A perfect SAT score denied entrance to ivy league schools liberals trickle down stupid...,

[JimBowie1958]

Whites (I believe now) are the minority, when all other minorities are added into one. I think whites make up 47% of the population now, (I could be wrong, that might have been a projection). Still, what I'm saying is, you throw a rock into a crowd in Europe, your gonna hit a white person.

Whites are not yet a minority in the USA, nor will they be.

there is nothing about speaking Spanish that changes ones race. Most Hispanics are WHITE, not some other race.

 

[Onyx]

DO you not understand how your "20%" does not in any way support your conclusion?

How does it not? It shows that there is no negative discrimination against Asians for being accepted into American universities.

Remember, Asian Americans represent 5.5% of the American population, but over 20% of the students in most universities. This guy is claiming that Stanford denied him on the basis of race, when they are 29% Asian.

 

[Correll]

DO you not understand how your "20%" does not in any way support your conclusion?

How does it not? It shows that there is no negative discrimination against Asians for being accepted into American universities.

Remember, Asian Americans represent 5.5% of the American population, but over 20% of the students in most universities. This guy is claiming that Stanford denied him on the basis of race, when they are 29% Asian.

THe (well documented) negative discrimination against Asian Americans is insufficient to completely offset the massive edge they enjoy in academic achievement.


This is a simple concept. You may disagree with it, but it is not credible that you cannot understand what I am saying.


Stop dodging the point.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

That's because we're smarter than you. Such is life.

Then why do so many of you support a system that ***** you up the ass?

Do you enjoy that shit?

I'm not a Democrat. I've asked myself that very question for years. Why do Jews do it?

 

[NYcarbineer]

According to conservative consensus, a college should have the right to accept or reject anyone they choose, for any reason.

 

[JimBowie1958]

I'm not a Democrat. I've asked myself that very question for years. Why do Jews do it?

Eliphino.

Makes me wonder if democratic processes can really work in our modern era if people dont learn what their own interests are and vote for them.

 

[Correll]

According to conservative consensus, a college should have the right to accept or reject anyone they choose, for any reason.

Are you defending the idea of rejecting people based on race?

 

[NYcarbineer]

According to conservative consensus, a college should have the right to accept or reject anyone they choose, for any reason.

Are you defending the idea of rejecting people based on race?

No. I'm pointing out that based on my observations here at USMB, most conservatives believe that a business, which would include colleges, should have the right to refuse service to anyone for any reason.

 

[konradv]

Of course. Here in America, we're far more concerned with skin color than with character, intelligence and effort. That's a given.

Don't forget the C-student scions of legacies. Why is all about skin color and not the 1%. It's the mechanic that got Bush into the Ivies and the main reason for AA, but gets completely ignored. Why?

 

[SavannahMann]

With a perfect ACT score and 13 Advanced Placement courses under his belt, Michael Wang applied to seven Ivy League universities and Stanford in 2013.

An Asian-American, Wang suspected his race might work against him. But he was still shocked when he was rejected by Stanford and every Ivy League school except for the University of Pennsylvania.

Being Asian actually increases your chances of being accepted into an American university due to affirmative action policies.

It sounds like this entitled try hard is just butthurt that he didn't get accepted, and is trying trying to offload accountability by playing the race card.

Your ignorance is showing. This has been an open secret for more than 40 years. If the University of California Los Angeles went strictly off of test scores the student body would be about 70% Asian.

Harvard's odd quota on Asian-Americans

They limit the numbers of Asians so that the White Kids and the other minorities are represented.

Simply denouncing any report as "but hurt" without knowing anything about it insures that the wall of ignorance you have constructed around yourself will remain intact.

 

[JimBowie1958]

According to conservative consensus, a college should have the right to accept or reject anyone they choose, for any reason.

Are you defending the idea of rejecting people based on race?

No. I'm pointing out that based on my observations here at USMB, most conservatives believe that a business, which would include colleges, should have the right to refuse service to anyone for any reason.

Those are PRIVATE institutions, not state owned colleges and universities.

Private higher education institutions can and do pretty much what they want regarding PC directed admissions.

 

[Correll]

According to conservative consensus, a college should have the right to accept or reject anyone they choose, for any reason.

Are you defending the idea of rejecting people based on race?

No. I'm pointing out that based on my observations here at USMB, most conservatives believe that a business, which would include colleges, should have the right to refuse service to anyone for any reason.

