One Political Plaza - Home of politics
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main
Is Harvard r****t?
Oct 15, 2017 08:25:26   #
no propaganda please Loc: moon orbiting the third rock from the sun
 
Law
2 days ago
Is Harvard r****t? If you’re Asian-American, their admission policies just might be
Steve Kurtz
By Steve Kurtz, Fox News





The trouble with helping one group, is it can mean you’re harming another.

Some Asian-Americans claim they’re discriminated against at schools such as Harvard, which have admissions policies that judge different racial and ethnic groups by different standards. And now the Trump administration is getting involved. It’s recently been confirmed that the Justice Department, under Attorney General Jeff Sessions, is looking into Harvard’s policies.

This seems to be a reversal of the previous administration’s stance, but it’s all part of a wider, long-running debate on just how far affirmative action programs should go.

Already President Trump is being attacked for threatening “equal protection” for all Americans. But it’s a sign of how the civil rights establishment thinks that, to many in its ranks, equal protection means treating people unequally.

Their argument is that there are certain groups, most notably African-Americans, who are historically disadvantaged, and who face discrimination, and so need a hand up to create a “level playing field.”

This is nothing new. Decades ago, top colleges would limit how many Jews they’d accept. Since many Jewish applicants had stellar qualification, the universities couldn’t argue the numbers, so they’d say it was about character.

Those on the other side believe that you don’t help anyone by lowering standards (and, in fact, placing minorities in schools where they’re far less qualified ends up with them finishing at the bottom of the class and more likely flunking out).

Though this is where the real dispute lies, there’s an awful lot of talk about “diversity.” That’s because the Supreme Court has declared diversity a compelling state interest, and thus an acceptable reason to factor race and ethnicity into admission policies.

What it’s led to in practice, critics claim, is a huge advantage for some groups based on race. (Colleges tend to deny this, but then, they almost have to, in the same way that tobacco companies had to deny their products caused cancer—to admit it is to give away the game before it starts.)

What this also means is the groups not getting special treatment have it tougher. And groups that perform exceptionally well, such as Asian-Americans, have it toughest of all.

This is nothing new. Decades ago, top colleges would limit how many Jews they’d accept. Since many Jewish applicants had stellar qualification, the universities couldn’t argue the numbers, so they’d say it was about character (of both the Jews and the campus). While the statements aren’t as blatant today, the same thing seems to be happening to Asian-Americans.

If the Department of Justice decides to take action, that won’t be the end of it. No doubt they’ll be challenged under Fisher v. University of Texas (2016), where Justice Kennedy wrote that using race in the admissions process is acceptable if the program is narrowly tailored for the goal of greater diversity. The decision also notes that courts will use “strict scrutiny” in judging admissions policies, though critics of the opinion state that strict scrutiny isn’t nearly as strict as it used to be.

Many Americans of all types have serious moral problems with programs that judge people by their race. It’s not only an undesirable way to go about things, it also creates perverse incentives. When groups that underperform are, in essence, rewarded, while groups that outperform are punished, how will things change for the better?

The people who administer these policies don’t seem prepared to change without the government requiring them to live up to the true promise of equal protection. So let the investigation begin.

Steve Kurtz is a producer for the Fox News Channel, and author of "Steve’s America (the perfect gift for people named Steve)".

Reply
Oct 15, 2017 08:42:58   #
pafret Loc: Northeast
 
no propaganda please wrote:
Law
2 days ago
Is Harvard r****t? If you’re Asian-American, their admission policies just might be
Steve Kurtz
By Steve Kurtz, Fox News





The trouble with helping one group, is it can mean you’re harming another.

Some Asian-Americans claim they’re discriminated against at schools such as Harvard, which have admissions policies that judge different racial and ethnic groups by different standards. And now the Trump administration is getting involved. It’s recently been confirmed that the Justice Department, under Attorney General Jeff Sessions, is looking into Harvard’s policies.

This seems to be a reversal of the previous administration’s stance, but it’s all part of a wider, long-running debate on just how far affirmative action programs should go.

Already President Trump is being attacked for threatening “equal protection” for all Americans. But it’s a sign of how the civil rights establishment thinks that, to many in its ranks, equal protection means treating people unequally.

Their argument is that there are certain groups, most notably African-Americans, who are historically disadvantaged, and who face discrimination, and so need a hand up to create a “level playing field.”

