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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ironically, studies have also shown that physicians are more willing to prescribe pain medication to white patients.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/science/2016/aug/10/black-patients-bias-prescriptions-pain-management-medicine-opioids

OK, let's go with that study...

From your article:

“A black patient with the same level of pain and everything else being accounted for was much less likely to receive an opioid prescription than a white patient with the same characteristics,” said study co-author Astha Singhal, an assistant professor at Boston University’s dental medicine school.

To determine whether there was a racial bias in pain medication prescriptions, the researchers looked at more than 60m records of pain-related emergency department visits from 2007 to 2011 for people aged 18 to 65.

Five conditions were examined and divided into two categories: definitive and non-definitive. The first referred to conditions that were easily diagnosed – kidney stones and long-bone fractures – and the second to conditions that are not: toothache, abdominal pain and back pain.

Black patients had about half the odds of being prescribed opioids compared to white patients for non-definitive conditions, according to the study, which Singhal co-authored with Renee Hsia of UC San Francisco and Yu-Yu Tien from the University of Iowa."

----

So, what about all the other factors in white vs. black lives? They are different, you know. Was that covered? Were these standard questionnaires on current health to all the survey participants?

"the researchers looked at more than 60m records of pain-related emergency department visits" Great, so what was in the records? Were they standardized? Of course not. What did they choose to count and how did they weigh the factors? What were the pre-existing condtions?



Why should I put any merit in this study? It's a headline and when it comes to race, you love headlines. Meanwhile, did you dig into the study?

Funnily enough, I don't think YOU dug into the study.

The "headline" is attached to a newspaper article, which includes a link to the journal article. If you had clicked on that link and dug into the study yourself, you would know that the study was not based on questionnaires or interviews of patients, but rather was based on patient record forms completed by physicians. Physicians provide all the information--what the reason for the ER visit is, what services were provided in the ER, what meds were provided or subscribed. Clinicians also coded severity of pain.

There might be underlying differences in black and white patients, sure. The study controlled for some of these possible differences. It controlled for age and type of insurance, and how frequently the patient had been seen in the ER in the last year. But what this study found is that ER physicians--who know little else about a patient than what they've been able to glean during a 5 minute conversation--diagnose a black person and a white person of the same sex, age, type of insurance, and frequency visiting the ER with back pain and the same level of pain, but don't provide them with the same treatment. The white person is much more likely to get opioids administered in the ER and much more likely to get a prescription for opioids to take home with them. But if the black person and white person are diagnosed with a leg fracture or kidney stone, they do get the same pain treatment. Why the difference? Well, fractures and kidney stones have clear clinical presentations--you can prove someone actually has a fracture or a kidney stone--but you can't prove back pain or abdominal pain. ER docs sometimes suspect that patients reporting back pain or abdominal pain are drug-seeking. And this study suggests they are more likely to suspect black people of drug seeking than white people--even though rates of opioid addiction are much higher in whites than in blacks.

This study is not perfect--it didn't control for every possible difference. But the fact that no racial differences were seen in certain types of conditions while they were significant for other types conditions suggests that race is the important factor here, not other, unmeasured differences.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At bottom, Justice O'Connor's rationale for affirmative action was that leaders come from elite institutions and more minorities need to attend elite institutions. So a bump up for a kid qualified for Wayne State or Michigan State based on grades and scores but not Michigan will get him or her into Michigan. It's a very snobby, elitist perspective. If your nonURM kid's ox is being gored by that displacement, you won't like it. But if your nonURM kid stil gets in, you'll profess not to care and talk up the virtues of diversity. Taking a public position against affirmative action is socially very very risky.

As long as people continue to believe that more minorities at an elite school make it less elite, you're safe.

Just keep your talk to the undesirable minorities. Not a whole lot of guesswork needed there.

It's not that people believe "undesirable minorities' in and of themselves make the school less elite, it's that when you lower the academic standards for minorities so they can get in, then you make the school less elite. You're bringing down the average GPA and scores of the entering class.

Very soon - if we're not there already - we're going to have to lower standards for everyone at every level. And that's because most everyone will be unable to meet higher standards and/or unable to pay for it. Read what Harvard's president had to say about it.

http://freakonomics.com/2015/09/03/the-president-of-harvard-will-see-you-now-full-transcript/

Go about three-fourths of the way down to where she talks about endowments and the importance of public education.

You people aren't doing the undesirable majority any favors.

We already have. Have you heard about middle and high school "do overs" and other shenanigans in testing?

