[W:148] Affirmative Action promotes systemic racial discrimination.

[jaeger19]

more retarded blather-it's broken record stuff.

you don't even have the fortitude to answer the question of why black scores are so much lower at elite institutions OTHER THAN LOWERED STANDARDS.

Because SAT scores are influenced more by parents wealth, race and social status.
Not necessarily a good predictor of ability.

 

[TurtleDude]

Because SAT scores are influenced more by parents wealth, race and social status.
Not necessarily a good predictor of ability.

sure are a better predictor than race. -or the fact that standards at various schools vary wildly,

 

[TurtleDude]

Because SAT scores are influenced more by parents wealth, race and social status.
Not necessarily a good predictor of ability.

oh BTW why do wealthy black kids have so much lower scores at places such as Harvard compared to middle class white and Asian kids?

 

[LessBiased?]

Sure... I mean.. thats why when I went to a private elite university...
The population was mostly black....then Hispanic....

Oh wait... Thats not what happened. Gee..it was 98% white.

You silly people.

That's not what's being claimed.

What the evidence shows is that, relative to whites, the bar for admission is being lowered for blacks and Hispanics, and raised for Asians, rather than admitting solely based on merit, in order to change the composition of the student population. If it was solely based on merit, the student population would have less blacks and Hispanics, and more Asians.

Some of the blacks and Hispanics who were admitted deserve to be there, but many don't. Conversely, many Asians deserved to be admitted, but weren't, precisely because they're Asian.

If you went to an elite university, this shouldn't be hard to understand.

 

[jaeger19]

That's not what's being claimed.

What the evidence shows is that, relative to whites, the bar for admission is being lowered for blacks and Hispanics, and raised for Asians, rather than admitting solely based on merit, in order to change the composition of the student population. If it was solely based on merit, the student population would have less blacks and Hispanics, and more Asians.

Some of the blacks and Hispanics who were admitted deserve to be there, but many don't. Conversely, many Asians deserved to be admitted, but weren't, precisely because they're Asian.

If you went to an elite university, this shouldn't be hard to understand.

 

[jaeger19]

That's not what's being claimed.

What the evidence shows is that, relative to whites, the bar for admission is being lowered for blacks and Hispanics, and raised for Asians, rather than admitting solely based on merit, in order to change the composition of the student population. If it was solely based on merit, the student population would have less blacks and Hispanics, and more Asians.

Some of the blacks and Hispanics who were admitted deserve to be there, but many don't. Conversely, many Asians deserved to be admitted, but weren't, precisely because they're Asian.

If you went to an elite university, this shouldn't be hard to understand.

Nope.. Its easy to understand.
White people.. by and large have more advantages than african americans and Hispanics in general.
Nothing to do with ability or "deserve".. but simply the advantage of being the white majority with its economic, social and cultural advantages.

African americans have the least advantage, followed by hispanics.

Again.. this is nothing about ability.. but simply about advantage in SAT scores from that systemic bias.

So.. if universities don;t want to be all white. They have to lower the standard for SAT scores.. so that minorities can get in. Its that simple.

Doesn;t mean that the minority "doesn;t deserve to be there".. any more than it means the white person with high scores does.

So when I was on the admissions committee for a medical program.

We might have several hundred candidates. All who met the minimum criteria for entrance. All who would be likely excellent medical providers.

Out of those several hundred.. there might be 50 minorities.

Now.. based PURELY on scores.. which are not indicative of ability (a person with an 20 point increase in score is not necessarily going to be a better provider) We would likely have to give all 100 spots to all white people. (maybe not but likely).

But again. The white kid with the top score will not be the best provider or any better provider necessarily than the person with the lowest acceptable score. In fact.. they may be worse.

