Trump DOJ to prosecute universities for anti-white affirmative action policies

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:White people just can't make it America anymore. Thanks, Obama. White people need more opportunity or they will be shut out from power.

Except that photo is of older white males, who were not harmed by AA policies (or at least not to the extent it's going on today). We are talking about white teenagers currently, who are rejected from colleges or grad schools in favor of lower-scoring minorities.

Ok. Who cares? F*ck the white males.

"Harmed"?? Just a bunch of snowflake p*ssies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hasn't SCOTUS already decided on the constitutionality of affirmative action? So glad taxpayer funds will be going to what's *really* important.

Yes screw little Johnny who got s 1600 SAT. he needs to give up his seat to Harvard because racism, right?

To little Jamal who also got a 1600? Maybe.

But you know that government can't tell Harvard who to admit, I hope.

That would be one thing but universities are giving preference to Jamal with a 1300 over mr white 1600.

Maybe Jamal with 1300 has a much more interesting back story to his life, has done a lot more admirable things, is a much better writer, a more talented inventor, won more awards, is a kinder person than Johnny who took 5 prep courses to get his perfect score but has never been out of his little cocoon of privilege and who obviously had help writing his essay.

I know which candidate I'd prefer.

How racist of the person who began the narrative of "Jamal" and "Johnny." They imply an admission system in which a certain name is associated with a certain race.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:White people just can't make it America anymore. Thanks, Obama. White people need more opportunity or they will be shut out from power.

Except that photo is of older white males, who were not harmed by AA policies (or at least not to the extent it's going on today). We are talking about white teenagers currently, who are rejected from colleges or grad schools in favor of lower-scoring minorities.

Ok. Who cares? F*ck the white males.

"Harmed"?? Just a bunch of snowflake p*ssies.

That's your attitude? F*ck the white males? Who else are you racist against?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Another waste of taxpayer money and another "oh, poor me" whine from the dumb whites.

Like "oh poor me" programs for Blacks? "Oh poor me my great great grandfather was a slave!"

No, Dear, like "Poor me, my great grandfather was a slave owner and now my boss is a woman or Black or Asian, etc and now one says Merry Christmas anymore!"

And "Oh, poor me! We spent six thousand dollars on an SAT tutor, another 3K for someone to write his college application essay and provide guidance, and another 800K on private school and my white son still didn't get into Harvard! Even after we paid for him to go on a church trip to help the pagan children!!"

Our white kids were National Merit semi finalists from public schools who were admitted to top tech schools We didn't have to do any of that nonsense. Most of their school friends are first generation Indians and Koreans. Although the Ivies courted them, they wanted to be educated and not get "the Harvard A."

[Anonymous]

Just out of curiosity could one of the many posters who are stomping and cheering in celebration of this recent shift in focus by the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division please give me an idea of just how many universities you expect to be actually sued over affirmative action admissions policies deemed to discriminate against white applicants?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Cal tech admissions model for all schools.

Cal Tech is 29% whites, 41% Asian and 16% URM.

MIT is 35% white, 26% Asian, and 20% URM.

All the white people clebrating this need to take a minute and realize that if college admissions were truly race blind, there would be fewer whites and fewer URMs, and a lot more Asians. Right now, Asians are the group that takes a hit on college admissions, not whites. And both of the big lawsuits out there on race based admissions are brought by Asian Americans-- not whites.

Didn't attend CalTech or MIT, but even I know your numbers don't add to 100%. Who did you leave out?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

You are good at making assumptions. I don't have to be black to make a case for Affirmative Action. Holocaust is bad but not nearly as bad as slavery which went on for centuries and killed millions of blacks and deprived them the very humanity you take for granted. It is much much worse than Holocaust. No one said everything is someone else's fault. But slavery, jim crow, cop shooting of unarmed blacks, harsh criminal justice reserved for minor black crimes are all on the hands of systemic racism.

oh

Here we go again. Let's see whose history is worse - descendants of slaves or descendants of the Holocaust.

lynchings
gas chambers
rapes
brutal force
starvation
child labor
breaking families apart

You must be very competitive, PP. but for all the wrong reasons . . .