Look up the MCPS 50% rule. And this is one of the "best" school systems around.

lol

[Anonymous]

First Affirmative Action speech was giving at Howard University...Not Harvard, not Galludet, but Howard. That's for a reason because it was meant for American Blacks descendants of slaves & Jim Crow and to make up for those things. The 300 + years of racist/bias policies directed toward American Blacks meant we lack any type of GENERATIONAL WEALTH, especially compared to the larger White Society. If you listen to the speech and legislation the words DIVERSITY WERE NEVER MENTIONED. As Affirmative Action had ZERO TO DO WITH DIVERSITY it was meant to help American Blacks move up the ladder when it came to opportunities and Generational Wealth. It also was NOT RACE BASED as American Blacks aren't a "RACE" but a cultural/ethnic group inside the United States. A cultural/ethnic group with a unique history in a country they help built. As American Blacks were here before it was a United States or a 13 colonies.


Now what has happened is Affirmative Action has been distorted as White Woman have been the primary beneficiaries since 1970 the second beneficiaries are White Males whom both groups receive something called "Geographical Affirmative Action" because not only do these schools want RACIAL diversity but also Geographical Diversity. So if you are are white and live in WV, Texas, MS, Alabama etc you get "extra points' simply based on where your parents decided to set roots.....are we gonna end that program as well? Also they give White Americans Affirmative Action when applying to HBCU's...always have. Now it applies to anyone and everyone including Hispanics which is absurd.

True Affirmative Action was not created for DIVERSITY or for Whites, Asians, Hispanics, LGBT etc it was to make up for Slavery & Jim Crow which none of the groups experienced at the hands of the US Govt. As for as Asians, they need to stop the phony victimhood card. Asians are more than triple their population at ELITE SCHOOLS how can you claim bias when you are OVER REPRESENTED? Not only that but these Affirmative Action policy was instituted YEARS before a lot of these Asian student parents arrived here. How can you complain about a Policy that was created before you voluntarily decided to immigrate here? Asians are not VICTIMS of Bias. US has a unique history that its trying to make up for if those groups don't like it or understand it there are THOUSANDS of other countries and millions of other university outside the US they can decide to attend to

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At bottom, Justice O'Connor's rationale for affirmative action was that leaders come from elite institutions and more minorities need to attend elite institutions. So a bump up for a kid qualified for Wayne State or Michigan State based on grades and scores but not Michigan will get him or her into Michigan. It's a very snobby, elitist perspective. If your nonURM kid's ox is being gored by that displacement, you won't like it. But if your nonURM kid stil gets in, you'll profess not to care and talk up the virtues of diversity. Taking a public position against affirmative action is socially very very risky.

As long as people continue to believe that more minorities at an elite school make it less elite, you're safe.

Just keep your talk to the undesirable minorities. Not a whole lot of guesswork needed there.

It's not that people believe "undesirable minorities' in and of themselves make the school less elite, it's that when you lower the academic standards for minorities so they can get in, then you make the school less elite. You're bringing down the average GPA and scores of the entering class.

Very soon - if we're not there already - we're going to have to lower standards for everyone at every level. And that's because most everyone will be unable to meet higher standards and/or unable to pay for it. Read what Harvard's president had to say about it.

http://freakonomics.com/2015/09/03/the-president-of-harvard-will-see-you-now-full-transcript/

Go about three-fourths of the way down to where she talks about endowments and the importance of public education.

You people aren't doing the undesirable majority any favors.

We already have. Have you heard about middle and high school "do overs" and other shenanigans in testing?

Look up the MCPS 50% rule. And this is one of the "best" school systems around.

lol

I just looked it up. Apparently, teachers are prohibited from given less than 50% if the student made any effort at all. So, if there are 50 math problems and the kid gets only one or two correct, he still gets a 50%. The dumbing down of America.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At bottom, Justice O'Connor's rationale for affirmative action was that leaders come from elite institutions and more minorities need to attend elite institutions. So a bump up for a kid qualified for Wayne State or Michigan State based on grades and scores but not Michigan will get him or her into Michigan. It's a very snobby, elitist perspective. If your nonURM kid's ox is being gored by that displacement, you won't like it. But if your nonURM kid stil gets in, you'll profess not to care and talk up the virtues of diversity. Taking a public position against affirmative action is socially very very risky.

As long as people continue to believe that more minorities at an elite school make it less elite, you're safe.

Just keep your talk to the undesirable minorities. Not a whole lot of guesswork needed there.

It's not that people believe "undesirable minorities' in and of themselves make the school less elite, it's that when you lower the academic standards for minorities so they can get in, then you make the school less elite. You're bringing down the average GPA and scores of the entering class.

