuclear weapons is the only way that the civilized world would be saved. They also believe that this strong response would be the confrontation of the problems that were swept under the rug by the Clinton Administration.

Some topics in this essay:
North Korea, Bader Ginsburg, North Koreans, World Report, University Michigan’s, Right’s Act, Supremes’ Sophistry, Supreme Court, Pg37 Evil, Pyongyang Saddam, north korea, nuclear weapons, supreme court, preferences university, university michigan’s, america’s intellectual, world report, preferences university michigan’s, court court,