SO.. is it important that minorities be in medical schools? Of course.. IF you care about having better medical care. The populations that we serve are very diverse. Having social and language and cultural similarities helps you diagnose and treat and interact with your patients better. All studies show this. I mean I hear time from time from white people how it doesn;t matter... until I hear them complain that they were uncomfortable with that "foreign doctor"... because they felt he didn;t listen.. or that they couldn;t understand his accent.. or that she didn;t seem to care that they were in pain from a baby.
(True story. One of our ob/gyn providers was from East Africa. Got her medical degree from Albert Einstein. Patients complained all the time about her not giving enough pain meds etc during labor. And frankly her cultural attitude toward labor pain was different than typical "american" women).

SO understand the problem. now as far as Asian americans being not accepted? That would seem problematic since they are still a minority and constitute a minority in schools.

 

[LessBiased?]

Nope.. Its easy to understand.
White people.. by and large have more advantages than african americans and Hispanics in general.
Nothing to do with ability or "deserve".. but simply the advantage of being the white majority with its economic, social and cultural advantages.

African americans have the least advantage, followed by hispanics.

Again.. this is nothing about ability.. but simply about advantage in SAT scores from that systemic bias.

So.. if universities don;t want to be all white. They have to lower the standard for SAT scores.. so that minorities can get in. Its that simple.

Doesn;t mean that the minority "doesn;t deserve to be there".. any more than it means the white person with high scores does.

So when I was on the admissions committee for a medical program.

We might have several hundred candidates. All who met the minimum criteria for entrance. All who would be likely excellent medical providers.

Out of those several hundred.. there might be 50 minorities.

Now.. based PURELY on scores.. which are not indicative of ability (a person with an 20 point increase in score is not necessarily going to be a better provider) We would likely have to give all 100 spots to all white people. (maybe not but likely).

But again. The white kid with the top score will not be the best provider or any better provider necessarily than the person with the lowest acceptable score. In fact.. they may be worse.

SO.. is it important that minorities be in medical schools? Of course.. IF you care about having better medical care. The populations that we serve are very diverse. Having social and language and cultural similarities helps you diagnose and treat and interact with your patients better. All studies show this. I mean I hear time from time from white people how it doesn;t matter... until I hear them complain that they were uncomfortable with that "foreign doctor"... because they felt he didn;t listen.. or that they couldn;t understand his accent.. or that she didn;t seem to care that they were in pain from a baby.
(True story. One of our ob/gyn providers was from East Africa. Got her medical degree from Albert Einstein. Patients complained all the time about her not giving enough pain meds etc during labor. And frankly her cultural attitude toward labor pain was different than typical "american" women).

SO understand the problem. now as far as Asian americans being not accepted? That would seem problematic since they are still a minority and constitute a minority in schools.

First, there's no denying that racism is real, the playing field is not level.

Second, I think there's a place for AA in various settings, but it needs to be implemented carefully, otherwise the ratio of good/harm it does won't be high enough.

I think that med school admissions is quite different from elite university admissions. The latter is more competitive than the former, and there are tiers of colleges and universities people can attend which range from community college to elite universities, whereas med school admission in the US is sort of all or nothing, in the sense that it doesn't really matter much which med school someone attends, unless someone really wants the prestige of saying they went to Harvard or Hopkins (hardly anyone bothers to inquire which med school their doc attended).

I disagree that test scores aren't indicative of ability. Above a certain threshold, it may not matter much (say 1500+ on the SAT), but there IS a correlation between those scores vs IQ test results, academic performance, and career success. In elite university admissions, the bar is being set quite a bit lower for blacks as compared to whites and especially Asians. Again, I think this does a real disservice to the blacks who are qualified to be admitted based on scores and grades, because they become stigmatized due to the underperformance of blacks who were admitted despite having lower scores and grades.

IMO, the solution to all of this is not to lower the bar for admission of blacks, but rather to improve their K12 education and socioeconomic circumstances such that a higher percentage of them can achieve their potential and compete on merit with people of other races, and admissions should be absolutely race neutral. I would be delighted if that results in the percentage of blacks in elite universities being the same as the percentage of blacks in the general population.

 

[jaeger19]

oh BTW why do wealthy black kids have so much lower scores at places such as Harvard compared to middle class white and Asian kids?