So you agree that, even if these schools have the legal RIGHT to do this, that it is wrong?

 

[usmbguest5318]

Oh, lord....The man's was admitted to Williams and U. Penn and chose Williams. He applied also to Yale and Princeton, and didn't get admitted to either. He's a minority.

A number of things cross my mind:

1. With his academic and extracurricular performance, why the hell didn't he pursue the early-decision (ED) route at the school he most wanted to attend? That's important because schools want to balance their student bodies across an assortment of characteristics -- grade level, non-academic interests, demographics, life experiences, interpersonal skills, comportment, students' longer term goals, etc. With his super high grades, Mr. Wang should have identified the school he most wanted and applied ED. That would have put him better standing for getting admitted because it'd have given him two shots instead of one. He didn't avail himself of his best opportunity to secure admission to the institution he most preferred.
2. The man is complaining because he wasn't accepted at several Ivy league schools and then didn't opt to go to the one that did admit him. If he was "dying" to go Ivy, why is he at Williams instead?
3. The man, perhaps the press too, is griping about a distinction without a difference. He's an undergrad, not a grad student. Among comparable schools, it doesn't matter where one gets one's baccalaureate degree, with the sole exception of Harvard. (Harvard stands apart for one reason: network.) What does matter somewhat is where one gets their graduate degree(s). For example, a person seeking a graduate degree in computer science probably wouldn't prefer Harvard (aside from the network) over some ten or so other schools, including Stanford, MIT, Princeton, Cornell and UC Berkeley. For a doctoral degree, the best schools to attend are often not even in the "big league" that one would traditionally recognize.
   
   I mention the above because it's almost certain that Mr. Wang will pursue a graduate degree. These days, in most disciplines and in terms of the offing of a fine career, a master's degree is what a bachelors was some 20+ years ago. The two fields I know of that are highly demanded, well paid and that don't bid one to get a master's degree are accounting and engineering, unsurprisingly.

I haven't read the thread posts, but I suspect some anti-affirmative action person has registered their complaint that a minority didn't "apparently" benefit in a college admissions process as a result of being a minority. Go figure....

 

[Hum Dinger]

My son, a white male hetero, was just rejected by Yale yesterday. He could not have fit Yale's description for what they were looking for in students more. He had an over 4.0 GPA, graduated Valedictorian, had done considerable amounts of community service, is an employee of Yale, has his own office on the Yale campus and had recommendations from a Yale professor and several Yale alumni.

While we were disappointed, he's been accepted at several good schools. Yale was the only Ivy league that he applied for. We figure it's just as well that he attend a less competitive school for undergrad, so he'll probably graduate at or near the top of his class then go onto a top graduate school.

But it seems that Yale does not choose their students by the criteria that they advertise. God knows what their true criteria is.

Methinks that you have to be either wealthy, gay or both.

 

[sakinago]

Oh, lord....The man's was admitted to Williams and U. Penn and chose Williams. He applied also to Yale and Princeton, and didn't get admitted to either. He's a minority.

A number of things cross my mind:

1. With his academic and extracurricular performance, why the hell didn't he pursue the early-decision (ED) route at the school he most wanted to attend? That's important because schools want to balance their student bodies across an assortment of characteristics -- grade level, non-academic interests, demographics, life experiences, interpersonal skills, comportment, students' longer term goals, etc. With his super high grades, Mr. Wang should have identified the school he most wanted and applied ED. That would have put him better standing for getting admitted because it'd have given him two shots instead of one. He didn't avail himself of his best opportunity to secure admission to the institution he most preferred.
2. The man is complaining because he wasn't accepted at several Ivy league schools and then didn't opt to go to the one that did admit him. If he was "dying" to go Ivy, why is he at Williams instead?
3. The man, perhaps the press too, is griping about a distinction without a difference. He's an undergrad, not a grad student. Among comparable schools, it doesn't matter where one gets one's baccalaureate degree, with the sole exception of Harvard. (Harvard stands apart for one reason: network.) What does matter somewhat is where one gets their graduate degree(s). For example, a person seeking a graduate degree in computer science probably wouldn't prefer Harvard (aside from the network) over some ten or so other schools, including Stanford, MIT, Princeton, Cornell and UC Berkeley. For a doctoral degree, the best schools to attend are often not even in the "big league" that one would traditionally recognize.
   