Very soon - if we're not there already - we're going to have to lower standards for everyone at every level. And that's because most everyone will be unable to meet higher standards and/or unable to pay for it. Read what Harvard's president had to say about it.

http://freakonomics.com/2015/09/03/the-president-of-harvard-will-see-you-now-full-transcript/

Go about three-fourths of the way down to where she talks about endowments and the importance of public education.

You people aren't doing the undesirable majority any favors.

We already have. Have you heard about middle and high school "do overs" and other shenanigans in testing?

Look up the MCPS 50% rule. And this is one of the "best" school systems around.

lol

I just looked it up. Apparently, teachers are prohibited from given less than 50% if the student made any effort at all. So, if there are 50 math problems and the kid gets only one or two correct, he still gets a 50%. The dumbing down of America.

given = giving

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At bottom, Justice O'Connor's rationale for affirmative action was that leaders come from elite institutions and more minorities need to attend elite institutions. So a bump up for a kid qualified for Wayne State or Michigan State based on grades and scores but not Michigan will get him or her into Michigan. It's a very snobby, elitist perspective. If your nonURM kid's ox is being gored by that displacement, you won't like it. But if your nonURM kid stil gets in, you'll profess not to care and talk up the virtues of diversity. Taking a public position against affirmative action is socially very very risky.

As long as people continue to believe that more minorities at an elite school make it less elite, you're safe.

Just keep your talk to the undesirable minorities. Not a whole lot of guesswork needed there.

It's not that people believe "undesirable minorities' in and of themselves make the school less elite, it's that when you lower the academic standards for minorities so they can get in, then you make the school less elite. You're bringing down the average GPA and scores of the entering class.

Very soon - if we're not there already - we're going to have to lower standards for everyone at every level. And that's because most everyone will be unable to meet higher standards and/or unable to pay for it. Read what Harvard's president had to say about it.

http://freakonomics.com/2015/09/03/the-president-of-harvard-will-see-you-now-full-transcript/

Go about three-fourths of the way down to where she talks about endowments and the importance of public education.

You people aren't doing the undesirable majority any favors.

We already have. Have you heard about middle and high school "do overs" and other shenanigans in testing?

Look up the MCPS 50% rule. And this is one of the "best" school systems around.

lol

I just looked it up. Apparently, teachers are prohibited from given less than 50% if the student made any effort at all. So, if there are 50 math problems and the kid gets only one or two correct, he still gets a 50%. The dumbing down of America.

Which has nothing to do with the issue of Affirmative Action. Also to complain about that is absurd when Elite Colleges have been operating like that for YEARS. It practically impossible to FAIL at places like Standard who have similar grading scales. The lowest grade you can get if u just show up is a "C". Hidden secret no one likes to talk about

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:First Affirmative Action speech was giving at Howard University...Not Harvard, not Galludet, but Howard. That's for a reason because it was meant for American Blacks descendants of slaves & Jim Crow and to make up for those things. The 300 + years of racist/bias policies directed toward American Blacks meant we lack any type of GENERATIONAL WEALTH, especially compared to the larger White Society. If you listen to the speech and legislation the words DIVERSITY WERE NEVER MENTIONED. As Affirmative Action had ZERO TO DO WITH DIVERSITY it was meant to help American Blacks move up the ladder when it came to opportunities and Generational Wealth. It also was NOT RACE BASED as American Blacks aren't a "RACE" but a cultural/ethnic group inside the United States. A cultural/ethnic group with a unique history in a country they help built. As American Blacks were here before it was a United States or a 13 colonies.


Now what has happened is Affirmative Action has been distorted as White Woman have been the primary beneficiaries since 1970 the second beneficiaries are White Males whom both groups receive something called "Geographical Affirmative Action" because not only do these schools want RACIAL diversity but also Geographical Diversity. So if you are are white and live in WV, Texas, MS, Alabama etc you get "extra points' simply based on where your parents decided to set roots.....are we gonna end that program as well? Also they give White Americans Affirmative Action when applying to HBCU's...always have. Now it applies to anyone and everyone including Hispanics which is absurd.

True Affirmative Action was not created for DIVERSITY or for Whites, Asians, Hispanics, LGBT etc it was to make up for Slavery & Jim Crow which none of the groups experienced at the hands of the US Govt. As for as Asians, they need to stop the phony victimhood card. Asians are more than triple their population at ELITE SCHOOLS how can you claim bias when you are OVER REPRESENTED? Not only that but these Affirmative Action policy was instituted YEARS before a lot of these Asian student parents arrived here. How can you complain about a Policy that was created before you voluntarily decided to immigrate here? Asians are not VICTIMS of Bias. US has a unique history that its trying to make up for if those groups don't like it or understand it there are THOUSANDS of other countries and millions of other university outside the US they can decide to attend to

White woman have test score and grades that are generally higher than white men. They did not receive affirmative action, they simply got what they had earned by merit.

