Affirmative Action discriminates. Using race, not grades, for law schools.
 

I guess if you're white, good grades aren't enough to get you in to these Arizona law schools... :mad:

Affirmative action backfired based on fairness against racism... figures. :mad:

Study: Minorities get better shot at law school

[URL="http://www.eastvalleytribune.com/story/127090#slComments"][COLOR=#800080][COLOR=#0000ff]
Howard Fischer, Capitol Media Services

A study by an organization opposed to affirmative action concludes that minorities are far more likely to be admitted to the state's two public law schools than similarly qualified whites.
The report by the Center for Economic Opportunity shows that the number of whites, Asians, Hispanics and blacks admitted to the law colleges at Arizona State University and the University of Arizona is pretty much in proportion to the number that apply.
But it also finds that both schools admit minorities with lower grade point averages and scores on the Law School Aptitude Test than whites.
At ASU, the median LSAT scores for blacks admitted in 2007 was 8.3 percent below whites; and a 6.7 percent difference exists between Hispanics and whites, according to the report. At UA, the median LSAT score for blacks admitted in 2007 was 15 percent below whites; and for Hispanics, the difference was 10 percent.
For grade point averages for the same incoming class, there was a 7.5 percent difference between the scores of whites versus blacks and Hispanics.
The result, according to Roger Clegg, the organization's president, is that everything else being equal, a black person with equal grade point average and LSAT scores is 250 times more likely to be admitted to the UA than a white. For Hispanics, he said, the ratio is 18 to 1.

http://www.eastvalleytribune.com/story/127090

Especially if the applicant is clean and articulate and whose middle name is .... (guess what I was going to write)

It's like the old people labor laws in California. You can't turn someone down for being too old, but you can for them being too young. It's posted in the break room, they even use the words "reverse discrimination". It's pathetic, the whole country is a bunch of sissies and jackasses. One more reason........ not to go to college. Protest the f***ers!:D

Isn't f***ers spelled ph***ers?

No, that's *** after ** except after *.

B

Garsh, a hyuk..

Is this really news? Affirmative action is automatically race based. And thus automatically discriminatory.

- Peter.

Did Joe Biden really say that about his Boss, Barack Hussein Obama?

Incidentally, the use of quotas to give minorities a break has a far more pernicious effect (at least from my perspective).

I was admitted to several top notch law schools. I was admitted to those schools on the strentgh of my LSAT's, my college grades and the depth and quality of my extra-curricular activities.

Yet, I have always had to fight the attitude that I got in because my status as a Hispanic.

It is a never ending battle. No matter what my achievements might be, there is always that yahoo that likes to believe that my name (not Hussein) got me admitted to law school.

Maybe in your case...

But the idea that people are being admitted just on race is a fact. White isn't the right color as far as Affirmative Action is concerned. :mad:

Just the term, "affirmative action" is an oxymoron! :mad:

Great idea. Cut the nose to spite the face. :rolleyes:

They may get in, but they don't graduate. The number of minorities that are admited to my school is quite high, but the number that actualy stay 4 years and get a degree is really low.

While it may get you in, if you don't belong you won't stay.

Not like a C-Average white guy ever got into Harvard because of who he was... ;)

Mine too.

But with AA present, all we have is your good word. Therein lies the problem. Most everybody I know will say they got what they got because of their abilities. I don't know anybody that will say that they got where they got because of some handicap. So how will you ever know that race didn't play some small role? I can never be sure that I was hired because of my abilities and not the color of my skin.

The worst part of it is that you cannot prove that you didn't and even if you could, you would still be lumped up with those that did. That is why I believe AA should be scrapped ASAP.

I personally know many "minorities" whose grades and test scores were high enough to get into school w/o the assistance of affirmative action.

I think that there should be some sort of affirmative action to help disadvantaged kids, regardless of race, get into college. There are a lot of disadvantaged white kids who could use the help.

In my case job performance is all the proof I (or my bosses) need.

I know. Fortunately, in my position performance can be quantified. :)

Exactly. Doesn't this system basically say to minorities "You are not as smart as white people, so we will hold you to a lower standard." And isn't that the exact opposite message that needs to be communicated? Also there are different implementations of affirmative action. There are quotas but there are also "uneven standards". I think it is fine to have a quota as a goal, and to undertake to achieve that goal through expanded recruitment and ways of helping minorities prepare to succeed. However, if you simply have a lower standard based on race, that is just discrimination, that's all it is. Pure racism. Should be totally completely banned as the racism it is.

