Anonymous wrote:Poor dummy got picked last. Dork!
Anonymous wrote:Obama went to Columbia and Harvard on racial preference. His grades at Punahou and Occidental were merely average. He would never have gotten in to Columbia or Harvard had he not classified himself as African American.
Anonymous wrote:Poor dummy got picked last. Dork!
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Affirmative action hurts blacks and Hispanics. It comes with poor reputation that follows people.
Then ALDC preferences hurt those subgroups and should be ended as well.
My gut feeling is that you'd think poorly of blacks and Hispanics with or without affirmative action . . .
No. And no. The scandals in the news shows people’s attitude towards athlete “scholars” is changing. The more we know, the lower the opinion of these people not the least of which are the admissions people. Hispanics and blacks in CalTech and MIT are highly regarded. They are in because of merit. Same with oxford and Cambridge, both of which do not allow affirmative action.
So to protect the reputation of blacks and Hispanics we should end race preference, but unqualified white applicants who get in under the ALDC preferences are ok? ALDC preferences are a form of affirmative action, and those preferences, by the way, don't exist at CallTech, MIT, Oxford or Cambridge.
Who said they are ok? No dumb affirmative action students, no dumb legacies, and no dumb jock meatheads.
I don’t think anyone in those groups at Harvard is “dumb.” And way to get in a very clever insult to people who are talented in athletics.
And to the PP who stated, “ALDC preferences are a form of affirmative action,” I affirmative action doesn’t mean what you think it means.
The point isn’t that athletics don’t meet some minimum qualification for admission, it’s that they’re admitted ahead of students that would have beaten them had the criteria been academics alone. So yes it’s a form of affirmative action or preference or however you want to classify it. race preference admits also meet the minimum threshold so if you’re saying that athletic recruits are ok because they aren’t “dumb” then everyone who gets in fits that description.
And to the other poster, you could pick any random twenty students at Harvard and they’ll have a 3.5 GPA. That’s not impressive
But a 3.5 GPA while being an athlete that requires 3-4 hours of practice a day would be. Athletes that got in based on their hard work and GPA is much better than those who got in based on their families wealth and legacies as none of the latter were due to student except by luck of birth.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Affirmative action hurts blacks and Hispanics. It comes with poor reputation that follows people.
Then ALDC preferences hurt those subgroups and should be ended as well.
My gut feeling is that you'd think poorly of blacks and Hispanics with or without affirmative action . . .
No. And no. The scandals in the news shows people’s attitude towards athlete “scholars” is changing. The more we know, the lower the opinion of these people not the least of which are the admissions people. Hispanics and blacks in CalTech and MIT are highly regarded. They are in because of merit. Same with oxford and Cambridge, both of which do not allow affirmative action.
So to protect the reputation of blacks and Hispanics we should end race preference, but unqualified white applicants who get in under the ALDC preferences are ok? ALDC preferences are a form of affirmative action, and those preferences, by the way, don't exist at CallTech, MIT, Oxford or Cambridge.
Who said they are ok? No dumb affirmative action students, no dumb legacies, and no dumb jock meatheads.
I don’t think anyone in those groups at Harvard is “dumb.” And way to get in a very clever insult to people who are talented in athletics.
And to the PP who stated, “ALDC preferences are a form of affirmative action,” I affirmative action doesn’t mean what you think it means.
The point isn’t that athletics don’t meet some minimum qualification for admission, it’s that they’re admitted ahead of students that would have beaten them had the criteria been academics alone. So yes it’s a form of affirmative action or preference or however you want to classify it. race preference admits also meet the minimum threshold so if you’re saying that athletic recruits are ok because they aren’t “dumb” then everyone who gets in fits that description.
And to the other poster, you could pick any random twenty students at Harvard and they’ll have a 3.5 GPA. That’s not impressive
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Affirmative action hurts blacks and Hispanics. It comes with poor reputation that follows people.
Then ALDC preferences hurt those subgroups and should be ended as well.
My gut feeling is that you'd think poorly of blacks and Hispanics with or without affirmative action . . .
No. And no. The scandals in the news shows people’s attitude towards athlete “scholars” is changing. The more we know, the lower the opinion of these people not the least of which are the admissions people. Hispanics and blacks in CalTech and MIT are highly regarded. They are in because of merit. Same with oxford and Cambridge, both of which do not allow affirmative action.
So to protect the reputation of blacks and Hispanics we should end race preference, but unqualified white applicants who get in under the ALDC preferences are ok? ALDC preferences are a form of affirmative action, and those preferences, by the way, don't exist at CallTech, MIT, Oxford or Cambridge.
Who said they are ok? No dumb affirmative action students, no dumb legacies, and no dumb jock meatheads.
