home
The Other Affirmative Action | 81 comments (81 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

Sorry, the point of the statistic (none / 0) (#62)
by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Oct 05, 2007 at 04:45:00 PM EST
is to support the point of the article, to whit:
What they almost never say is that many of the applicants who were rejected were far more qualified than those accepted. Moreover, contrary to popular belief, it was not the black and Hispanic beneficiaries of affirmative action, but the rich white kids with cash and connections who elbowed most of the worthier applicants aside.

and not at all that
the concern about the admission of so-called "unqualified" students is a red herring as it has, at best, a limited effect on the institution.


[ Parent ]
You Must Be Kidding (none / 0) (#64)
by squeaky on Fri Oct 05, 2007 at 05:07:52 PM EST
Seemed exactly the point of the article:

the concern about the admission of so-called "unqualified" [Affirmative Action] students is a red herring as it has, at best, a limited effect on the institution.

Maybe without the words Affirmative Action, which you left out of the quote, you would have a point. If anything this piece is a argument that Affirmative Action is a good thing.

A degree from a selective college can open many doors for a talented young person from a humble background. But rather than promoting social mobility, our nation's selective colleges appear to be thwarting it, by turning away applicants who have excelled given their circumstances and offering second chances to wealthy and connected young people who have squandered many of the advantages life has offered them.
When social mobility goes away, at least two dangerous things can happen. The privileged class that produces most of our nation's leaders can become complacent enough to foster mediocrity, and less-fortunate segments of our society can become resigned to the notion that hard work will not get them anywhere.


[ Parent ]
Thanks for admitting I have a point. (none / 0) (#67)
by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Oct 05, 2007 at 05:51:55 PM EST
the concern about the admission of so-called "unqualified" students is a red herring as it has, at best, a limited effect on the institution.
particularly since this is the exact quote, nothing was left out except BTD's "To wit," that started the sentence.

Anyone home?

[ Parent ]

Anyone Home? (none / 0) (#69)
by squeaky on Fri Oct 05, 2007 at 06:11:45 PM EST
Considering that whole context of the quote was Affirmative action and the whole point of the article was refuting the BS claims about the harm from Affirmative Action, the quote is exactly what the article is about. That you say that it has nothing to do whatsoever with the point of the article is beyond odd.

And I have to agree with BTD that there is no substantive difference between your two quotes.

Are you nitpicking in order to save face? If so it is not even clear what your nitpick is.

[ Parent ]

Saving face (none / 0) (#71)
by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Oct 05, 2007 at 06:44:19 PM EST
Thery missed the point of the article and arenow saving face.

Remember, this started with them actually attacking the article, not me.

See where the aim is now.

[ Parent ]

Last Resort (none / 0) (#73)
by squeaky on Fri Oct 05, 2007 at 06:56:21 PM EST
Shoot the messenger at close range, and still miss.

[ Parent ]
If your point is that you and BTD choose to infer (none / 0) (#72)
by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Oct 05, 2007 at 06:50:40 PM EST
from the article that because there are 1/2 as many dim AA kids in colleges than dim non-AA kids, that dim AA kids don't harm or have little effect on the college, then sure, infer away.

But that was not in any way the point of the article and in fact that is not ever even discussed in the article.

The point of the article, and the quote in discussion, is that many "select" students are elbowed aside, and, numerically, most of them are elbowed aside by by dim white kids with connections.

BTD chose to infer that that meant that dim AA kids have little effect on the colleges, and I chose to recognize, in a kinda humorous twist, to me anyway, that, from the quote, numerically, dim whites and Asians were underrepresented in the colleges and that dim black and Hispanics are over represented.

But I never said (or if I did, it was a poorly worded comment, I'm too lazy to actually go back and look at the comments) that my point was the point of the article or the quote.

You and BTD seem to think, adamantly, that your inference is the point of the article.

That humors me also.

[ Parent ]

WTF (none / 0) (#74)
by squeaky on Fri Oct 05, 2007 at 07:07:38 PM EST
A degree from a selective college can open many doors for a talented young person from a humble background. But rather than promoting social mobility.....

Affirmative Action is the program that promotes social mobility. You do not have to be an Einstein to get that from the article which is pro "social mobility".

More from Peter Schmidt:

Amazon.com: Creating a Class: College Admissions and the Education ...
Rather than serving as routes to social mobility, many college admission ... Are Winning the War over College Affirmative Action by Peter Schmidt $16.47 ...


[ Parent ]
We must be reading different articles. (none / 0) (#75)
by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Oct 05, 2007 at 07:10:39 PM EST
This is the one BTD linked to.

[ Parent ]
Google Search (none / 0) (#76)
by squeaky on Fri Oct 05, 2007 at 07:21:41 PM EST
Affirmative Action + Social Mobility brings up a quote from the aurhor Peter Schmidt. The very same author of the linked article.

His position, which seems obvious to me, but obscure to you, is that "Rich White Kids Are Winning the War Over College Affirmative Action". The subtitle or his book Color and Money

[ Parent ]

Oh fer cripe's sake, there you go. (none / 0) (#78)
by sarcastic unnamed one on Sat Oct 06, 2007 at 12:10:34 AM EST
Everyone else here is talking about the linked article - the actual subject of the thread - and you're talking about something completely different that you googled.

What a waste of time.


[ Parent ]

Are You Drunk? (none / 0) (#79)
by squeaky on Sat Oct 06, 2007 at 12:36:46 AM EST
Everyone else here is talking about the linked article - the actual subject of the thread - and you're talking about something completely different that you googled.

Peter Schmidt, the author of the thread's linked article,  wrote the book "Color and Money: How Rich White Kids Are Winning the War over College Affirmative Action." which is the subject of this thread,
 even if you refuse to believe it.

You have argued that Peter Schmidt's linked article above has nothing to do with Affirmative Action. That couldn't be more wrong. And you complain that my mention of his book is unrelated to the subject of this thread, when it is the exact same topic of this thread is simply nuts.

About the book:

The elite U.S. universities remain "bastions of privilege" in spite of decades of affirmative action and a stated commitment by schools to diversify their campuses, says the author of a new book on college admissions.
In "Color and Money: How Rich White Kids Are Winning the War over College Affirmative Action," higher education journalist Peter Schmidt argues that many select schools give admissions preference to white applicants and that, while people resent race-conscious admissions, they ignore admissions based on wealth or influence. "As it stands now, if anyone is winning the war over college affirmative action, it's wealthy white kids," says Schmidt, a deputy editor of the Chronicle of Higher Education.

link

[ Parent ]

Oh, and (none / 0) (#80)
by squeaky on Sat Oct 06, 2007 at 12:46:50 AM EST
Here is more of a waste of time for you Peter Schmidt's blog about the subject at hand The Other Affirmative Action


[ Parent ]
Um (none / 0) (#65)
by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Oct 05, 2007 at 05:25:02 PM EST
IF you think those are somehow not the same thing, go for it.

[ Parent ]
I know what the article said, (none / 0) (#68)
by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Oct 05, 2007 at 05:54:44 PM EST
and I know what you wrote that it said. They are not the same thing.

Sorry, but you brought your preconceived notions into the thinking here.

[ Parent ]

As I said (none / 0) (#70)
by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Oct 05, 2007 at 06:43:09 PM EST
Go for it.

[ Parent ]

The Other Affirmative Action | 81 comments (81 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

  • Premium Ads

  • Blog Ads

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

    donate to TalkLeft