Asians are over represented as a percentage of their share of the population but not by their share of top students.

It's time to end affirmative action, along with the boosts that legacy and sports give. Make it about academic performance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:First Affirmative Action speech was giving at Howard University...Not Harvard, not Galludet, but Howard. That's for a reason because it was meant for American Blacks descendants of slaves & Jim Crow and to make up for those things. The 300 + years of racist/bias policies directed toward American Blacks meant we lack any type of GENERATIONAL WEALTH, especially compared to the larger White Society. If you listen to the speech and legislation the words DIVERSITY WERE NEVER MENTIONED. As Affirmative Action had ZERO TO DO WITH DIVERSITY it was meant to help American Blacks move up the ladder when it came to opportunities and Generational Wealth. It also was NOT RACE BASED as American Blacks aren't a "RACE" but a cultural/ethnic group inside the United States. A cultural/ethnic group with a unique history in a country they help built. As American Blacks were here before it was a United States or a 13 colonies.


Now what has happened is Affirmative Action has been distorted as White Woman have been the primary beneficiaries since 1970 the second beneficiaries are White Males whom both groups receive something called "Geographical Affirmative Action" because not only do these schools want RACIAL diversity but also Geographical Diversity. So if you are are white and live in WV, Texas, MS, Alabama etc you get "extra points' simply based on where your parents decided to set roots.....are we gonna end that program as well? Also they give White Americans Affirmative Action when applying to HBCU's...always have. Now it applies to anyone and everyone including Hispanics which is absurd.

True Affirmative Action was not created for DIVERSITY or for Whites, Asians, Hispanics, LGBT etc it was to make up for Slavery & Jim Crow which none of the groups experienced at the hands of the US Govt. As for as Asians, they need to stop the phony victimhood card. Asians are more than triple their population at ELITE SCHOOLS how can you claim bias when you are OVER REPRESENTED? Not only that but these Affirmative Action policy was instituted YEARS before a lot of these Asian student parents arrived here. How can you complain about a Policy that was created before you voluntarily decided to immigrate here? Asians are not VICTIMS of Bias. US has a unique history that its trying to make up for if those groups don't like it or understand it there are THOUSANDS of other countries and millions of other university outside the US they can decide to attend to

White woman have test score and grades that are generally higher than white men. They did not receive affirmative action, they simply got what they had earned by merit.

Asians are over represented as a percentage of their share of the population but not by their share of top students.

It's time to end affirmative action, along with the boosts that legacy and sports give. Make it about academic performance.

I say academic performance combined with family financial situation. Take race out of it.

Some of you are saying that if we were to switch to an income/net worth system, it would hurt blacks - and is therefore racist to want this switch. But think about it. It's well known that blacks are poorer, as a whole, and they therefore would still benefit from the new parameters. The only black kids would would lose their advantage would be the UMC blacks - and that's as it should be. Why is the black daughter of a lawyer and a doctor getting any preferential treatment at all? She's already benefited by virtue of her high SES.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At bottom, Justice O'Connor's rationale for affirmative action was that leaders come from elite institutions and more minorities need to attend elite institutions. So a bump up for a kid qualified for Wayne State or Michigan State based on grades and scores but not Michigan will get him or her into Michigan. It's a very snobby, elitist perspective. If your nonURM kid's ox is being gored by that displacement, you won't like it. But if your nonURM kid stil gets in, you'll profess not to care and talk up the virtues of diversity. Taking a public position against affirmative action is socially very very risky.

URMs are still pretty under-represented at Michigan. https://admissions.umich.edu/apply/freshmen-applicants/student-profile

The real bottom line is that Trump's DOJ is trying to pick a fight that more higher income whites will join.

If he really wanted to do something about access to education for his base, he'd look at public education funding at state and local levels. Someone posted a map of Republican-led states the other day. I think if you overlaid it with a map of academic achievement, it would be easy to conclude Republicans prefer to keep their constituents dumb and poor. I wonder why. I think in Kansas they've even decided that four days/week is enough. http://www.ruraledu.org/articles.php?id=3297

You can't get into college if your education has been subpar since kindergarten.

