I think what we have here is a failure to communicate

[Ernham]

Possible reasons why people believe AA should exist:

1. They believe that due to past discrimination that it has somehow "******ed" modern day URMs on some level.

The problem with this assumption is that even though it might have validity, many other groups that aren't considered "urms" have suffered similar situations but have been given no leg up. Further, although not "PC", in the case of blacks, had they never been here(americas) to be "horribly oppressed, " they'd be back in africa and destitute, possibly in a mud hut. FACT. Also, some groups that are considered "URMs" were never in that "oppressed" situation to begin with..

The further assumption that blacks in a particular have been given "negative self concepts" and whatnot are further LIES. Black children score significantly higher than asian/white children on self-esteem surveys, responding more affirmatively to survey questions such as "I'm an important person," "I'm smart,""People like me,"etc.

2. They believe that socioeconomic reasons are the root of the "gap" between blacks and whites/asians.

Unfortunately, this is a fallacy. Although socioeconomic status will definitely have educational side-effects on opportunities and aptitude, the closer and closer you match whites/asians with blacks, the more and more blacks fall behind. Check my sig for the stats on essentially welfare family asian/whites vs upper class blacks. Quite alarming for all you egalitarian Marxists out there, I'm sure.


3. They have been informed that URM are more likely to return to their respective communities to work.

This is probably true. However, there is no data that ANYONE has bothered to collect on where lower class whites/asians go after they get their degrees. This is classic in america where poor whites or "ORMs" are doubly oppressed, not studied, not offered any outreach programs, etc.


The assumption that whites as a whole have always prospered while other groups have not is simply ridiculous. As a whole, certain stratums of society have always been held back regardless of their skin. As a matter of fact, it wasn't until the socialist groups started mobilizing in the US did it become possible for the "average joe" to get a good education.

The majority of whites in undergrad school and beyond are upper to middle class. And they may actually identify with having been given some advantage due to their parents finances/networks or whatnot. HOWEVER, these individuals seem to constantly ignore poor whites. This is actually tied into psychology. Whites more compete "within a group(their own race, whites)," so if they can oppress a poor minority element within their own ranks, hold them down so to speak, it makes their accomplishments look all the better and their offspring continue to be favored in such a system, while the doubly oppressed poor whites must face discrimination from upper class whites, the educational/government system as a whole, and URMs themselves that believe all whites have some ridiculous good buddy network.

I stand firm that AA is not about leveling any playing field. It's merely a proxy for a Marxists social engineering agenda, wherein well-off whites are usually happy to "go along with the program" due to in group competition, since THEY really do have an advantage. You'll always notice it's some well-off white person leading the calls for this crap the loudest and how whites have all these advantages. Ask yourself why.

The biggest and most undeserved population lives in RURAL AMERICA. Mister "Cohen", a rich white guy, one of the head racists at AAMCAS responsible for its Marxist agendas, has decided that he doesn't care about this group.. No, no, despite that rural whites are significantly more likely than URMs are to return to their communities to serve, he continues with the same Marxist doctrine he set out to begin with. Again, he doesn't care. His rich kids will always be fine, his rich nephews will be doing great. The parasitic upper class has been living off the lower class in this country for so long it is essentially synonymous with the "american way."

I hope this has been enlightening. I'll probably add more later, including studies/cites regarding related issues.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[MichiMO]

No one is denying that there are other groups that are disadvantaged who are not given "a leg up." (though, isn't there a place in AMCAS to designate disadvantaged students? Not sure)
The difference is percentage. There is a much, much larger percentage of poor African Americans than poor whites. I would be happy for AA to be extended to all individuals of a low socio-economic status, but for the time being it is addressing the group with the largest need.

As for the issue you addressed about there being no studies about whether ORM or poor whites go back into their communities to work...no, there is no data about poor whites that I know of, but given that ORM are overrepresented and there are still health care shortages, I think it is safe to assume that there is not a large number of ORM's going into rural or underserved medicine. Maybe poor whites would be more willing to go back into their communitites to practice and I would like to see studies on that.