IF you mean scores like SAT or MCAT.? Its likely cultural bias built into the tests. For example.. if the test question is a Zamboni is to ice like a ______ to wood.

Its quite possible that someone who was african american.. and rich as all get out.. is less likely to know what a Zamboni is.

Now..if you are talking just performance once they get to harvard? I would submit that the sample size of rich black kids going to harvard is simply too small to make any good judgements.
However, it could be things like cultural/social expectations, teacher bias, etc.

Unless you have some evidence that shows that african americans are just not as smart as white people.

 

[LessBiased?]

Side note: is anyone else besides me bothered by the terms "white" and "black" in reference to people, as though people can/should be classified by color, and that there are people who are actually white and black? I know of "Asian" people who are darker than some "black" people, but no one calls those Asians "black". And somehow it's offensive to call some people "yellow" or "red". Weird ...

We can call "black" people "African American", but does that make sense for people whose ancestors have been in the US for centuries? Should we not then insist that "white" people be called "European American"?

The language here is a mess, and is loaded with implications that the US is a basically a "white" country, and anyone who isn't "white" needs a prefix like "Asian" or "African".

I'd like to do away with the color coding and, if we have to group people, everyone gets a prefix of European, African, Asian, Carribean, Hispanic, etc. ... -American. But then that creates another problem, because the "Americas" include a lot of countries besides the US!

 

[LessBiased?]

IF you mean scores like SAT or MCAT.? Its likely cultural bias built into the tests. For example.. if the test question is a Zamboni is to ice like a ______ to wood.

Its quite possible that someone who was african american.. and rich as all get out.. is less likely to know what a Zamboni is.

Now..if you are talking just performance once they get to harvard? I would submit that the sample size of rich black kids going to harvard is simply too small to make any good judgements.
However, it could be things like cultural/social expectations, teacher bias, etc.

Unless you have some evidence that shows that african americans are just not as smart as white people.

I've heard the cultural bias argument. There might be some of that, but I think it's a small factor at most. I think the real problem is quality of education.

I wouldn't automatically rule out the possibility of genetic differences in IQ between races, but I suspect that they'd be insignificantly small, if they exist at all. I've never seen good evidence that there are any large differences, and the spread of the bell curves within each group would be much larger than the difference in averages in each group anyway. "Black people just aren't as smart as white people" would be a bad argument!

 

[Maidenrules29]

Pretty much everyone across the political spectrum will accept various kinds of 'handouts'. I've never heard of people on the right refusing medicare, social security, tax refunds, etc. And I'm sure there are plenty of women and minorities on the right making use of AA.

Medicare and social security are not handouts. They are taxpayer funded social infastructure that we all pay into so that we arent destitute when we are old. There is no politics in basic infastructure. Affirmative action causes people to hire less qualified people for a job and causes less qualified students entry into school over kids who did better.

 

[jaeger19]

First, there's no denying that racism is real, the playing field is not level.

Yep

Second, I think there's a place for AA in various settings, but it needs to be implemented carefully, otherwise the ratio of good/harm it does won't be high enough.

Well.. the problem is.. how do you solve a problem that is due to systemic racism? What does it take to break the system? Often more minorities in position of power. How do they get that position of power if systemic racism prevents it? Its a circular problem.
Implemented carefully? Well I agree but frankly.. in most settings.. lets say fire departments... the number of even close to qualified applicants is so low due to that systemic racism and cultural bias, that they basically throw up their hands and use a quota.. even though.. doing such actually violates affirmative action laws. But its the most expediant way for them.

I think that med school admissions is quite different from elite university admissions. The latter is more competitive than the former, and there are tiers of colleges and universities people can attend which range from community college to elite universities, whereas med school admission in the US is sort of all or nothing, in the sense that it doesn't really matter much which med school someone attends, unless someone really wants the prestige of saying they went to Harvard or Hopkins (hardly anyone bothers to inquire which med school their doc attended).