And that is just it. How would I know that the person in front of me is really qualified and not shooed in thru the back door at night because he/she isn't as good as a non-minority?

Not necessarily, it also says to minorities, including women, that "the system" is attempting to adjust for years of social and educational inequality in a hope to bring diversity to a profession.

I would disagree. Play a game with a pro and there is a handicap that favors the weaker party. This adjustment is a spin for minorities who cannot and/or will not compete.

Affirmative Action is an oxymoron!

If all you want to see is the current discrimination of affirmative action and not the effects of the past, then you are certainly correct.

Agreed.

Also to tell someone that they were the "right" color and could get preferential treatment should be against the law whether it was law school, med school or working at the cafeteria in the schools.

Ah, but sir, the results may not be PC.

And the darlings of the morons.

No! In the "fair" service to all people, of all colors, grades must be the standard, not skin color quotas, race quotas, or gender quotas.

To tell someone that they weren't the "right" color or race to get in to law school should be against the law.

All races can be judged equally by grades, because they are "colorblind".

Affirmative Action is an oxymoron. :mad:

I believe the initial goal of affirmative action was to allow underprivileged, but driven minorities access to higher education that wouldn't traditionally be available if academic performance across racial boundaries were unweighted.

Consider an example case history of a typical suburban white student, who would have access to an exemplarary school system, complete with dedicated instructors, regular test coaching and such, increasing his chances for academic success. This student would be prepared for college with a solid GPA and high SAT or ACT test scores.

Flash over to an extreme case...an underpriviledged minority who, although has the desire to excel (and does), has limited to no access to the types of advantages that allow that student to excel in the admission exams. Couple that with grades, while superior, were attained in classes where the instructors may not have been motivated to do more that herd students in and out of the room, or worse yet, spend so much time with disciplinary issues that the ones who actual turn in work, get high marks.

Nevertheless, someone recognizes that the student aspires to go to college, and recognizes that while falling short of the pedigree that typical college applicants possess, has the determination to succeed...enter AA.

But like every human assistance program (especially welfare), it has its abusers. Many will say that this system was developed shortly after the "Jim Crow" era when it was viable, and those days are long gone. That is probably true. Also consider that the above case is no longer typical of minorities, and many have mainstreamed into suburban America, having access to the same types of advantages for success that white students enjoy.

But yeah, like others posted, my grades and test scores were exemplary, so there was no need to be considered for admission under a quota. Fortunately, my college days are long behind me, so I don't have to defend my college opportunity, or my credentials for admission.

Should AA be removed? Probably. But mostly it should be revised, so that the pendulum doesn't swing too far the other way (as it seems to have done if you are a white candidate)...whereas candidates who fall short of standards (regardless of race) but are willing to succeed are considered on a case-by-case basis.

It isn't an issue of "want to see". It is there. To give me a handicap in my favor is telling me that I don't have what it takes to compete without the handicap. Now, you can tell me about the fact that I didn't work hard enough, have enough talent, etc, etc. Either way, how does it negate the fact that I have been given a boost because I am not good enough?

Oh yeah, I recall this one, isn't it "two wrongs make a right"?

Since we're dippingi into academic waters . . . where are the facts about whether the beneficiaries of "affirmative action" suffer the hardship of lower self esteem or stigmatization as a result. After you factor in the understanding that these minority groups already have sensitization to self esteem and stigmatization by society . . . shouldn't there be some research on this?

BTW, it seems that caucasian women were the biggest group benefiting from "affirmative action."

The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

Every program does but I don't think that is what is being debated.

Then take off AA if they are equal as you say.

But how can you be sure that there were not more qualified candidates that were pushed aside to admit you?

What case is there? There are always limited resources, spaces, etc, etc. They go to the most qualified. Race, religion, etc, etc are not issues.

I know that there was a porno movie that went "Two Wongs make a White". :D

Waste of money to research this crap. Put 200 mindfawks in a room with a guy and you will have many opinions on what is wrong and even more opinions on how to fix it.