The flaw I see in your logic is that you somehow think the existence of other supressed groups negates the needs of another supressed group...that AA should be eliminated because there are poor whites who experience the "same type" of socio-economic supression and don't get a "leg up." However, what this shows is the need for more AA, not less. Make AA based socio-economic status so it is more broadly applicable and based on something more "fair" than race, but don't cut off the leg because of the foot.

By the way...I listed these same reasons for AA in another thread which I am guessing you read from the sounds of your list. Why didn't you just address it there?

 

[Ernham]

"The difference is percentage. There is a much, much larger percentage of poor African Americans than poor whites. I would be happy for AA to be extended to all individuals of a low socio-economic status, but for the time being it is addressing the group with the largest need."

Not according to the UNICEF leaflet I have sitting right on my bookshelf. There are about 50% more poor whites than poor blacks in the US.

Three persons are sitting out in front of your home dieing of starvation do you:

A. Give all three a sandwich
B. Give only one person three sandwiches.
C. Watch someone else chase two of them away with a bat and give the remaining one three sandwhiches, then slink back into your house, pretending you didn't see anything. Have a nice T-bone.

Which do you do?


"As for the issue you addressed about there being no studies about whether ORM or poor whites go back into their communities to work...no, there is no data about poor whites that I know of, but given that ORM are overrepresented and there are still health care shortages, I think it is safe to assume that there is not a large number of ORM's going into rural or underserved medicine."

That wasn't what I had stated,.

"Maybe poor whites would be more willing to go back into their communitites to practice and I would like to see studies on that."

Actually they do. Not "poor" per se, they have it on rural students that go into medicine and where they go. There is a HIGHER correlation with this group going back to serve undeserved populations in rural areas, where the MAJORITY of need is for medical persona in the USA. AGAIN. read my post. I already stated that. Dr."Cohen" is a racist with his head up his @$$. He knows that rural students are more likely to practice in the most needy areas yet he continues to stack his Marxist deck. He doesn't care about suffering. He doesn't care about needy. He cares about saturating medical schools with minorities at the EXPENSE of those that are needy and suffering by de facto ignorance of his own studies and the inability to read some simple statistics. Trust me, it's not accidental. And they can get away with it forever because uppity upper/middle class white folks apparently don't give ****. Everyone wants a head start and that's just more competiton for them. That's the truth of the matter. There is no other satisfactory or logical explanation given the available data.

"The flaw I see in your logic is that you somehow think the existence of other supressed groups negates the needs of another supressed group..."

No. I just don't believe screwing over the majority of poor persons so a tiny minority of them can get a free ride on their backs and dollars.

"that AA should be eliminated because there are poor whites who experience the "same type" of socio-economic supression and don't get a "leg up." However, what this shows is the need for more AA, not less. Make AA based socio-economic status so it is more broadly applicable and based on something more "fair" than race, but don't cut off the leg because of the foot."

Obviously you did not read my sig. They know that socioeconomic factoring only is much more fair; however, like I said, AA IS NOT ABOUT FAIRNESS. It's social engineering. It has nothing to do with serving undeserved populations, leveling any playing fields, or any other BS rhetoric. The facts speak for themselves.

"By the way...I listed these same reasons for AA in another thread which I am guessing you read from the sounds of your list. Why didn't you just address it there?"

I probably stopped reading it because it became inundated with barely intelligible *****s.

 

[wazupshah]

Ernham, Are you starting med school in the fall?

 

[Ernham]

Originally posted by wazupshah
Ernham, Are you starting med school in the fall?

No, why do you ask? I just finished up my sophomore year.

 

[wazupshah]

Aright, here's the deal man. Most of us don't like AA, at least in the form its in now. Those that support it, do so because they feel that the benefits outway the harm it does. And it does do harm - those that think it doesn't are just kidding themselves.

However, with the the significant studies that demonstarte the disparity in health care between races (when socio-econmic variables are held constant) and the research that shows URM physicians as being more likely to serve these populations, I find it difficult to ignore the benefits of such a program.

But it is a two way street. Just like those opposed to AA must recognize the benefits of AA, proponents have to recognize the harms. The old-world thinking that is built into the premise of AA - that race makes a difference- is exactly the same thing that it is trying to correct. The self-contradiction is almost humorous.