Well.. actually its more in the need for diversity in the medical providers such that the population is served.
However, I will point out that "tiers of colleges".. are not the same educationally where as medical schools are held to a standard since all medical professions that are licensed have to pass a licensing exam.

I disagree that test scores aren't indicative of ability. Above a certain threshold, it may not matter much (say 1500+ on the SAT), but there IS a correlation between those scores vs IQ test results, academic performance, and career success.

Well you said it.. above a certain threshold. We are not talking about someone who scores 600 on the SAT versus 1000.
We are talking someone who scores 1000 vs someone that scores say 1350.. That test does not have enough sensitivity to determine who is going to "excel". Cripes.. i graduated tops in my class at extremely rigorous schools both undergraduate, graduate and medical over many a person who scored better than I did on standardized tests.

 

[jaeger19]

In elite university admissions, the bar is being set quite a bit lower for blacks as compared to whites and especially Asians. Again, I think this does a real disservice to the blacks who are qualified to be admitted based on scores and grades, because they become stigmatized due to the underperformance of blacks who were admitted despite having lower scores and grades.

Pooh. I mean think on that. That makes no sense. So you, a black student get the same entrance requirements as a white person and gets a Cornell education and walks away with a degree in biology with a 3.92 GPA
MEanwhile, a black student who gets lower entrance scores but gets into Cornell anyway and graduates with a degree in biology with a 2.75 GPA.. is somehow HARMING.. the kid that got the 3.92???

How? How does that work out in the real world when the fellow with the 3.92 GPA walks in for a job? You think and employer says "well.. he got a 3.92in biology at harvard.... "but I heard about this guy that got in on lower credentials and got a 2.75!"

Come one. When you think about it.. it just doesn;t make sense. Its not how things work in the real world.

Whats really happening is that white folks.. many elites.. try to justify bias against black people.. and try to explain it away with..."but but I knew a guy that got in etc".

Cripes.. look at Turtledude here. He went to an elite college. You don;t think there were white privileged kids in his school that got in because daddy gave a donation? You don;t think there were white kids that partied in that school and that barely graduated by the skin of their teeth taking classes like "HIstory of polka dots?".
Is HE harmed by those kids that got in and did poorly? Why not?
think about that for more than a minute.

IMO, the solution to all of this is not to lower the bar for admission of blacks, but rather to improve their K12 education and socioeconomic circumstances such that a higher percentage of them can achieve their potential and compete on merit with people of other races, and admissions should be absolutely race neutral.

Sounds good. But you know how you raise the socio economic circumstances of those african american children. Oh right.. its having that dad who got into Cornell and graduated with a 2.75 in Biology.. that now has a much better paying job, and is a role model for his children... and can help them because of his education and better socieconomic situation..
How else to you propose improving their socioeconomic situation? Taking a poor or lower middle class family and then giving them enough money so that they are now at the level of a college educated biology major?
How does that work out?

 

[Maidenrules29]

scores.. which are not indicative of ability

I'll remember that the next time I'm at the DMV. If I fail the test I'll tell them to pound sand and give me my license anyway. Same thing if I take the civil service exam to work at the post office or the one the Home Depot gives you before you can work there.

 

[LessBiased?]

Medicare and social security are not handouts. They are taxpayer funded social infastructure that we all pay into so that we arent destitute when we are old. There is no politics in basic infastructure. Affirmative action causes people to hire less qualified people for a job and causes less qualified students entry into school over kids who did better.

I'm pretty sure that the taxes I've paid over the years are vastly more than what I'll ever get out of SS or medicare, so I'm subsidizing people who take more out of the system than what they paid in. If you want equity in that, you should get rid of SS and medicare, and ask people to save up to be able to pay those expenses when they get old.

I've hired many people over the years (of just about all of the 'races'), and have never been subject to any AA policies which influenced who I hired. As far as their performance, stereotypes were not met. The smarter and dumber ones spanned all the races.

 

[LessBiased?]