Um and how many rapes, murders, and robberies have blacks committed against whites? They commute violent crimes against white demonstrators FAR more frequently than whites against blacks. So we should reward them?

Well, if we're trying to keep score, AAs have a long way to catch up. Look out, whitey.

Most AAs have slaveowner ancestry as well. This is something that many AAs seem to conveniently forget about whenever they can beat white people over the head about slavery.

This is the typical defense of the coward. A heinous crime is justified because someone else committed it too. And it's such an exaggeration that blacks were slave owners in America. Even if it was true it pales in comparison to the scale of white slave owners.

Did someone say that slavery was justified? And you are clearly not understanding the point. The point is not that some "blacks were slave owners." The point is that many blacks like to point out that their ancestors were raped by cruel white slaveowners, while conveniently omitting the logical implication that this means that they themselves are descendants of those cruel white slaveowners and are in no position to be condemning other people's ancestry.

So are you saying if a black man rapes your wife and your daughter then your progeny will claim black ancestry as as theirs and celebrate it.

[Anonymous]

Opponents of affirmative action typically point to black or Latino students with lower grades and test scores than rejected white applicants.
But grades and standardized test scores are an incomplete and imprecise measure of merit.
No one - including the people who give the grades and write the tests - thinks they should be the only considerations.
Moreover, grades aren’t comparable between schools, so admissions officers also have to consider the difficulty of classes, the competitiveness of schools, and the extent of grade inflation.
Meanwhile, standardized test scores reflect well-documented racial and socioeconomic biases.
There’s no formula for how to account for all of this, so even looking at grades and test scores alone involves an inherently subjective and holistic evaluation.
Lawyers and courts can’t tell a university how to do this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Cal tech admissions model for all schools.

Cal Tech is 29% whites, 41% Asian and 16% URM.

MIT is 35% white, 26% Asian, and 20% URM.

All the white people clebrating this need to take a minute and realize that if college admissions were truly race blind, there would be fewer whites and fewer URMs, and a lot more Asians. Right now, Asians are the group that takes a hit on college admissions, not whites. And both of the big lawsuits out there on race based admissions are brought by Asian Americans-- not whites.

Didn't attend CalTech or MIT, but even I know your numbers don't add to 100%. Who did you leave out?

100% of American students were missing from the international IT competition in Tehran. Not part of the best and brightest being celebrated globally because of US Politics. To bad.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

But it is not because that is surefire way to create a permanent underclass citizens with blacks, hispanics and white trash. Asians do well because they come from a very favorable socio-economic background. Once you have that advantage then it matters less which college you get into(an Ivy or Public Ivy). Asians are stuck in a virtuous loop of educated parents make money pass it on to their kids who get top education who make even more money.

But a if black student is denied admission into the top college then its like denying the entire black community for generations after. Blacks are stuck in a negative loop. Blacks don't score well because of social status and are relegated to a a weaker school and the negative loop continues. One or two exceptional student will break this cycle BUT most will not. Is this what you want? Where is upward mobility for blacks?

How is it like denying the entire black community. Why do you only apply community when it comes to black people.

I am Asian and I went to Ivy League school. My parents had to make a lot of sacrifices to get me to where I am. I did not do drugs or skip classes I focused and made all the right choices but are you saying I dont deserve any success in life because I worked hard? I have seen lots of Black kids who squander the opportunities they have, why should they deserve any better? I have also seen other Blacks who have struggled and made the right choices and are doing very well.
People should succeed based on their life choices and hard work and not based on race.