So our task, you and me - recognizing both the flaws of AA, and the flaws of a system without AA - is to help design a system that is better. One that works to eliminate the factor of race in admissions, while also helping to eliminate the factor of race in the quality of health care patients recieve in this country.

That is the challenge that I present to you, should you be of those that are willing to put action where words end.

 

[Ernham]

"The House has recently passed two pieces of legislation aimed at expanding the access of Nebraska?s rural citizens to quality healthcare. In Washington, D.C., few Members of Congress understand the unique challenges people who live and work in rural areas face when needing quality, available healthcare. However, the Medicare Modernization and Prescription Drugs Act of 2002, H.R. 4954, and the Improving Access to Physicians in Medically Underserved Areas Act, H.R. 4858, directly address several of the primary obstacles rural residents face in accessing quality healthcare.

First, the House passed H.R. 4858, extending a program to attract physicians to rural, medically underserved areas. Currently, foreign-born international medical graduates can apply for a J-1 visa to pursue graduate medical education in the United States. A U.S. government agency or state health department may sponsor a foreign-born doctor?s return to the U.S. in exchange for that physician?s commitment to serve in a medically underserved area for at least three years.

As of April 15, 2002, Nebraska has accepted the applications of 36 physicians to practice in Nebraska under the State 20 J-1 visa waiver program, providing rural Nebraska communities with talented physicians that they may otherwise not have acquired. Garden County Hospital in Oshkosh exemplifies the program?s benefits. Garden County, covering 1,705 square miles, has a population under 2,500. In a county with such expansive size and small population, the lack of commercial and entertainment venues make recruiting a physician and that physician?s spouse nearly impossible. Yet, through the J-1 visa program, Garden County became home to an Internist from Poland practicing primary care.

In addition to doctors, this program offers the state flexibility to address the changing needs of its residents by allowing the state to sponsor specialties that fit the needs of specific areas in the state. This program has directly increased the access of underserved populations in the Third District to needed medical care, and the care has been given much closer to home. "

 

[thezero]

Perfectly said Wazupshah. Good keepin it real.

 

[DarkChild]

ROFLMAO - Ernham is a freaking sophomore!!
alright I'm done taking your posts even semi-seriously. you're quickly becoming the laughing stock on this board. but even fools deserve to be taught...
as such there are a few things I would like to point out:
1) your original post doesnt mention the most compelling arguments for AA. hint - see wazupshah's post above.
2) did you comprehend any of michio's post? you seemed to have clearly missed this point:

Originally posted by Ernham
"The difference is percentage. There is a much, much larger percentage of poor African Americans than poor whites. I would be happy for AA to be extended to all individuals of a low socio-economic status, but for the time being it is addressing the group with the largest need."

Not according to the UNICEF leaflet I have sitting right on my bookshelf. There are about 50% more poor whites than poor blacks in the US.

Michio's point isnt that there are more poor whites than poor blacks, but rather poor blacks comprise a larger percentage of the black population than poor whites comprise of the white population.
3)

Originally posted by Ernham
"I probably stopped reading it because it became inundated with intelligible *****s."

Yes, Ernham - these AA threads tend to be populated by the intelligible - what we need less of are unintelligible trolls like you.
Look here are a few tips: get a dictionary and learn what words mean. practice reading so you can understand how words are used in a sentence. then step back on to the court when you've got a little more game.

 

[Ernham]

Bowman, GQ, AAMC data:

"Over 60% of rural-interested students planned to locate their practices in a socioeconomically deprived area as compared with only 11.5% of other medical students."

"The vast majority of this group is white, over 75% of which came from rural communities themselves."

What was funny about this joker is that he was trying to cook up more admissions for "URMs" thinking they HAD to have wanted to serve really needy persons, right? Haha.

"UNICEF:

The majority of poverty stricken areas of the US are rurally located for all areas except for the north eastern states."

Numbers aren't important. the ratio for poverty is 2 whites per every "other."


Instead od the racists at AAMc creating some outreach programs/scholarships and/or providing some USEFUL affirmative action for rural students because of their commitment and not shallow platitudes, they continue to play make-believe in their house of cards..