Yes you can. My education was subpar and I didn't even attend kindergarten or graduate high school. I got a GED in the Air Force and used benefits to complete an MS in Finance after my third deployment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:First Affirmative Action speech was giving at Howard University...Not Harvard, not Galludet, but Howard. That's for a reason because it was meant for American Blacks descendants of slaves & Jim Crow and to make up for those things. The 300 + years of racist/bias policies directed toward American Blacks meant we lack any type of GENERATIONAL WEALTH, especially compared to the larger White Society. If you listen to the speech and legislation the words DIVERSITY WERE NEVER MENTIONED. As Affirmative Action had ZERO TO DO WITH DIVERSITY it was meant to help American Blacks move up the ladder when it came to opportunities and Generational Wealth. It also was NOT RACE BASED as American Blacks aren't a "RACE" but a cultural/ethnic group inside the United States. A cultural/ethnic group with a unique history in a country they help built. As American Blacks were here before it was a United States or a 13 colonies.


Now what has happened is Affirmative Action has been distorted as White Woman have been the primary beneficiaries since 1970 the second beneficiaries are White Males whom both groups receive something called "Geographical Affirmative Action" because not only do these schools want RACIAL diversity but also Geographical Diversity. So if you are are white and live in WV, Texas, MS, Alabama etc you get "extra points' simply based on where your parents decided to set roots.....are we gonna end that program as well? Also they give White Americans Affirmative Action when applying to HBCU's...always have. Now it applies to anyone and everyone including Hispanics which is absurd.

True Affirmative Action was not created for DIVERSITY or for Whites, Asians, Hispanics, LGBT etc it was to make up for Slavery & Jim Crow which none of the groups experienced at the hands of the US Govt. As for as Asians, they need to stop the phony victimhood card. Asians are more than triple their population at ELITE SCHOOLS how can you claim bias when you are OVER REPRESENTED? Not only that but these Affirmative Action policy was instituted YEARS before a lot of these Asian student parents arrived here. How can you complain about a Policy that was created before you voluntarily decided to immigrate here? Asians are not VICTIMS of Bias. US has a unique history that its trying to make up for if those groups don't like it or understand it there are THOUSANDS of other countries and millions of other university outside the US they can decide to attend to

So you're saying the higher-achieving Asian-Americans should be willing to go to a lesser university outside the US so lower-scoring UMC black kids can take their slots in the superior schools ? Why shouldn't the kids with the lower scores go to the universities with lower standards? It's not that the black kids aren't getting in SOMEWHERE. Why are they entitled to jump the line into the Ivy League?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:First Affirmative Action speech was giving at Howard University...Not Harvard, not Galludet, but Howard. That's for a reason because it was meant for American Blacks descendants of slaves & Jim Crow and to make up for those things. The 300 + years of racist/bias policies directed toward American Blacks meant we lack any type of GENERATIONAL WEALTH, especially compared to the larger White Society. If you listen to the speech and legislation the words DIVERSITY WERE NEVER MENTIONED. As Affirmative Action had ZERO TO DO WITH DIVERSITY it was meant to help American Blacks move up the ladder when it came to opportunities and Generational Wealth. It also was NOT RACE BASED as American Blacks aren't a "RACE" but a cultural/ethnic group inside the United States. A cultural/ethnic group with a unique history in a country they help built. As American Blacks were here before it was a United States or a 13 colonies.


Now what has happened is Affirmative Action has been distorted as White Woman have been the primary beneficiaries since 1970 the second beneficiaries are White Males whom both groups receive something called "Geographical Affirmative Action" because not only do these schools want RACIAL diversity but also Geographical Diversity. So if you are are white and live in WV, Texas, MS, Alabama etc you get "extra points' simply based on where your parents decided to set roots.....are we gonna end that program as well? Also they give White Americans Affirmative Action when applying to HBCU's...always have. Now it applies to anyone and everyone including Hispanics which is absurd.

True Affirmative Action was not created for DIVERSITY or for Whites, Asians, Hispanics, LGBT etc it was to make up for Slavery & Jim Crow which none of the groups experienced at the hands of the US Govt. As for as Asians, they need to stop the phony victimhood card. Asians are more than triple their population at ELITE SCHOOLS how can you claim bias when you are OVER REPRESENTED? Not only that but these Affirmative Action policy was instituted YEARS before a lot of these Asian student parents arrived here. How can you complain about a Policy that was created before you voluntarily decided to immigrate here? Asians are not VICTIMS of Bias. US has a unique history that its trying to make up for if those groups don't like it or understand it there are THOUSANDS of other countries and millions of other university outside the US they can decide to attend to

So you're saying the higher-achieving Asian-Americans should be willing to go to a lesser university outside the US so lower-scoring UMC black kids can take their slots in the superior schools ? Why shouldn't the kids with the lower scores go to the universities with lower standards? It's not that the black kids aren't getting in SOMEWHERE. Why are they entitled to jump the line into the Ivy League?