This is nothing new. Decades ago, top colleges would limit how many Jews they’d accept. Since many Jewish applicants had stellar qualification, the universities couldn’t argue the numbers, so they’d say it was about character.

Those on the other side believe that you don’t help anyone by lowering standards (and, in fact, placing minorities in schools where they’re far less qualified ends up with them finishing at the bottom of the class and more likely flunking out).

Though this is where the real dispute lies, there’s an awful lot of talk about “diversity.” That’s because the Supreme Court has declared diversity a compelling state interest, and thus an acceptable reason to factor race and ethnicity into admission policies.

What it’s led to in practice, critics claim, is a huge advantage for some groups based on race. (Colleges tend to deny this, but then, they almost have to, in the same way that tobacco companies had to deny their products caused cancer—to admit it is to give away the game before it starts.)

What this also means is the groups not getting special treatment have it tougher. And groups that perform exceptionally well, such as Asian-Americans, have it toughest of all.

This is nothing new. Decades ago, top colleges would limit how many Jews they’d accept. Since many Jewish applicants had stellar qualification, the universities couldn’t argue the numbers, so they’d say it was about character (of both the Jews and the campus). While the statements aren’t as blatant today, the same thing seems to be happening to Asian-Americans.

If the Department of Justice decides to take action, that won’t be the end of it. No doubt they’ll be challenged under Fisher v. University of Texas (2016), where Justice Kennedy wrote that using race in the admissions process is acceptable if the program is narrowly tailored for the goal of greater diversity. The decision also notes that courts will use “strict scrutiny” in judging admissions policies, though critics of the opinion state that strict scrutiny isn’t nearly as strict as it used to be.

Many Americans of all types have serious moral problems with programs that judge people by their race. It’s not only an undesirable way to go about things, it also creates perverse incentives. When groups that underperform are, in essence, rewarded, while groups that outperform are punished, how will things change for the better?

The people who administer these policies don’t seem prepared to change without the government requiring them to live up to the true promise of equal protection. So let the investigation begin.

Steve Kurtz is a producer for the Fox News Channel, and author of "Steve’s America (the perfect gift for people named Steve)".
Law br 2 days ago br Is Harvard r****t? If you’re ... (show quote)


Another money wasting governmental boondoggle. There is absolutely no question that racial discrimination is being practiced, it was mandated by the government. These schools initially altered their admissions to satisfy the legal mandates and then persisted because the recipients have learned to play the victim card.

If they want to resolve this they can pass a law making it illegal to give preference based on race in any endeavor. Then let those who claim discrimination file complaints and suits. The last thing we need is another endless investigation, employing more lawyers, to waste the taxpayers money while leaving the practice unaffected. Sessions needs to get a day job.

Reply
Oct 15, 2017 09:01:57   #
S. Maturin
 
pafret wrote:
Another money wasting governmental boondoggle. There is absolutely no question that racial discrimination is being practiced, it was mandated by the government. These schools initially altered their admissions to satisfy the legal mandates and then persisted because the recipients have learned to play the victim card.

If they want to resolve this they can pass a law making it illegal to give preference based on race in any endeavor. Then let those who claim discrimination file complaints and suits. The last thing we need is another endless investigation, employing more lawyers, to waste the taxpayers money while leaving the practice unaffected. Sessions needs to get a day job.
Another money wasting governmental boondoggle. Th... (show quote)


Almost all schools of "higher" learning have been practicing r****m since the early 1970s. W****s and Asians have been pushed aside to spoon feed, shoehorn, b****s into positions few can actually handle. That r****t approach doubly hurts the b****s it is intended to benefit by forcing them into positions of almost guaranteed failure besides offering them a f**e/make believe, irrational social position which enforces the views that they are hugely different from all others because they possess higher levels of melanin in their hides.

R****M IS WRONG WHETHER DEMANDED BY WRONG-HEADED GOVERNMENT POLITICAL "LEADERS" OR NOT. It's simply WRONG!

Reply
 
 
Oct 15, 2017 11:27:22   #
moldyoldy
 
With w****s it is always who you know, how much money you donate, or what relative went to the school. Those are the qualifications.

http://www.dailykos.com/stories/2017/10/12/1705902/-Former-Wharton-Professor-Donald-Trump-Is-the-Dumbest-Goddam-Student-I-Ever-Had?detail=emaildkre

Reply
Oct 15, 2017 21:05:56   #
no propaganda please Loc: moon orbiting the third rock from the sun
 
moldyoldy wrote:
With w****s it is always who you know, how much money you donate, or what relative went to the school. Those are the qualifications.

http://www.dailykos.com/stories/2017/10/12/1705902/-Former-Wharton-Professor-Donald-Trump-Is-the-Dumbest-Goddam-Student-I-Ever-Had?detail=emaildkre


and, as usual, your source the c*******t front, Daily Kos, shows your political leanings very well.