 

[thezero]

Hey if you want to get rid of Ernham and his satan avatarr give him a big hug watch . [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[Ernham]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]

We are now ernham proofed.



-0-

 

[Ernham]

"However, with the the significant studies that demonstarte the disparity in health care between races (when socio-econmic variables are held constant) and the research that shows URM physicians as being more likely to serve these populations, I find it difficult to ignore the benefits of such a program."

Show me a cite for these data.

 

[thezero]

dude you must really do well in school knowing all these facts and stuff. are thinking about MD/JD.

-0-

 

[Ernham]

"ROFLMAO - Ernham is a freaking sophomore!!"

No, I "was."

"alright I'm done taking your posts even semi-seriously. you're quickly becoming the laughing stock on this board. but even fools deserve to be taught..."

Making a case for AA again, hmm???


"as such there are a few things I would like to point out:
1) your original post doesnt mention the most compelling arguments for AA. hint - see wazupshah's post above."


I'm still waiting on his data. Regardless, there are more poor persons in rural areas in the US, regardless of anyone's color.

"2) did you comprehend any of michio's post? you seemed to have clearly missed this point:"

There was none of note that I did not soundly extinguish.

"Michio's point isnt that there are more poor whites than poor blacks, but rather poor blacks comprise a larger percentage of the black population than poor whites comprise of the white population."

Still, there is no reason for it. Following your logic we should just throw all blacks in prison because percent wise they are represented 500% greater than they should be gor the msjority of felony crimes. Sound like a plan,?


"Yes, Ernham - these AA threads tend to be populated by the intelligible - what we need less of are unintelligible trolls like you."

That was suppose to read "barely intelligble."

"Look here are a few tips: get a dictionary and learn what words mean. practice reading so you can understand how words are used in a sentence. then step back on to the court when you've got a little more game. "

Thanks for the tip. I'm now grammar cop.

 

[trubluwolv]

Ernham--
do you have any original thought? or do you just go around quoting statistics (which can be misleading, by the way) from UNICEF booklets and AMCAS webpages?

good lord... can you, just for one second, get your head out of your own a*s and open your mind to another's perspective on a complicated issue (e.g. Affirmative action)?

you don't have to agree with anyone--i'm not asking you to "dance".... but if you hope to, one day, go to medical school and be successful physician, you must learn to understand and empathize with others that are different from you. please.

all that being said, i find your conviction in your beliefs extremely ballsy, but at the same time, self-destructive.

 

[wazupshah]

"However, with the the significant studies that demonstarte the disparity in health care between races (when socio-econmic variables are held constant)..."

In 1999, Congress requested that the Institute of Medicine assess the extent of racial and ethnic dispariteis in healthcare, assuming that access-related factors - such as insurance status and the ability to pay for care are the same. This is a summary of their extensive report. I was shocked when I read it. Check it out:

IOM Report Summary



"...research that shows URM physicians as being more likely to serve these populations"

Brunk D. Caring for the underserved: Four predictive factors. Fam Pract News 2000 Jan 1:46

Unfortunately I can't find a copy of this report published on the internet. If anyone can, please post it. But the following link is an essay that references the major conclusions from this study while making the case for AA. It's a pretty good read, but the data I'm refering to is talked about in the last paragraph of page 2:

Afirmative Action in Medical School Admissions

 

[Ernham]

None of this is valid pertaining to your initial assertions. I do believe you have lied to me. Where is the "constant"?? Maybe I missed it, but I believe I read everythng.

 

[wazupshah]

Please explain how you think you have been lied to. The assertions I made earlier are directly supported by the references that I have provided.

 

[Ernham]

Originally posted by wazupshah
Please explain how you think you have been lied to. The assertions I made earlier are directly supported by the references that I have provided.

"when socio-econmic variables are held constant"

 

[arktec]

WOW. dude, ernham, go out and get some air or something...marxist this...marxist that...Paranoia is not healthy. I'll probably regret posting this, but the fact that you are so young and have already closed your mind off to so many things concerns me. Seriously man, take a few steps back....zoom out. Don't go through life angry at everyone. No one is out to get you. And for the love of God, don't take your anger out on your future patients.

peace

 

[medicnas]

...some men you just can't reach so you get what we had here today...