   I mention the above because it's almost certain that Mr. Wang will pursue a graduate degree. These days, in most disciplines and in terms of the offing of a fine career, a master's degree is what a bachelors was some 20+ years ago. The two fields I know of that are highly demanded, well paid and that don't bid one to get a master's degree are accounting and engineering, unsurprisingly.

I haven't read the thread posts, but I suspect some anti-affirmative action person has registered their complaint that a minority didn't "apparently" benefit in a college admissions process as a result of being a minority. Go figure....

So discrimination based on skin color in a negative manner is ok? Because he got into a good school anyway?

 

[NYcarbineer]

According to conservative consensus, a college should have the right to accept or reject anyone they choose, for any reason.

Are you defending the idea of rejecting people based on race?

No. I'm pointing out that based on my observations here at USMB, most conservatives believe that a business, which would include colleges, should have the right to refuse service to anyone for any reason.

So you agree that, even if these schools have the legal RIGHT to do this, that it is wrong?

My opinion is nowhere to be found in my statements. I was expressing a curiosity as to why conservatives object to this when they generally think a business should have the 'liberty' to do or not do business with anyone they please.

 

[NYcarbineer]

According to conservative consensus, a college should have the right to accept or reject anyone they choose, for any reason.

Are you defending the idea of rejecting people based on race?

No. I'm pointing out that based on my observations here at USMB, most conservatives believe that a business, which would include colleges, should have the right to refuse service to anyone for any reason.

Those are PRIVATE institutions, not state owned colleges and universities.

Private higher education institutions can and do pretty much what they want regarding PC directed admissions.

Yale is not a state school.

 

[sakinago]

According to conservative consensus, a college should have the right to accept or reject anyone they choose, for any reason.

Are you defending the idea of rejecting people based on race?

No. I'm pointing out that based on my observations here at USMB, most conservatives believe that a business, which would include colleges, should have the right to refuse service to anyone for any reason.

So you agree that, even if these schools have the legal RIGHT to do this, that it is wrong?

My opinion is nowhere to be found in my statements. I was expressing a curiosity as to why conservatives object to this when they generally think a business should have the 'liberty' to do or not do business with anyone they please.

What are you going on about? Is your point that universities should discriminate?

What we're talking about is, an anti-discrimination law...that discriminates by nature, is not a good approach to fight discrimination. It's not that hard to understand that point.

 

[NYcarbineer]

According to conservative consensus, a college should have the right to accept or reject anyone they choose, for any reason.

Are you defending the idea of rejecting people based on race?

No. I'm pointing out that based on my observations here at USMB, most conservatives believe that a business, which would include colleges, should have the right to refuse service to anyone for any reason.

So you agree that, even if these schools have the legal RIGHT to do this, that it is wrong?

My opinion is nowhere to be found in my statements. I was expressing a curiosity as to why conservatives object to this when they generally think a business should have the 'liberty' to do or not do business with anyone they please.

What are you going on about? Is your point that universities should discriminate?

What we're talking about is, an anti-discrimination law...that discriminates by nature, is not a good approach to fight discrimination. It's not that hard to understand that point.

I'm talking about the broad consensus among RW'ers around here that a business should be able to refuse service to gays, or blacks, or Jews, or anyone they please if that's their desire,

and thus, why are they objecting to a college doing exactly what these RW'ers otherwise endorse?

 

[sakinago]

Are you defending the idea of rejecting people based on race?

No. I'm pointing out that based on my observations here at USMB, most conservatives believe that a business, which would include colleges, should have the right to refuse service to anyone for any reason.

So you agree that, even if these schools have the legal RIGHT to do this, that it is wrong?

My opinion is nowhere to be found in my statements. I was expressing a curiosity as to why conservatives object to this when they generally think a business should have the 'liberty' to do or not do business with anyone they please.

What are you going on about? Is your point that universities should discriminate?

What we're talking about is, an anti-discrimination law...that discriminates by nature, is not a good approach to fight discrimination. It's not that hard to understand that point.

I'm talking about the broad consensus among RW'ers around here that a business should be able to refuse service to gays, or blacks, or Jews, or anyone they please if that's their desire,

and thus, why are they objecting to a college doing exactly what these RW'ers otherwise endorse?

Ok I'll entertain your ridiculous red herring, if a "college" wants to do so, they wouldn't be accredited. Which their degrees would be useless, and not a viable business model.

But if you actually want to fight against discrimination, why support a law that discriminates unfairly against minorities, despite there being much more effective options to fight discrimination? I'm also done with entertaining your red herrings to no where.