Reply
Oct 16, 2017 10:09:51   #
padremike Loc: Phenix City, Al
 
no propaganda please wrote:
Law
2 days ago
Is Harvard r****t? If you’re Asian-American, their admission policies just might be
Steve Kurtz
By Steve Kurtz, Fox News





The trouble with helping one group, is it can mean you’re harming another.

Some Asian-Americans claim they’re discriminated against at schools such as Harvard, which have admissions policies that judge different racial and ethnic groups by different standards. And now the Trump administration is getting involved. It’s recently been confirmed that the Justice Department, under Attorney General Jeff Sessions, is looking into Harvard’s policies.

This seems to be a reversal of the previous administration’s stance, but it’s all part of a wider, long-running debate on just how far affirmative action programs should go.

Already President Trump is being attacked for threatening “equal protection” for all Americans. But it’s a sign of how the civil rights establishment thinks that, to many in its ranks, equal protection means treating people unequally.

Their argument is that there are certain groups, most notably African-Americans, who are historically disadvantaged, and who face discrimination, and so need a hand up to create a “level playing field.”

This is nothing new. Decades ago, top colleges would limit how many Jews they’d accept. Since many Jewish applicants had stellar qualification, the universities couldn’t argue the numbers, so they’d say it was about character.

Those on the other side believe that you don’t help anyone by lowering standards (and, in fact, placing minorities in schools where they’re far less qualified ends up with them finishing at the bottom of the class and more likely flunking out).

Though this is where the real dispute lies, there’s an awful lot of talk about “diversity.” That’s because the Supreme Court has declared diversity a compelling state interest, and thus an acceptable reason to factor race and ethnicity into admission policies.

What it’s led to in practice, critics claim, is a huge advantage for some groups based on race. (Colleges tend to deny this, but then, they almost have to, in the same way that tobacco companies had to deny their products caused cancer—to admit it is to give away the game before it starts.)

What this also means is the groups not getting special treatment have it tougher. And groups that perform exceptionally well, such as Asian-Americans, have it toughest of all.

This is nothing new. Decades ago, top colleges would limit how many Jews they’d accept. Since many Jewish applicants had stellar qualification, the universities couldn’t argue the numbers, so they’d say it was about character (of both the Jews and the campus). While the statements aren’t as blatant today, the same thing seems to be happening to Asian-Americans.

If the Department of Justice decides to take action, that won’t be the end of it. No doubt they’ll be challenged under Fisher v. University of Texas (2016), where Justice Kennedy wrote that using race in the admissions process is acceptable if the program is narrowly tailored for the goal of greater diversity. The decision also notes that courts will use “strict scrutiny” in judging admissions policies, though critics of the opinion state that strict scrutiny isn’t nearly as strict as it used to be.

Many Americans of all types have serious moral problems with programs that judge people by their race. It’s not only an undesirable way to go about things, it also creates perverse incentives. When groups that underperform are, in essence, rewarded, while groups that outperform are punished, how will things change for the better?

The people who administer these policies don’t seem prepared to change without the government requiring them to live up to the true promise of equal protection. So let the investigation begin.

Steve Kurtz is a producer for the Fox News Channel, and author of "Steve’s America (the perfect gift for people named Steve)".
Law br 2 days ago br Is Harvard r****t? If you’re ... (show quote)


A father, whose son is a piano player in a whore house for tips, can be prouder of him than a son who is a graduate of Harvard within the past 30 or 40 years.

Reply
Oct 16, 2017 11:03:34   #
moldyoldy
 
no propaganda please wrote:
and, as usual, your source the c*******t front, Daily Kos, shows your political leanings very well.


The facts stand for themselves, you can add GWB to the list of those with legacy admissions.

Reply
 
 
Oct 16, 2017 12:24:58   #
PulletSurprise Loc: Columbus, GA
 
moldyoldy wrote:
With w****s it is always who you know, how much money you donate, or what relative went to the school. Those are the qualifications.


You're a racially motivated bigot that stereotypes others out of your own selfishness and conceit.
You demand Preferential Treatment, to be held in special favor!
Your ways are to devalue others, to victimize and promote a hatred towards any group that promotes you. The stronger the negative feelings towards the group, the better.