Dude, I don't need you civil war - it pays the rich while it buries the poor.

 

[Tamomo]

Ernham is a freak....he's probably one of the other wierdos who just signed up under a different name. Total nonsense.

He began by posting stuff on how he was "disadvantaged" for being a non-trad. or older student in his calculus class or something. Then later started b!tching about how he was disadvantaged about something else (I don't want to go through the hell of trying to search his crazy ass posts and read through them)

With all his b!thching against AA you would expect him not to
b!tch about stuff like that....grade curves and mathematical ability.
Funny though....does he want people to cut him a break b/c he's the only old fart in his class and can't do math?

Listen old timer... this is the pre-allo forum, most of the nutjobs on here don't get in. This is just a place where everyone comes on and just rants and raves and act like experts behind their screen names.

The REAL DOCTORS, not the lawyers or the jackass off of the street, support some form of AA...with the eventual goal of it being terminated if disparities are accounted for. They NEVER choose under/un qualified candidates ever. NO-ONE is guaranteed a DAMN thing b/c of their f*cking MCAT/GPA..no one. Not only do you have to prove yourself but they also have to like you.

So why don't you stop being such a jack-ass and concentrate on trying to take a simple derivative in you calculus class and stop wasting your time here bitching about stuff that will get you nowhere. Control the things you can and don't worry about the rest....because in the end all the schools know who is good on paper and who will make a good doctor....these are not usually mutually inclusive.

 

[renebean319]

I think i've told you this, ernham, in a previous forum argument, though surprisingly enough, you were involved in... that you need help.. all this anger and hatred towards others is just not healthy... i know you may be a liiiiiil bit older than the rest of us.. but thats even more of a better reason to seek help and continue to live out your dreams with a lot less anger and a lot more compassion... yeah ok, so what if you weren't forced onto a slave ship .. thats alright.. so what if you aren't an immigrant from peru persuing a higher education.. SO WHAT.. i still don't see why this is such a big deal.. the point of med school admissions is not only mcats, gpa, xtracurriculars.. but its also your personality .. your intelligence.. your overall demeanor.. and if your acting like this and your only a sophmore.. maybe you should be exploring other options.. preferbly a job behind a desk where interaction with URM's is limited....once again.. God Bless all those who are shooting for their dreams.. and God Bless YOU ernham...


A lil diddy' taught to me by one of my students.... I love me and I love you because we are different shades and hues and if you and i were only one color........it won't be as much fun but we'd still have love for one another!!!!

 

[Rudy1223]

Originally posted by renebean319
I think i've told you this, ernham, in a previous forum argument, though surprisingly enough, you were involved in... that you need help.. all this anger and hatred towards others is just not healthy... i know you may be a liiiiiil bit older than the rest of us.. but thats even more of a better reason to seek help and continue to live out your dreams with a lot less anger and a lot more compassion... yeah ok, so what if you weren't forced onto a slave ship .. thats alright.. so what if you aren't an immigrant from peru persuing a higher education.. SO WHAT.. i still don't see why this is such a big deal.. the point of med school admissions is not only mcats, gpa, xtracurriculars.. but its also your personality .. your intelligence.. your overall demeanor.. and if your acting like this and your only a sophmore.. maybe you should be exploring other options.. preferbly a job behind a desk where interaction with URM's is limited....once again.. God Bless all those who are shooting for their dreams.. and God Bless YOU ernham...


A lil diddy' taught to me by one of my students.... I love me and I love you because we are different shades and hues and if you and i were only one color........it won't be as much fun but we'd still have love for one another!!!!

Well said!!!! Couldn't have said it better myself.

 

[Ernham]

Well, it is quite telling that this has been up for, what, over a day? Yet no one has factually rebutted my post yet. Instead, all I find is ad hominem attacks and appeals. Yes, quite telling. Reader, take note.

 

[Rudy1223]

 

[Ernham]

 

[vixenell]

Originally posted by Ernham
Possible reasons why people believe AA should exist:

1. They believe that due to past discrimination that it has somehow "******ed" modern day URMs on some level.

I'd agree with your first statement, only change it a little to "...due to past and present discrimination..." However, I do not believe that this is the driving force behind support for AA. Not mine, atleast.