Yep

Well.. the problem is.. how do you solve a problem that is due to systemic racism? What does it take to break the system? Often more minorities in position of power. How do they get that position of power if systemic racism prevents it? Its a circular problem.
Implemented carefully? Well I agree but frankly.. in most settings.. lets say fire departments... the number of even close to qualified applicants is so low due to that systemic racism and cultural bias, that they basically throw up their hands and use a quota.. even though.. doing such actually violates affirmative action laws. But its the most expediant way for them.

Well.. actually its more in the need for diversity in the medical providers such that the population is served.
However, I will point out that "tiers of colleges".. are not the same educationally where as medical schools are held to a standard since all medical professions that are licensed have to pass a licensing exam.

Well you said it.. above a certain threshold. We are not talking about someone who scores 600 on the SAT versus 1000.
We are talking someone who scores 1000 vs someone that scores say 1350.. That test does not have enough sensitivity to determine who is going to "excel". Cripes.. i graduated tops in my class at extremely rigorous schools both undergraduate, graduate and medical over many a person who scored better than I did on standardized tests.

I'd say there's rather big difference between 1000 vs 1350 on the SAT. I'd expect a large and evident difference in ability and performance.

 

[LessBiased?]

Pooh. I mean think on that. That makes no sense. So you, a black student get the same entrance requirements as a white person and gets a Cornell education and walks away with a degree in biology with a 3.92 GPA
MEanwhile, a black student who gets lower entrance scores but gets into Cornell anyway and graduates with a degree in biology with a 2.75 GPA.. is somehow HARMING.. the kid that got the 3.92???

How? How does that work out in the real world when the fellow with the 3.92 GPA walks in for a job? You think and employer says "well.. he got a 3.92in biology at harvard.... "but I heard about this guy that got in on lower credentials and got a 2.75!"

Come one. When you think about it.. it just doesn;t make sense. Its not how things work in the real world.

Whats really happening is that white folks.. many elites.. try to justify bias against black people.. and try to explain it away with..."but but I knew a guy that got in etc".

Cripes.. look at Turtledude here. He went to an elite college. You don;t think there were white privileged kids in his school that got in because daddy gave a donation? You don;t think there were white kids that partied in that school and that barely graduated by the skin of their teeth taking classes like "HIstory of polka dots?".
Is HE harmed by those kids that got in and did poorly? Why not?
think about that for more than a minute.



Sounds good. But you know how you raise the socio economic circumstances of those african american children. Oh right.. its having that dad who got into Cornell and graduated with a 2.75 in Biology.. that now has a much better paying job, and is a role model for his children... and can help them because of his education and better socieconomic situation..
How else to you propose improving their socioeconomic situation? Taking a poor or lower middle class family and then giving them enough money so that they are now at the level of a college educated biology major?
How does that work out?

It's not "harm" in that direct sense, but it's taking away an opportunity from someone who merited it. I think that's wrong, and it causes social strife as we see demonstrated in this thread.

How to fix it? I think it's a tough problem. Hard to overcome the effects of a group starting here as slaves with no family structure and thought of as less than fully human. It took centuries of slavery before it was abolished, then another century until the civil rights movement, at a time when black people were often still treated as less than fully human. I think we just have to work on it from many fronts, trying not to implement policies which unintentionally cause excessive harm. I'm gratified to see the progress made in the past half century, which is my lifetime so far.

 

[Maidenrules29]

Pooh. I mean think on that. That makes no sense. So you, a black student get the same entrance requirements as a white person and gets a Cornell education and walks away with a degree in biology with a 3.92 GPA
MEanwhile, a black student who gets lower entrance scores but gets into Cornell anyway and graduates with a degree in biology with a 2.75 GPA.. is somehow HARMING.. the kid that got the 3.92???