You probably go out of your way to hammer Dr. Carson because he's objectively willing to treat others as individuals.

You may relentlessly resent and demean me because I have more Soul and as a Black, you cannot compete against on a equal playing field! Your alternative is to stone or beat others to your level, instead of being the best in your craft.

I adopted an Asian, Mexican and Greek-mixed little ones. They are all adults and live reasonably well. I would tell you, the same as when they were growing up, "Be responsible, work with all your might to be the best that you can be at wh**ever talent(s) you possess; treat others as you would like to be treated; walk upright, but humble before our GOD (the God of the Bible); use honest weights as you deal with others; etc. I'm not your Uncle Tom and my words are not malicious.

Reply
Oct 16, 2017 13:15:47   #
moldyoldy
 
PulletSurprise wrote:
You're a racially motivated bigot that stereotypes others out of your own selfishness and conceit.
You demand Preferential Treatment, to be held in special favor!
Your ways are to devalue others, to victimize and promote a hatred towards any group that promotes you. The stronger the negative feelings towards the group, the better.

You probably go out of your way to hammer Dr. Carson because he's objectively willing to treat others as individuals.

You may relentlessly resent and demean me because I have more Soul and as a Black, you cannot compete against on a equal playing field! Your alternative is to stone or beat others to your level, instead of being the best in your craft.

I adopted an Asian, Mexican and Greek-mixed little ones. They are all adults and live reasonably well. I would tell you, the same as when they were growing up, "Be responsible, work with all your might to be the best that you can be at wh**ever talent(s) you possess; treat others as you would like to be treated; walk upright, but humble before our GOD (the God of the Bible); use honest weights as you deal with others; etc. I'm not your Uncle Tom and my words are not malicious.
You're a racially motivated bigot that stereotypes... (show quote)


You have never had to walk in my shoes. Like most you see the world through your prism of experience. Most w****s never realized how different police treated B****s before video. Imagine that in everyday life with people who think like you.

Reply
Oct 16, 2017 15:45:43   #
PulletSurprise Loc: Columbus, GA
 
I do understand and my heart goes out to you, that's why I spoke as I did. On top of everything else, I'm a Jew! Double trouble, try those shoes out.

You and I have been blessed. We can't ride on other people's shoulders, we have to stand for those things that are right and good, letting everything else fall to the side. It's a long, arduous journey and we have to put one foot in front of the other, step by step. It's character over color. We can't afford to lower our heads, but we must continually look to our Creator who stands above all.
Live day by day, moment by moment and don't get bogged down in the mire. Choose life, not death.
After the night, comes the dawn.

There will be those to dislike us because of our color, our religion, our differences and that's the way of the world. Don't take it as personal. Struggles make us stronger. We learn and build on solid ground of love and faith. Our Creator is building His Kingdom of T***h, Righteousness and Mercy and I will stand on His side when the line is drawn.

Elijah became discourage and hid in a cave thinking he was alone when God revealed there were 7,000 other Prophets like him being persecuted. We are not alone.

May God bless you.

Reply
Oct 16, 2017 16:53:42   #
padremike Loc: Phenix City, Al
 
moldyoldy wrote:
The facts stand for themselves, you can add GWB to the list of those with legacy admissions.


GWB GPA at both Harvard and Yale, (you do recall he graduated from both?), were better that John Kerry. What was Obama's GPA? Wonder why he's so ashamed he won't release them? We know for certain he registered as a foreign exchange student. What do you make of that Mr. old and moldy? Your Manchurian president's secrets will be revealed someday.

Reply
 
 
Oct 16, 2017 17:44:29   #
moldyoldy
 
padremike wrote:
GWB GPA at both Harvard and Yale, (you do recall he graduated from both?), were better that John Kerry. What was Obama's GPA? Wonder why he's so ashamed he won't release them? We know for certain he registered as a foreign exchange student. What do you make of that Mr. old and moldy? Your Manchurian president's secrets will be revealed someday.


Try to prove anything that you said.

Reply
Oct 16, 2017 20:01:19   #
padremike Loc: Phenix City, Al
 
moldyoldy wrote:
Try to prove anything that you said.


In the words of Hillary, to you...."What difference does it make?" But it is true.

Reply
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main
OnePoliticalPlaza.com - Forum
Copyright 2012-2024 IDF International Technologies, Inc.