The problem with this assumption is that even though it might have validity, many other groups that aren't considered "urms" have suffered similar situations but have been given no leg up. Further, although not "PC", in the case of blacks, had they never been here(americas) to be "horribly oppressed, " they'd be back in africa and destitute, possibly in a mud hut. FACT. Also, some groups that are considered "URMs" were never in that "oppressed" situation to begin with..

So you're expecting all blacks to be grateful for slavery? Thats ridiculus. Like another poster said in another thread, thats like asking the jews to thank hitler for the holocaust.

Don't knock mud huts.

The further assumption that blacks in a particular (?) have been given "negative self concepts" and whatnot are further LIES. Black children score significantly higher than asian/white children on self-esteem surveys, responding more affirmatively to survey questions such as "I'm an important person," "I'm smart,""People like me,"etc.

This is interesting. I'd like a link or citation. But speaking from personal experience, I was accused of cheating throughout middle and high school, and even threatened with expulsion simply because I had one of the highest class averages. While this didn't deter my personal interest in attending college (I was fortunate enough to have parents who both were college graduates), for awhile I believe that anything worthwhile I did would be questioned for no apparent reason. I still somewhat believe that. However, this is not why I support AA.

2. They believe that socioeconomic reasons are the root of the "gap" between blacks and whites/asians.

No, but it is a major factor.

Unfortunately, this is a fallacy. Although socioeconomic status will definitely have educational side-effects on opportunities and aptitude, the closer and closer you match whites/asians with blacks, the more and more blacks fall behind. Check my sig for the stats on essentially welfare family asian/whites vs upper class blacks. Quite alarming for all you egalitarian Marxists out there, I'm sure.

Have you taken a statistics course, or written a documented paper before? Because listing a anonymously (possibly self-written) unjustifiable quote does not qualify as "stats." And as closely as I read the Amicus briefs, I never saw the words "crack" or "caviar." Where did you find this 70% figure? It seems pretty exaggerated, if not completely false. The fact that 50% more whites/asians live in poverty does not take into account that there are much more than twice as many whites/asians living in America than blacks.

Again, this is not the main reason why I support AA.

3. They have been informed that URM are more likely to return to their respective communities to work.

This is probably true. However, there is no data that ANYONE has bothered to collect on where lower class whites/asians go after they get their degrees. This is classic in america where poor whites or "ORMs" are doubly oppressed, not studied, not offered any outreach programs, etc.

Sounds like quite a senior thesis. You should give it a go.

The assumption that whites as a whole have always prospered while other groups have not is simply ridiculous. As a whole, certain stratums of society have always been held back regardless of their skin. As a matter of fact, it wasn't until the socialist groups started mobilizing in the US did it become possible for the "average joe" to get a good education.

The majority of whites in undergrad school and beyond are upper to middle class. And they may actually identify with having been given some advantage due to their parents finances/networks or whatnot. HOWEVER, these individuals seem to constantly ignore poor whites. This is actually tied into psychology. Whites more compete "within a group(their own race, whites)," so if they can oppress a poor minority element within their own ranks, hold them down so to speak, it makes their accomplishments look all the better and their offspring continue to be favored in such a system, while the doubly oppressed poor whites must face discrimination from upper class whites, the educational/government system as a whole, and URMs themselves that believe all whites have some ridiculous good buddy network.

.... and you're giving other people grammer lessons?

Anywho, As far as the good buddy system, I don't believe this necessaily. However, as someone else argued, holding economic status constant, it is true that the average poor white will have a better life than an equally poor black. So some form of the "good buddy system," ie, racism, still exists in the real world. Not saying that you're racist, necessarily, so don't go there.


[/QUOTE]I stand firm that AA is not about leveling any playing field. It's merely a proxy for a Marxists social engineering agenda, wherein well-off whites are usually happy to "go along with the program" due to in group competition, since THEY really do have an advantage. You'll always notice it's some well-off white person leading the calls for this crap the loudest and how whites have all these advantages. Ask yourself why.

