Supreme Court upholds Michigan Affirmative Action ban on college applications

[jamil]

Dagnabit! Wrong guy! Nobody knows who MLK is, but we all know "Jr." And as for his mister scammer, he's a clown, he should've been given 20 years.

MLK is the defacto abbreviation for Martin Luther King Jr. Is anyone really confused about who the subject is when referred to as MLK?

 

[Kutnupe14]

MLK is the defacto abbreviation for Martin Luther King Jr. Is anyone really confused about who the subject is when referred to as MLK?

I used MLK, it was spelled out in Church's post.

 

[jamil]

I used MLK, it was spelled out in Church's post.

Is anyone confused about to whom church referred? But yeah, you're technically right.

 

[churchmouse]

Jr is a total putz. He is riding the wave set in motion by his father as so many others are doing. They have twisted all of this up into a revenue stream. It is a job for them to keep all this alive. Sad.

 

[jamil]

Jr is a total putz. He is riding the wave set in motion by his father as so many others are doing. They have twisted all of this up into a revenue stream. It is a job for them to keep all this alive. Sad.

Jr is the man. the putz is MLK III.

 

[Phil502]

That's flat out wrong. You are taking one possible outcome of AA, and incorrectly stating that it is all that it fully encompasses. AA can be as simple as targeting low income minority children to apply to certain colleges with telephone calls, flyers, school visits; while not doing the same in more affluent white area/schools. This doesn't mean, as in the case of my mother, that she was unqualified, it means that as a black female in Arkansas, the possibility of going to a "white" school (something not remotely considered before) was actually a honest option. AA started as outreach programs to groups that had been traditionally discriminated against, and actively informing them that new avenues had opened for their participation. You are attempting to imply that it started as picking one person over another, regardless of qualifications, which is NOT how the practice started. Today, most people understand that they can, for the most part, accomplish anything that is within their ability (which obviously hasn't always been the case) hence why I stated earlier that the practice, in all forms, is archaic.

The argument against it is not that it informs minorities of opportunities available but that it actually gave them extra points for being minorities. When you get extra points for merely being a minority than you are in fact discriminating against those that are not minorities and subsequently got bumped by someone awarded points based on something other than skill.

As usual, people supporting this socialist garbage don't know when to draw the line at helping without hurting.

 

[churchmouse]

Jr is the man. the putz is MLK III.

You are correct.....my bad.

 

[Kutnupe14]

The argument against it is not that it informs minorities of opportunities available but that it actually gave them extra points for being minorities. When you get extra points for merely being a minority than you are in fact discriminating against those that are not minorities and subsequently got bumped by someone awarded points based on something other than skill.

As usual, people supporting this socialist garbage don't know when to draw the line at helping without hurting.

That wasn't what I was addressing. I was correcting to origin of the application, which was NOT picking unqualified people over qualified.

 

[spec4]

Isn't Affirmative Action the hiring of minorities, regardless of qualifications, to keep the government off the back of the employer? If I'm hiring people (which I did most of my working life), my major concern is getting the best person I can for the job. I've hired some excellent minority employees, and also some minority employees who were real dogs. Same experience with non-minority employees. I do recall the government coming in once and saying we didn't have enough minority employees. This was in an affluent suburb of Chicago which was about 99% white.

 

[Kutnupe14]

Isn't Affirmative Action the hiring of minorities, regardless of qualifications, to keep the government off the back of the employer? If I'm hiring people (which I did most of my working life), my major concern is getting the best person I can for the job. I've hired some excellent minority employees, and also some minority employees who were real dogs. Same experience with non-minority employees. I do recall the government coming in once and saying we didn't have enough minority employees. This was in an affluent suburb of Chicago which was about 99% white.

Believe it or not, there was once a time, before AA, that the best candidate for the actual job wasn't hired.

 

[jamil]

Believe it or not, there was once a time, before AA, that the best candidate for the actual job wasn't hired.

Nepotism has always been a problem, and always will be a problem. But that's probably not what you're talking about.

 

[JeremiahJohnson]

I can tell you how AA in Indiana affected my family. My son applied to a number of schools including Purdue which is a state university. He was told all the mechanical engineering spots were taken by better applicants and that if he changed his major they may be able to accept him. That's incorrect. The actual reason he was not accepted into Mechanical Engineering was not based on merit, SAT, or Highschool GPA, but rather the quota was full. One of his classmates was accepted into Mechanical Engineering with lower qualifications in all areas, but she was black and low income. So, he was accepted into Rose Hulman and chose to go there. The cost is much higher, but it's a private school that just happens to be the 14-year running #1 undergraduate engineering school in the nation. He is now finishing his second year (4 more weeks) and is doing very, VERY well.

I ask you, should he and I pay twice the tuition and overall cost just because he's a white male from a middle class family? Obvious answer - NO.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

Believe it or not, there was once a time, before AA, that the best candidate for the actual job wasn't hired.

And AA didn't fix that.

 

[spec4]

An employer would be a fool not to hire the best candidate.