For what reason? By definition you gave them something they did not deserve, relative to someone who did deserve it, so in theory they should be happy because of the "gift". It would be like someone getting a job because of a relative, how many people really would feel bad because they came in the door on family heels? All of the ones I know were grateful for the "opportunity", they then had to earn their keep.

But an interesting aspect of what you suggest is the fact that affirmative action is causing (or making worse) a situation that it was created to remedy. In theory AA is there to help minorities and the goal is to eliminate racism. But whenever one group is given preferential treatment over another, it INCREASES resentment, and therefore, creates more discrimination.

This of course applies between any groups, not just race based, but AA is the only race based program so it rears its ugly head more than ever.

Two wrongs DON'T make a right! Affirmative Action is almost a case of "revenge" discrimination. Since minorities were discriminated against in the past, now it's OK to discriminate against white people now?

If it was wrong then (and it was). Isn't discrimination still wrong now? (the answer is still YES!):rolleyes:

Apparently not if it passes PC muster.

That is a load of crap.

The concept that people of "color" feel stigmatized and somehow inferior and that we need help from the Big White Father is in itself racist.

Hell, the white man has not been born yet who is better than me.

I don't need AA to get ahead in the world.

Don't need it.

Don't want it.

My children never set foot in public schools from K - 12.

They have been the beneficiaries of some of the finest schooling available.

They also do not need the Big White Father to toss them a bone in the form of AA.

The whole concept of AA was created by white folks, suffering from white guilt, who think that minorities are too stupid, too indolent, too backwards to make it without handouts.

PUKE on AA.

I agree with you for different reasons.

I don't need the Big White Father to give me a handout.

And I pity the poor white bastard who comes up to me and tells me that I need his help to "make it" because I am a numerical minority. :mad: :mad: :mad:

While you may be good, I don't think anybody is that good that they can make that statement. There is always somebody better at some point or other.

Prove me wrong then. :D

The point of the statement, even if there is a bit of hyperbole and hubris contained in it, is that as a Hsipanic I do not need the Big White Father to legitimize me or to toss me a few bones.

I can do quite well (and have done quite well) w/o AA.

A little OT, but if Obama gets elected does the euqal rights movement die?

Are you assuming that all things will be euqal? :D

Try being Asian. You get screwed either way. I don't wanna hear it from either side.

I think there is still a need for affirmative action laws. I think they should be invoked sparingly. I think they should eventually be phased-out. But yeah, there's still a need to go after plenty of *********s.

Yes, I agree they are anti-democratic. I understand that they are onerous and demeaning. But still....

B

I don't have to try being Asian. I am asian.

I tried being asian. I got tired of doing all the math and not understanding NASCAR.

B

I tried being Asian, but I don't like the food.:D;)

McCain is a Annapolis legacy student.

Without his dad and grandfather he would likely not have
been accepted. His class ranking was 5th from the bottom
and he got to fly jet fighters.

Affirmative action and legacy admissions both discriminate.

Me neither

Refresh my memory. Assuming that was true, the choice didn't serve him very well, did it? Neither did the wait staff at the Hanoi Hilton, IIRC.

Yes they do. Doesn't make either a good thing

Somebody has to be 5th from bottom. Reckon they're all legacies, too?

Also, even if you're a legacy, in the service academies you still have to pass the entrance exams. The legacy thing gets you a leg-up afterward.

Finally, do you think his dad's having been a legacy is why he was an outstanding naval officer? Or was it despite having been a legacy?

B

You see it is our fault(white man)we took people away from their homeland,out of their culture,and brought them here to be used as slaves to do the work we were too lazy to do ourselves. I s it any wonder a people treated like this (referreing to blacks) would be pissed! Even thuogh this happened a long time ago,the scars remain, the biggest pussys are the cynical white men who think that by using force,or the threat of it, make them "better" than someone of another race. All men are not created equal, if you ever were to find yourself in an NBA shower room,you would see for yourself. You are where you are by the hard work you put in to acheive your goals, why not appreciate that and stop crying because someone who does not share your pigment ation finally got a break. This is beating a dead horse ,worry about yourself, and stay out of thier business,it is less stressful.

Affirmative Action By Any Other Name?

Harvard accepts 40% of applicants who are children of alumni but only 11% of applicants generally. And this kind of affirmative action makes the student body less diverse, not more so.