The biggest and most undeserved population lives in RURAL AMERICA. Mister "Cohen", a rich white guy, one of the head racists at AAMCAS responsible for its Marxist agendas, has decided that he doesn't care about this group.. No, no, despite that rural whites are significantly more likely than URMs are to return to their communities to serve, he continues with the same Marxist doctrine he set out to begin with.[/QUOTE]

At last, the conspiracy theory emerges. So its all about the rich white man holding the poor white man down. Kind of hypocritical, no?

I hope this has been enlightening. I'll probably add more later, including studies/cites regarding related issues.

Not exactly enlightening... pretty much everything that's been posted against affirmative action in EVERY SINGLE AA THREAD that has popped up in the past few months. Yet, you still missed the main reason why AA is even a part of our society. Instead, you have turned it into an argument in which you appear to believe that AA would be fine and dandy if it were to include poor whites as well. Overall, it seems incredibly hypocritical, and leads me to believe that you would have no problem with AA if you were in fact one of its beneficiaries.

 

[Ernham]

"I'd agree with your first statement, only change it a little to "...due to past and present discrimination..." However, I do not believe that this is the driving force behind support for AA. Not mine, atleast."

Present discrimination? Must be tough with all the handouts, set-asides and quotas.


"So you're expecting all blacks to be grateful for slavery? That's ridiculus. Like another poster said in another thread, that's like asking the jews to thank hitler for the holocaust."

Don't bring Jews into this. That's old and trite and they have suffered a fraction what others did in WW2. Anyway, the point is that blacks should be thankful they live in the US and not in in some stone-age society in Africa.



"This is interesting. I'd like a link or citation. But speaking from personal experience, I was accused of cheating throughout middle and high school, and even threatened with expulsion simply because I had one of the highest class averages."

Did you hang out with known cheaters? Hey, it's not unique, though. I was thought to be cheating my entire first year of general chemistry, simply because I had never had a general chemistry course and I managed a 98% and a 99% on the finals. They even looked at my old piece of junk TI-81 to make sure there weren't some kind of "cheating programs"... I guess.

"While this didn't deter my personal interest in attending college (I was fortunate enough to have parents who both were college graduates),for awhile I believe that anything worthwhile I did would be questioned for no apparent reason. I still somewhat believe that. However, this is not why I support AA."

**** happens.


"No, but it is a major factor."

If it were such a major factor, welfare whites/asians would not be smoking blacks raised in 80,000+K families by ~5 points on the MCATs. There is something SERIOUSLY wrong with that picture.

"Have you taken a statistics course, or written a documented paper before? Because listing a anonymously (possibly self-written) unjustifiable quote does not qualify as "stats." And as closely as I read the Amicus briefs, I never saw the words "crack" or "caviar.""

Called paraphrasing.


"Where did you find this 70% figure? It seems pretty exaggerated, if not completely false."

Halfway through page 20. It's a simple division; no need for stats...

"The fact that 50% more whites/asians live in poverty does not take into account that there are much more than twice as many whites/asians living in America than blacks."

PERCENTS DO NOT MATTER. Individuals do.

"Sounds like quite a senior thesis. You should give it a go."

Oh. it runs deeper than just neglect to look at were lower class asian/white doctors go; they don't even divide up lower class blacks from upper! It's like they are class blind and only interested in looking at race, race, race.





".... and you're giving other people grammer lessons?"

There was/is nothing wrong with my grammAR.

"Anywho, As far as the good buddy system, I don't believe this necessaily. However, as someone else argued, holding economic status constant, it is true that the average poor white will have a better life than an equally poor black."

Someone mentioned it, but he/she had no data to support it his/her assertions.


"At last, the conspiracy theory emerges. So its all about the rich white man holding the poor white man down. Kind of hypocritical, no?"

No. I don't believe so. Then again, I'm not sure what you are eluding to. Clarify. I'm saying the system of capitlism itself lends intself to an oppresive situation when you have influxes of destitute immigrants.


"Yet, you still missed the main reason why AA is even a part of our society."

I'm all ears(eyes).