.....For example, what's wrong with a black kid who has the grades and scores to get into U-Mass just going there? Completely acceptable. Why do standards have to be lowered to get him into Harvard, thereby taking the seat from a higher-achieving student, who, in turn, has to settle for U-Mass? Completely unfair.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:First Affirmative Action speech was giving at Howard University...Not Harvard, not Galludet, but Howard. That's for a reason because it was meant for American Blacks descendants of slaves & Jim Crow and to make up for those things. The 300 + years of racist/bias policies directed toward American Blacks meant we lack any type of GENERATIONAL WEALTH, especially compared to the larger White Society. If you listen to the speech and legislation the words DIVERSITY WERE NEVER MENTIONED. As Affirmative Action had ZERO TO DO WITH DIVERSITY it was meant to help American Blacks move up the ladder when it came to opportunities and Generational Wealth. It also was NOT RACE BASED as American Blacks aren't a "RACE" but a cultural/ethnic group inside the United States. A cultural/ethnic group with a unique history in a country they help built. As American Blacks were here before it was a United States or a 13 colonies.


Now what has happened is Affirmative Action has been distorted as White Woman have been the primary beneficiaries since 1970 the second beneficiaries are White Males whom both groups receive something called "Geographical Affirmative Action" because not only do these schools want RACIAL diversity but also Geographical Diversity. So if you are are white and live in WV, Texas, MS, Alabama etc you get "extra points' simply based on where your parents decided to set roots.....are we gonna end that program as well? Also they give White Americans Affirmative Action when applying to HBCU's...always have. Now it applies to anyone and everyone including Hispanics which is absurd.

True Affirmative Action was not created for DIVERSITY or for Whites, Asians, Hispanics, LGBT etc it was to make up for Slavery & Jim Crow which none of the groups experienced at the hands of the US Govt. As for as Asians, they need to stop the phony victimhood card. Asians are more than triple their population at ELITE SCHOOLS how can you claim bias when you are OVER REPRESENTED? Not only that but these Affirmative Action policy was instituted YEARS before a lot of these Asian student parents arrived here. How can you complain about a Policy that was created before you voluntarily decided to immigrate here? Asians are not VICTIMS of Bias. US has a unique history that its trying to make up for if those groups don't like it or understand it there are THOUSANDS of other countries and millions of other university outside the US they can decide to attend to

So you're saying the higher-achieving Asian-Americans should be willing to go to a lesser university outside the US so lower-scoring UMC black kids can take their slots in the superior schools ? Why shouldn't the kids with the lower scores go to the universities with lower standards? It's not that the black kids aren't getting in SOMEWHERE. Why are they entitled to jump the line into the Ivy League?

What I am saying is that is NOT EVEN Happening as Asians are OVER REPRESENTED in Elite Schools so who is taking their spots? They are playing "victim" when there is no evidence to support it. If You don't like a national policy that was CREATED for you even arrived then DONT IMMIGRATE TO That COUNTRY. Like me immigrating to China as a Black American and complaining about University policies that were in place DECADES before I arrived. Its beyond absurd.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:First Affirmative Action speech was giving at Howard University...Not Harvard, not Galludet, but Howard. That's for a reason because it was meant for American Blacks descendants of slaves & Jim Crow and to make up for those things. The 300 + years of racist/bias policies directed toward American Blacks meant we lack any type of GENERATIONAL WEALTH, especially compared to the larger White Society. If you listen to the speech and legislation the words DIVERSITY WERE NEVER MENTIONED. As Affirmative Action had ZERO TO DO WITH DIVERSITY it was meant to help American Blacks move up the ladder when it came to opportunities and Generational Wealth. It also was NOT RACE BASED as American Blacks aren't a "RACE" but a cultural/ethnic group inside the United States. A cultural/ethnic group with a unique history in a country they help built. As American Blacks were here before it was a United States or a 13 colonies.


Now what has happened is Affirmative Action has been distorted as White Woman have been the primary beneficiaries since 1970 the second beneficiaries are White Males whom both groups receive something called "Geographical Affirmative Action" because not only do these schools want RACIAL diversity but also Geographical Diversity. So if you are are white and live in WV, Texas, MS, Alabama etc you get "extra points' simply based on where your parents decided to set roots.....are we gonna end that program as well? Also they give White Americans Affirmative Action when applying to HBCU's...always have. Now it applies to anyone and everyone including Hispanics which is absurd.