This whole argument is about more qualified students NOT getting in in place of less qualified students. The way the college entrance should work is that the ones who studied the hardest and got the best GPA and won the awards get in to the best schools. If your scores are low you go to a lesser college. You can still go to college, just not M.I.T or Harvard because you WANT to. There are plenty of poor Asian students who get into top colleges because their parents push education. Should those kids be punished and not let into the college of their choice because a lower-achieving person that is just a little poorer gets in due to A.A. because of their different culture? Life wasn't meant to be fair. I would love to be an NBA player and make millions. But I'm uncoordinated and only 6"1. But I like to play and want to join an NBA team. Why cant NBA teams lower their standards so that uncoordinated short people can play?

 

[Maidenrules29]

I'm pretty sure that the taxes I've paid over the years are vastly more than what I'll ever get out of SS or medicare, so I'm subsidizing people who take more out of the system than what they paid in. If you want equity in that, you should get rid of SS and medicare, and ask people to save up to be able to pay those expenses when they get old.

I've hired many people over the years (of just about all of the 'races'), and have never been subject to any AA policies which influenced who I hired. As far as their performance, stereotypes were not met. The smarter and dumber ones spanned all the races.

I have also hired tons of people while a restaurant GM and I hired pretty much the entire cross section of humanity. Based soley on personality, energy, availability, and how I thought they would treat my customers.

 

[LessBiased?]

This whole argument is about more qualified students NOT getting in in place of less qualified students. The way the college entrance should work is that the ones who studied the hardest and got the best GPA and won the awards get in to the best schools. If your scores are low you go to a lesser college. You can still go to college, just not M.I.T or Harvard because you WANT to. There are plenty of poor Asian students who get into top colleges because their parents push education. Should those kids be punished and not let into the college of their choice because a lower-achieving person that is just a little poorer gets in due to A.A. because of their different culture? Life wasn't meant to be fair. I would love to be an NBA player and make millions. But I'm uncoordinated and only 6"1. But I like to play and want to join an NBA team. Why cant NBA teams lower their standards so that uncoordinated short people can play?

Very well put.

 

[TurtleDude]

Nope.. Its easy to understand.
White people.. by and large have more advantages than african americans and Hispanics in general.
Nothing to do with ability or "deserve".. but simply the advantage of being the white majority with its economic, social and cultural advantages.

African americans have the least advantage, followed by hispanics.

Again.. this is nothing about ability.. but simply about advantage in SAT scores from that systemic bias.

So.. if universities don;t want to be all white. They have to lower the standard for SAT scores.. so that minorities can get in. Its that simple.

Doesn;t mean that the minority "doesn;t deserve to be there".. any more than it means the white person with high scores does.

So when I was on the admissions committee for a medical program.

We might have several hundred candidates. All who met the minimum criteria for entrance. All who would be likely excellent medical providers.

Out of those several hundred.. there might be 50 minorities.

Now.. based PURELY on scores.. which are not indicative of ability (a person with an 20 point increase in score is not necessarily going to be a better provider) We would likely have to give all 100 spots to all white people. (maybe not but likely).

But again. The white kid with the top score will not be the best provider or any better provider necessarily than the person with the lowest acceptable score. In fact.. they may be worse.

SO.. is it important that minorities be in medical schools? Of course.. IF you care about having better medical care. The populations that we serve are very diverse. Having social and language and cultural similarities helps you diagnose and treat and interact with your patients better. All studies show this. I mean I hear time from time from white people how it doesn;t matter... until I hear them complain that they were uncomfortable with that "foreign doctor"... because they felt he didn;t listen.. or that they couldn;t understand his accent.. or that she didn;t seem to care that they were in pain from a baby.
(True story. One of our ob/gyn providers was from East Africa. Got her medical degree from Albert Einstein. Patients complained all the time about her not giving enough pain meds etc during labor. And frankly her cultural attitude toward labor pain was different than typical "american" women).

SO understand the problem. now as far as Asian americans being not accepted? That would seem problematic since they are still a minority and constitute a minority in schools.

in other words, racial discrimination.