I don’t think anyone in those groups at Harvard is “dumb.” And way to get in a very clever insult to people who are talented in athletics.
And to the PP who stated, “ALDC preferences are a form of affirmative action,” I affirmative action doesn’t mean what you think it means.
Anonymous wrote:The classes your athletes are getting 3.5’s in are not quite the same classes as your typical academically qualified applicant. That’s so well documented that normally it doesn’t need to be said.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:How many Caucasian students get legacy compared to affirmative action of blacks and browns as a percentage of overall population and applications?
False argument. Preference is a preference. It's not a matter of degree.
Not false at all. You don’t know statistics or logic.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Affirmative action hurts blacks and Hispanics. It comes with poor reputation that follows people.
Then ALDC preferences hurt those subgroups and should be ended as well.
My gut feeling is that you'd think poorly of blacks and Hispanics with or without affirmative action . . .
No. And no. The scandals in the news shows people’s attitude towards athlete “scholars” is changing. The more we know, the lower the opinion of these people not the least of which are the admissions people. Hispanics and blacks in CalTech and MIT are highly regarded. They are in because of merit. Same with oxford and Cambridge, both of which do not allow affirmative action.
So to protect the reputation of blacks and Hispanics we should end race preference, but unqualified white applicants who get in under the ALDC preferences are ok? ALDC preferences are a form of affirmative action, and those preferences, by the way, don't exist at CallTech, MIT, Oxford or Cambridge.
Who said they are ok? No dumb affirmative action students, no dumb legacies, and no dumb jock meatheads.
I don’t think anyone in those groups at Harvard is “dumb.” And way to get in a very clever insult to people who are talented in athletics.
And to the PP who stated, “ALDC preferences are a form of affirmative action,” I affirmative action doesn’t mean what you think it means.
+1. My daughter’s college team had a collective 3.5+ GPA last semester. Well above the school average. It isn’t uncommon.
The classes your athletes are getting 3.5’s in are not quite the same classes as your typical academically qualified applicant. That’s so well documented that normally it doesn’t need to be said.
Sorry you got picked last for sports. I know it still hurts.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:How many Caucasian students get legacy compared to affirmative action of blacks and browns as a percentage of overall population and applications?
False argument. Preference is a preference. It's not a matter of degree.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Affirmative action hurts blacks and Hispanics. It comes with poor reputation that follows people.
Then ALDC preferences hurt those subgroups and should be ended as well.
My gut feeling is that you'd think poorly of blacks and Hispanics with or without affirmative action . . .
No. And no. The scandals in the news shows people’s attitude towards athlete “scholars” is changing. The more we know, the lower the opinion of these people not the least of which are the admissions people. Hispanics and blacks in CalTech and MIT are highly regarded. They are in because of merit. Same with oxford and Cambridge, both of which do not allow affirmative action.
So to protect the reputation of blacks and Hispanics we should end race preference, but unqualified white applicants who get in under the ALDC preferences are ok? ALDC preferences are a form of affirmative action, and those preferences, by the way, don't exist at CallTech, MIT, Oxford or Cambridge.
Who said they are ok? No dumb affirmative action students, no dumb legacies, and no dumb jock meatheads.
I don’t think anyone in those groups at Harvard is “dumb.” And way to get in a very clever insult to people who are talented in athletics.
And to the PP who stated, “ALDC preferences are a form of affirmative action,” I affirmative action doesn’t mean what you think it means.
+1. My daughter’s college team had a collective 3.5+ GPA last semester. Well above the school average. It isn’t uncommon.
Sorry you got picked last for sports. I know it still hurts.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Affirmative action hurts blacks and Hispanics. It comes with poor reputation that follows people.
Then ALDC preferences hurt those subgroups and should be ended as well.
My gut feeling is that you'd think poorly of blacks and Hispanics with or without affirmative action . . .
No. And no. The scandals in the news shows people’s attitude towards athlete “scholars” is changing. The more we know, the lower the opinion of these people not the least of which are the admissions people. Hispanics and blacks in CalTech and MIT are highly regarded. They are in because of merit. Same with oxford and Cambridge, both of which do not allow affirmative action.
So to protect the reputation of blacks and Hispanics we should end race preference, but unqualified white applicants who get in under the ALDC preferences are ok? ALDC preferences are a form of affirmative action, and those preferences, by the way, don't exist at CallTech, MIT, Oxford or Cambridge.
Who said they are ok? No dumb affirmative action students, no dumb legacies, and no dumb jock meatheads.
I don’t think anyone in those groups at Harvard is “dumb.” And way to get in a very clever insult to people who are talented in athletics.
And to the PP who stated, “ALDC preferences are a form of affirmative action,” I affirmative action doesn’t mean what you think it means.