PUGGERNAUT posted:

Legacy admissions are such bullshit and no one ever seems to call universities out on them.

joepinetree posted:

Both are wrong, as quotas and set points have long been considered illegal.

Regents of the University of California v. Bakke prohibited quotas, and Gratz v. Bollinger prohibited giving a set number of points by race. Fisher v. University of Texas has also ruled that AA can only take place if the institution can show that they've tried race neutral ways of increasing diversity first.

computer parts posted:

Because hardly anyone has them. Public universities certainly don't.

computer parts posted:

Because hardly anyone has them. Public universities certainly don't.

Zwabu posted:

Okay then, how could there be any AA at all without having numbers in the equation? If the goal is to increase representation of disadvantaged or underrepresented minorities in the class, at some point you have to look at your admitted class and see whether that number or proportion increased to determine success. Unless you are saying those decisions essentially eradicated AA.

joepinetree posted:

This is not true at all. Most elite universities have them, and it is estimated that between 10 and 25% of admissions at ivies are legacy admissions. And regarding public universities, the only time legacy admissions were contested in court involved UNC (Rosenstock v. Board of Governors of the University of North Carolina) and the court ruled legacy admissions constitutional (because the court claimed it was a rational way of increasing alumni giving).

computer parts posted:

Yeah Ivies are not a large part of the university population (either by number of universities or student population). And just because something is constitutional doesn't mean it's used.

quote:

I am an alumnus/a of the University. Will this be taken into consideration when my child applies?

Because we maintain close ties with our alumni and value their commitment to the University, we do ask about alumni ties on our application. For non-resident children of alumni (those whose mother, father, step-father, or step-mother attended Carolina), family ties to the University may be used in our final admission decision. Please note that legacy status cannot be derived from siblings, grandparents, or other extended family.

joepinetree posted:

Don't be disingenuous. Giving the example of the ivy league doesn't mean that they are the only ones who do it. About 90% of top tier universities have some sort of legacy preference (see the book Affirmative Action for the Rich: Legacy Preferences in College Admissions), and only about 16 public universities explicitly have done away with legacy admissions that they once had in place.

For people without access to the book:

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/answer-sheet/college-admissions/should-colleges-stop-legacy-pr.html

quote:

At Texas A&M, 321 of the legacy admits in 2002 were white, while only 3 were black, and 25 were Hispanic.

computer parts posted:

Because hardly anyone has them. Public universities certainly don't.

computer parts posted:

For reference, there are 20,000 students that were admitted this year, and based on extrapolation there were at least 10,000 (e: closer to 11,000 with data) admitted in 2002. So it's not any sort of significant number.

Centripetal Horse posted:

I love deadlines goalposts. I like the whooshing sound they make as they fly by.

Sometimes it's OK to just say, "Huh, I guess I was wrong," instead of making torturous efforts to shift the debate until you can declare victory by exhaustion of the opposition.

Mr Ice Cream Glove posted:

Goddamn




http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0...RXSBASFFH5FZYPT

computer parts posted:

I'm not wrong, though. It represents 3% of admissions at my school. A non-legacy based system (CalTech) had 1.5% children of alumni. That's twice the percentage, but still an insignificant amount of people.

And this is before admitting that the trend in public universities has been to eliminate legacy admits for admission, so yes it is a rare occurrence.

Oh and using Caltech as an example is hilarious because they're a very focused university and very costly.

computer parts posted:

Because hardly anyone has them. Public universities certainly don't.

Jerry Manderbilt posted:

Yeah, it spoke volumes to me that my dad is perfectly happy to about AA and race as a factor in admissions "denying me a place at Cal or UCLA" while not saying a word about how it might have been unfair that I could get the legacy factor for Princeton since dad was a Princeton alum.

Mr Ice Cream Glove posted:

joepinetree posted:

Is absolutely, 100% not true, so yeah, you are wrong. It is specially disingenuous to go through that much information and focus on the "only 3% at Texas A&M!" argument, after reading about 90% of top tier colleges and universities doing it, with some having as many as 25% of incoming students as legacies.

TapTheForwardAssist posted:

She is legally Hispanic

Gozinbulx posted:

Explain.

computer parts posted:

Because hardly anyone has them. Public universities certainly don't.

Gozinbulx posted:

Explain.

Gozinbulx posted:

Explain.

Gozinbulx posted:

Explain.

PeterWeller posted:

Does race play a role in admissions at HBCs, or is it just momentum that maintains their ethnic makeup, or are they more diverse and that's why we use the H for "Historically"?

PeterWeller posted:

Does race play a role in admissions at HBCs, or is it just momentum that maintains their ethnic makeup, or are they more diverse and that's why we use the H for "Historically"?