True Affirmative Action was not created for DIVERSITY or for Whites, Asians, Hispanics, LGBT etc it was to make up for Slavery & Jim Crow which none of the groups experienced at the hands of the US Govt. As for as Asians, they need to stop the phony victimhood card. Asians are more than triple their population at ELITE SCHOOLS how can you claim bias when you are OVER REPRESENTED? Not only that but these Affirmative Action policy was instituted YEARS before a lot of these Asian student parents arrived here. How can you complain about a Policy that was created before you voluntarily decided to immigrate here? Asians are not VICTIMS of Bias. US has a unique history that its trying to make up for if those groups don't like it or understand it there are THOUSANDS of other countries and millions of other university outside the US they can decide to attend to

So you're saying the higher-achieving Asian-Americans should be willing to go to a lesser university outside the US so lower-scoring UMC black kids can take their slots in the superior schools ? Why shouldn't the kids with the lower scores go to the universities with lower standards? It's not that the black kids aren't getting in SOMEWHERE. Why are they entitled to jump the line into the Ivy League?

.....For example, what's wrong with a black kid who has the grades and scores to get into U-Mass just going there? Completely acceptable. Why do standards have to be lowered to get him into Harvard, thereby taking the seat from a higher-achieving student, who, in turn, has to settle for U-Mass? Completely unfair.

Not "unfair" if that's a policy that the US has created to correct a certain historical issue, than that's the policy. if ASIAN immigrants don't like the National Policy then they can immigrate else or better yet STAY in their native country. You can't voluntarily leave your country where you are a MAJORITY to voluntarily be a MINORITY somewhere else then bitch and moan about not being represented. You don't get to claim "victimhood" for your own choices. Especially when you are OVER REPRESENTED at all Elite Schools and the group you claim is taking your spots are UNDER REPRESENTED. Its beyond absurd

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:First Affirmative Action speech was giving at Howard University...Not Harvard, not Galludet, but Howard. That's for a reason because it was meant for American Blacks descendants of slaves & Jim Crow and to make up for those things. The 300 + years of racist/bias policies directed toward American Blacks meant we lack any type of GENERATIONAL WEALTH, especially compared to the larger White Society. If you listen to the speech and legislation the words DIVERSITY WERE NEVER MENTIONED. As Affirmative Action had ZERO TO DO WITH DIVERSITY it was meant to help American Blacks move up the ladder when it came to opportunities and Generational Wealth. It also was NOT RACE BASED as American Blacks aren't a "RACE" but a cultural/ethnic group inside the United States. A cultural/ethnic group with a unique history in a country they help built. As American Blacks were here before it was a United States or a 13 colonies.


Now what has happened is Affirmative Action has been distorted as White Woman have been the primary beneficiaries since 1970 the second beneficiaries are White Males whom both groups receive something called "Geographical Affirmative Action" because not only do these schools want RACIAL diversity but also Geographical Diversity. So if you are are white and live in WV, Texas, MS, Alabama etc you get "extra points' simply based on where your parents decided to set roots.....are we gonna end that program as well? Also they give White Americans Affirmative Action when applying to HBCU's...always have. Now it applies to anyone and everyone including Hispanics which is absurd.

True Affirmative Action was not created for DIVERSITY or for Whites, Asians, Hispanics, LGBT etc it was to make up for Slavery & Jim Crow which none of the groups experienced at the hands of the US Govt. As for as Asians, they need to stop the phony victimhood card. Asians are more than triple their population at ELITE SCHOOLS how can you claim bias when you are OVER REPRESENTED? Not only that but these Affirmative Action policy was instituted YEARS before a lot of these Asian student parents arrived here. How can you complain about a Policy that was created before you voluntarily decided to immigrate here? Asians are not VICTIMS of Bias. US has a unique history that its trying to make up for if those groups don't like it or understand it there are THOUSANDS of other countries and millions of other university outside the US they can decide to attend to

White woman have test score and grades that are generally higher than white men. They did not receive affirmative action, they simply got what they had earned by merit.

Asians are over represented as a percentage of their share of the population but not by their share of top students.

It's time to end affirmative action, along with the boosts that legacy and sports give. Make it about academic performance.

I say academic performance combined with family financial situation. Take race out of it.