 

[Twangbanger]

I think the average "Slats Grobnik" observer of this case is capable of seeing something the elite Liberals apparently cannot: we're not talking about Arkansas, or Mississippi, or Georgia here. We're talking about Michigan, the industrialized North, Motown...the place which most exemplifies where the Black Middle Class was born. Not some Buford T. Justice back-water bayou. The court simply recognized the ability of the voters of an industrialized Northern state to make the right call on an aspect of racial preferences in their state. But, when the Sotomayors of the world look at this case, that's not what they see: they see "precedent." The "Wise Latinas" see the theoretical possibility of other states following suit, and they don't just want to strangle that baby in the cradle - they want to point a GE minigun into the cradle and burn a hole through it. They believe (on this issue, at least) that all states should be treated the same, as an abstract principle: as goes Michigan, so goes Mississippi.

But the whole basis of the Voting Rights Act / Affirmative Action / Civil Rights legal establishment they hold so dear, is the principle enshrined in law that all states are _not_ equal with regard to racial equality. In the case of the VRA, for example, they vigorously defend the ability of the Federal Government to treat states differently, based on their history of racial discrimination.

So, then, if states are to be treated differently based on their record on civil rights - why isn't Michigan allowed to get credit for being "Not Mississippi?" Why do they have to be painted with the same brush that Boss Hogg and Buford T. Justice get painted with?

And no, this is not just about phone calls and distributing "flyers" in minority neighborhoods encouraging the residents to attend a certain school. When minority enrollment drops by half once the AA practice is discontinued, there has to be some mechanism more "affirmative" at work there than just the distribution of "flyers." When enrollment drops that much, it conclusively leads to the realization that those schools had to have been admitting people who would otherwise not fit their standards. And, once AA went away - and they were no longer allowed by law to give candidates additional "brownie points" for skin color - they were left with no choice but to stop rigging the game.

This looks like a good decision. The SC simply recognized the ability of voters in one northern State, to amend the constitution of that State, to end race-based admissions policies in _publicly-funded_ (not private) colleges and universities of that State. They are still free to target students based on income. But, that's not what AA advocates want, because when you target based on income, you see, it doesn't "work:" you end up pulling in a lot of low-income white students, because, well...there's a whole lot of low-income white people out there. And they can go hang, because we don't want them.

 

[IndyDave1776]

Speaking of Sotomayor, how well would someone like Roberts fared had he remarked that a wise traditional while man would make better decisions than [minority] could? I rather doubt that the same free pass would be issued which was given with the 'wise latina' remark.

 

[Que]

I can tell you how AA in Indiana affected my family. My son applied to a number of schools including Purdue which is a state university. He was told all the mechanical engineering spots were taken by better applicants and that if he changed his major they may be able to accept him. That's incorrect. The actual reason he was not accepted into Mechanical Engineering was not based on merit, SAT, or Highschool GPA, but rather the quota was full. One of his classmates was accepted into Mechanical Engineering with lower qualifications in all areas, but she was black and low income. So, he was accepted into Rose Hulman and chose to go there. The cost is much higher, but it's a private school that just happens to be the 14-year running #1 undergraduate engineering school in the nation. He is now finishing his second year (4 more weeks) and is doing very, VERY well.

I ask you, should he and I pay twice the tuition and overall cost just because he's a white male from a middle class family? Obvious answer - NO.

If you don't mind me asking, what was your son's SAT/ACT scores, GPA, class rank, and extra curricular activities?

And AA didn't fix that.

This is a subject I really detest, but the conversation carries on and you bring up an interesting point. Can you tell me what will/can fix it? Let's remove AA from the conversation and go back to the creation of the policy. What could have been done to stop what was happening in hiring practices and admission to public universities?

I remember being told on the forum and face-to-face that I'm INGO's AA quota on the mod staff. Yeah, they may have been "joking," but it's the same thing with real jobs and other opportunities. Who is to say the best person wasn't chosen? But, because the choice was different, it was because of quotas and other benefits. I've never seen a different choice labeled as the best choice. Still, SIUADO!

 

[Kutnupe14]

And AA didn't fix that.

What did?

 

[Kutnupe14]

If you don't mind me asking, what was your son's SAT/ACT scores, GPA, class rank, and extra curricular activities?



This is a subject I really detest, but the conversation carries on and you bring up an interesting point. Can you tell me what will/can fix it? Let's remove AA from the conversation and go back to the creation of the policy. What could have been done to stop what was happening in hiring practices and admission to public universities?

I remember being told on the forum and face-to-face that I'm INGO's AA quota on the mod staff. Yeah, they may have been "joking," but it's the same thing with real jobs and other opportunities. Who is to say the best person wasn't chosen? But, because the choice was different, it was because of quotas and other benefits. I've never seen a different choice labeled as the best choice. Still, SIUADO!

Most would say remove all restrictions and hire/admit the best candidates. Interestingly enough, that tends to be Asian males, who are routinely aren't admitted to schools based on the fact that they would dominate incoming classes.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

What did?

You think it's fixed?