I am asian too and I know for sure asians didn't suffer through the indignity of slavery and Jim Crow. I know Asians weren't systematically disenfranchised en masse when it came to voting. I know Asians weren't stopped from buying a home like the blacks were for various reasons until the 1980s, which stops them from accumulating assets or using home equity to pay for college. I know Asians don't have to live in dire circumstances with drug war happening in the neighborhood. I know Asians don't have to worry about cops shooting them on random traffic stops. I know Asians don't have to overcome the entire negative black stereotypes that blacks have to overcome no matter their own individual qualities.

I can keep going but You won't know how bad it is unless you live in their shoes OR have the compassion to feel some one else's pain.

One correction. Asians were often included in housing racial covenants unless they were domestic servants.

Carry on

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

You are good at making assumptions. I don't have to be black to make a case for Affirmative Action. Holocaust is bad but not nearly as bad as slavery which went on for centuries and killed millions of blacks and deprived them the very humanity you take for granted. It is much much worse than Holocaust. No one said everything is someone else's fault. But slavery, jim crow, cop shooting of unarmed blacks, harsh criminal justice reserved for minor black crimes are all on the hands of systemic racism.

oh

Here we go again. Let's see whose history is worse - descendants of slaves or descendants of the Holocaust.

lynchings
gas chambers
rapes
brutal force
starvation
child labor
breaking families apart

You must be very competitive, PP. but for all the wrong reasons . . .

Um and how many rapes, murders, and robberies have blacks committed against whites? They commute violent crimes against white demonstrators FAR more frequently than whites against blacks. So we should reward them?

Well, if we're trying to keep score, AAs have a long way to catch up. Look out, whitey.

Most AAs have slaveowner ancestry as well. This is something that many AAs seem to conveniently forget about whenever they can beat white people over the head about slavery.

This is the typical defense of the coward. A heinous crime is justified because someone else committed it too. And it's such an exaggeration that blacks were slave owners in America. Even if it was true it pales in comparison to the scale of white slave owners.

Did someone say that slavery was justified? And you are clearly not understanding the point. The point is not that some "blacks were slave owners." The point is that many blacks like to point out that their ancestors were raped by cruel white slaveowners, while conveniently omitting the logical implication that this means that they themselves are descendants of those cruel white slaveowners and are in no position to be condemning other people's ancestry.

So are you saying if a black man rapes your wife and your daughter then your progeny will claim black ancestry as as theirs and celebrate it.

It doesn't matter what they "claim" or "celebrate." If you are the product of a rape, your father is a rapist. It doesn't matter if you "claim" or "celebrate" him. He is your father. You may not like him, but you are his descendent and there is nothing you can do about it. If your white great-great-great grandfather raped your black great-great-great grandmother, you are just as much a descendant of the white rapist as the black victim. He is just as much as part of your family as she is.

My point is not that descendants of bad people should feel ashamed or guilty. I'm just pointing out the common hypocrisy that so much of black identity is based on "white oppressors enslaved/raped by ancestors" when you are often literally descended from those white oppressors yourself. If white people are implicated by what their ancestors did, then so are you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Ok. Who cares? F*ck the white males.

"Harmed"?? Just a bunch of snowflake p*ssies.

That's why I like this policy. It says the same thing back to you non-whites. You want to play the game, expect it back.

F*ck your soft tyranny.

[Anonymous]

White men used to rape blacks and it was ok. Then it stopped being OK. But then the white men weren't getting enough. So now it's OK for white men to rape blacks again.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Just out of curiosity could one of the many posters who are stomping and cheering in celebration of this recent shift in focus by the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division please give me an idea of just how many universities you expect to be actually sued over affirmative action admissions policies deemed to discriminate against white applicants?

That's in the weeds. What this policy will do is push back on this shit and send the message to knock it off. Merit based or life gets more difficult and screw the arbitrary race based multicultural agenda. That's enough for me!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:White men used to rape blacks and it was ok. Then it stopped being OK. But then the white men weren't getting enough. So now it's OK for white men to rape blacks again.

It's OK for white men to rape blacks? I think you should go back on the full dosage. The half-dosage is making you delusional.