Some of you are saying that if we were to switch to an income/net worth system, it would hurt blacks - and is therefore racist to want this switch. But think about it. It's well known that blacks are poorer, as a whole, and they therefore would still benefit from the new parameters. The only black kids would would lose their advantage would be the UMC blacks - and that's as it should be. Why is the black daughter of a lawyer and a doctor getting any preferential treatment at all? She's already benefited by virtue of her high SES.

While I understand your point, even Black poverty and White poverty is DIFFERENT. For example Obama was raised by his "white mom" who was on "food stamps". Yet people don't realize that his Grandmother left him 500+k inheritance when he DIED. So you would assume that him being raised by a white single mom is just like a black person being raised by a single Black mom but its NOT TRUE...no black kid being raised by a single mom is getting a 500k inheritance from Grand Ma when she dies. this is the generational wealth White Americans pretend they don't have. So even "poor" whites aren't even that poor especially when compared to Blacks. Also why a single white mom has more net worth then a married Black Couple. Again Affirmative Action was created to help the "POOR" it was created to help correct the legacy of Slaver & Jim Crow

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:First Affirmative Action speech was giving at Howard University...Not Harvard, not Galludet, but Howard. That's for a reason because it was meant for American Blacks descendants of slaves & Jim Crow and to make up for those things. The 300 + years of racist/bias policies directed toward American Blacks meant we lack any type of GENERATIONAL WEALTH, especially compared to the larger White Society. If you listen to the speech and legislation the words DIVERSITY WERE NEVER MENTIONED. As Affirmative Action had ZERO TO DO WITH DIVERSITY it was meant to help American Blacks move up the ladder when it came to opportunities and Generational Wealth. It also was NOT RACE BASED as American Blacks aren't a "RACE" but a cultural/ethnic group inside the United States. A cultural/ethnic group with a unique history in a country they help built. As American Blacks were here before it was a United States or a 13 colonies.


Now what has happened is Affirmative Action has been distorted as White Woman have been the primary beneficiaries since 1970 the second beneficiaries are White Males whom both groups receive something called "Geographical Affirmative Action" because not only do these schools want RACIAL diversity but also Geographical Diversity. So if you are are white and live in WV, Texas, MS, Alabama etc you get "extra points' simply based on where your parents decided to set roots.....are we gonna end that program as well? Also they give White Americans Affirmative Action when applying to HBCU's...always have. Now it applies to anyone and everyone including Hispanics which is absurd.

True Affirmative Action was not created for DIVERSITY or for Whites, Asians, Hispanics, LGBT etc it was to make up for Slavery & Jim Crow which none of the groups experienced at the hands of the US Govt. As for as Asians, they need to stop the phony victimhood card. Asians are more than triple their population at ELITE SCHOOLS how can you claim bias when you are OVER REPRESENTED? Not only that but these Affirmative Action policy was instituted YEARS before a lot of these Asian student parents arrived here. How can you complain about a Policy that was created before you voluntarily decided to immigrate here? Asians are not VICTIMS of Bias. US has a unique history that its trying to make up for if those groups don't like it or understand it there are THOUSANDS of other countries and millions of other university outside the US they can decide to attend to

White woman have test score and grades that are generally higher than white men. They did not receive affirmative action, they simply got what they had earned by merit.

Asians are over represented as a percentage of their share of the population but not by their share of top students.

It's time to end affirmative action, along with the boosts that legacy and sports give. Make it about academic performance.

I say academic performance combined with family financial situation. Take race out of it.

Some of you are saying that if we were to switch to an income/net worth system, it would hurt blacks - and is therefore racist to want this switch. But think about it. It's well known that blacks are poorer, as a whole, and they therefore would still benefit from the new parameters. The only black kids would would lose their advantage would be the UMC blacks - and that's as it should be. Why is the black daughter of a lawyer and a doctor getting any preferential treatment at all? She's already benefited by virtue of her high SES.

While I understand your point, even Black poverty and White poverty is DIFFERENT. For example Obama was raised by his "white mom" who was on "food stamps". Yet people don't realize that his Grandmother left him 500+k inheritance when he DIED. So you would assume that him being raised by a white single mom is just like a black person being raised by a single Black mom but its NOT TRUE...no black kid being raised by a single mom is getting a 500k inheritance from Grand Ma when she dies. this is the generational wealth White Americans pretend they don't have. So even "poor" whites aren't even that poor especially when compared to Blacks. Also why a single white mom has more net worth then a married Black Couple. Again Affirmative Action was NOT created to help the "POOR" it was created to help correct the legacy of Slaver & Jim Crow

Mean to be NOT created to help the poor, but to help American Blacks