Popular Thug Drink posted:

Most/all of them accept non-black students. Some of them are actually majority non-black. I would say momentum at this point - most HBCUs are somewhat obscure state schools, and your average white high school grad is aiming for an elite out of state school, a large state school, a small liberal arts school far away from mom and dad, or local community college. On the contrary, black high school grads are much more likely to be aware of HBCUs and prefer to go there. This is especially true for elite HBCUs like Spelman, Morehouse, or Howard.

joepinetree posted:

Most HBCUs have been trying like hell to recruit more broadly, specially among Hispanics. The thing is that besides the historical ties to African Americans, most HBCUs also have very explicit missions about serving underprivileged or communities in need. These things together put them at a disadvantage in the prestige game. So the Morehouse School of Medicine, for example, which is one of the best regarded medical schools for primary care, still has a mostly African American student body because not many white students know about it or consider it, or if they do they do not fit the mission of wanting to serve under-served communities. So African American undergrads who know or have ties to it will apply there, but other students will prefer Mercer or similar.

Gozinbulx posted:

Explain.

Mr Ice Cream Glove posted:

Palin did the Ice Bucket challenge

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Swr-vs9mqo
She challenged Hillary and Mccain

Mr Interweb posted:

So I was watching a debate between Robert Reich, Mark Zandi vs. Art Laffer and Glen Hubbard, and goddamn, Art Laffer has to be one of the worst debaters I've ever seen. He spent the entire time making the most simplistic, childlike arguments for tax cuts. The guy's supposed to be an economist, but I've seen Glenn Beck make more substantial defenses for SSE than this dude did. Considering this is the guy who arguably created the Republican Party of today when it comes to economics, you would think he'd do a little better job when it comes to bullshitting at the very least.

Elephant Ambush posted:

I laughed for the entire 2 minutes because she is the dumbest person alive but I almost died at the end. She's an awful person but I give her credit for taking the ice water to the dome.

quote:

The White House sent three officials to attend Monday's funeral for Michael Brown in St. Louis -- three more than it sent for former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher's funeral last year.

The administration's handling of the Brown funeral already has started to raise comparisons between the two.

For Monday's funeral, the White House sent two officials with the White House Office of Public Engagement as well as Broderick Johnson, chairman of the My Brother's Keeper Task Force.

No White House officials, though, were part of the presidential delegation sent last year to Thatcher's funeral. For that, the White House sent former secretaries of State George Schultz and James Baker III -- as well as the charge d'affaires to the U.K. and the former U.S. ambassador.

At the time, the nature of the delegation stirred controversy in the British media as tabloids claimed British officials felt snubbed that high-level American officials -- including President Obama himself -- were not attending.

The White House countered that Baker and Schultz' attendance were "testimony" to Thatcher's "global stature and reputation." British Prime Minister David Cameron's office also denied claims at the time that the administration had snubbed the late prime minister.

But in the case of Brown, an unarmed black 18-year-old fatally shot by a police officer earlier this month, the Obama administration has devoted considerable resources. Attorney General Eric Holder visited Ferguson, Mo., last week and has dozens of investigators on the ground conducting a federal civil rights probe.

The administration also said that one of the White House officials attending the funeral on Monday had a personal connection.

Marlon Marshall, deputy director of the White House Office of Public Engagement, is a St. Louis native and went to high school with Michael Brown's mother.

The other White House official is Heather Foster, public engagement adviser for the White House Office of Public Engagement.

The White House also came under criticism recently when Obama did not attend the funeral for Maj. Gen. Harold Greene, the highest-ranking U.S. military officer killed in combat since the Vietnam War.

He was killed in a suspected insider attack in Afghanistan. Obama was in Martha's Vineyard during the funeral, but Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel and Army Chief of Staff Gen. Ray Odierno attended.

When Greene's body arrived at Dover Air Force Base days earlier, Odierno and Army Secretary John McHugh reportedly were there for the transfer. While White House officials typically do not attend these transfers, Obama and past U.S. presidents do from time to time. Obama and top Defense officials attended the transfer, for instance, of the remains of 30 U.S. service members killed in Afghanistan in 2011 when their helicopter was shot down.

Meanwhile, the highest-level administration official at the 2010 funeral for border agent Brian Terry was then-Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano.

Mr Ice Cream Glove posted:

loving Fox News




http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...itics+-+Text%29

Jerry Manderbilt posted:

Hey, they should be glad the White House didn't send people over to the UK to party when she died.

Zeroisanumber posted:

God knows that I did.

FMguru posted:

"Ding Dong The Witch Is Dead" actually charted in the UK the week Thatcher died.

RadicalR posted:

I find this amusing, if not petty.

Content:

So the Congress is going to vote on overturning Citizen United. What are the odds that they'll succeed?