 

[TurtleDude]

This whole argument is about more qualified students NOT getting in in place of less qualified students. The way the college entrance should work is that the ones who studied the hardest and got the best GPA and won the awards get in to the best schools. If your scores are low you go to a lesser college. You can still go to college, just not M.I.T or Harvard because you WANT to. There are plenty of poor Asian students who get into top colleges because their parents push education. Should those kids be punished and not let into the college of their choice because a lower-achieving person that is just a little poorer gets in due to A.A. because of their different culture? Life wasn't meant to be fair. I would love to be an NBA player and make millions. But I'm uncoordinated and only 6"1. But I like to play and want to join an NBA team. Why cant NBA teams lower their standards so that uncoordinated short people can play?

a brilliant answer. and numerous studies have shown that a black who is academically mismatched by getting into a school where his undergraduate record is inferior to most of the other students, is more likely to fail to graduate, or pass the bar than he would be if he went to a less selective school where he is academically competitive. at the top law schools-at least the ones that have first year grades, blacks dominate the bottom quintile. I worked with a guy who went to a very good law school who had been accepted at the BIG THREE-Yale, Harvard and Stanford. He went to a top ten school but not one of the big three. I asked him why. He noted that if he went to Duke or UVa or NYU or Cornell-he was at least in the middle 50% (he was phi beta Kappa at Marquette but his LSAT score was in the mid 600s and thus over 100 points lower than Harvard ) in terms of the scores. He knew if he went to especially Yale, his LSAT score put him near the bottom. So he went to a very good school, finished with a solid average, passed the bar on the first try, and last I checked, was a partner in a really good regional law firm. Not wall street, but he put three kids through good colleges and has a very good lifestyle.

 

[Logician Man]

a brilliant answer. and numerous studies have shown that a black who is academically mismatched by getting into a school where his undergraduate record is inferior to most of the other students, is more likely to fail to graduate, or pass the bar than he would be if he went to a less selective school where he is academically competitive. at the top law schools-at least the ones that have first year grades, blacks dominate the bottom quintile. I worked with a guy who went to a very good law school who had been accepted at the BIG THREE-Yale, Harvard and Stanford. He went to a top ten school but not one of the big three. I asked him why. He noted that if he went to Duke or UVa or NYU or Cornell-he was at least in the middle 50% (he was phi beta Kappa at Marquette but his LSAT score was in the mid 600s and thus over 100 points lower than Harvard ) in terms of the scores. He knew if he went to especially Yale, his LSAT score put him near the bottom. So he went to a very good school, finished with a solid average, passed the bar on the first try, and last I checked, was a partner in a really good regional law firm. Not wall street, but he put three kids through good colleges and has a very good lifestyle.

Please present a link to these studies ( multiple ) you speak of. Thanks

 

[weaver2]

Nothing made their original condition so bad as to warrant the Democrat bigotry and misogyny imposed upon them. That is like asking what the Africans did to warrant becoming slaves. Leftist filth love imposing their prejudices on others, and Affirmative Action is no exception. Anyone who supports Affirmative Action is both a bigot and a misogynist with an IQ well below room temperature. Which accurately describes the Democratic Party.

Nothing, eh? You're neither woman nor minority. How the hell do you know what gets imposed on them. But, you are right; Africans did nothing to warrant becoming slaves but there. They are slave. It's the same with women and minorities: nothing about their original condition warranted lower pay and unequal opportunity and yet there they are with lower pay and discriminatory promotion policies.

 

[TurtleDude]

Nothing, eh? You're neither woman nor minority. How the hell do you know what gets imposed on them. But, you are right; Africans did nothing to warrant becoming slaves but there. They are slave. It's the same with women and minorities: nothing about their original condition warranted lower pay and unequal opportunity and yet there they are with lower pay and discriminatory promotion policies.

what did a hard working son of Jewish or Chinese immigrants do to deserve to be denied a slot at Harvard despite having a 4.0 average and a 35 ACT and watching a bunch of blacks =many of which who are wealthier than he is-get in with 3.5 GPAs and 28 ACTs?