"Instead, you have turned it into an argument in which you appear to believe that AA would be fine and dandy if it were to include poor whites as well."

No. AA would be fine if it was based on race-neutral criterion. But that's the the true calling card of AA. It's all about race. Not about leveling any playing fields or any other nonsense that the talking heads love to spew.

"Overall, it seems incredibly hypocritical, and leads me to believe that you would have no problem with AA if you were in fact one of its beneficiaries."

You base this on what? What this your supposed hypocritical element???

 

[vixenell]

Why one woman believe AA should exist:

"We need Affirmative Action"

by Susan V. Berresford

How does a society ensure fairness where much unfairness reflects longstanding, systemic discrimination? In this situation people don't have to act badly for injustice to continue; they merely do what they have always considered right. The search for practical answers, at the heart of debates over affirmative action, often founders on an apparent ethical paradox: doing the right thing means doing something that many perceive as wrong...

Clearly, opposition to affirmative action has grown in the United States, as reflected in the behavior of judges, legislators and voters. Their thinking varies. The courts emphasize the principle of nondiscrimination. Some public attitudes probably reflect racist or sexist beliefs or unwillingness to give up advantages. To others the success of formerly disadvantaged individuals proves that the playing field is now level. And some believe that affirmative action stigmatizes its beneficiaries and creates unhealthy social divisions...

We need affirmative action in spite of what some perceive as its unfairness. Three beliefs shape my view.

First, affirmative action is consistent with U.S. values and ideals.

Our democracy is based on ideas that people are created equal; that men and women should enjoy liberty and equality of opportunity; that individuals should act responsibly on their own behalf and toward each other; and that we should sacrifice for the common good. To me these concepts imply that various groups in our society will be integrated in educational, work and other settings.

In spite of substantial effort and progress, we are not the society we aspire to be. Minorities are disproportionately poor, and most of our communities and institutions are not well integrated. Housing is still highly segregated, not just by income or choice but by informal steering practices. The Urban Institute cites research using matched pairs of white and minority home seekers that found discrimination in 50 percent of the minorities' contacts with real estate agents. Schools in minority communities are typically less well equipped than schools in white communities. And, as the Tom?s Rivera Policy Institute has shown, they offer fewer advanced placement courses, which are key to competitive college admissions.

The U.S. professoriate is overwhelmingly white, and that predominance appears to be increasing ? 91.7 percent today compared with 90.4 percent in 1989, according to a survey by the University of California at Los Angeles. Labor economist Marc Bendick's hiring-practice studies, which matched pairs of minorities and whites, found evidence of discrimination in 20 percent of the cases. A 1999 study by Catalyst found that only 5.1 percent of the jobs from chief executive to executive vice president at Fortune 500 companies are held by women, and we know also that women often encounter barriers and harassment in formerly all-male work like policing, construction and firefighting.

If we want to be a unified and meritocratic society, these patterns require redress. Affirmative action attempts redress, and I don't see any better solution. It is a practical expression of our nation's best values and ideals. It gives excluded groups a foothold in educational, employment and other settings where talent and hard work can pay off. It opens informal networks of power and influence. Rather than "harming the beneficiaries" as some charge, it increases opportunities and the possibility that advantaged people will recognize the capacities of "the other."

Opponents of affirmative action in the United States say our national values endorse a "colorblind" society. But that suggests we should overlook the capacity of people, communities and nations to draw strength from their ethnic, gender and other differences while embracing nondiscriminatory ideals. I believe our values suggest that we should see and appreciate our varied colors and backgrounds...

To many in the United States, the idea of colorblindness appeals because it suggests nondiscrimination. But that avoids the problem; it doesn't address it. U.S. Supreme Court Justice Harry Blackmun spoke to this point in his separate opinion in the Bakke case: "In order to get beyond racism, we must first take account of race. There is no other way." I also find the comments of Rajeev Dhavan, Senior Advocate in India's Supreme Court, helpful: "For a society to agree not to discriminate on grounds of caste, color or religion is unexceptional, but can any society be totally blind to the fact that discrimination stems from deep-rooted prejudices which the constitution seeks to outlaw... The simple injunction of nondiscrimination does not enjoin the State to be a spectator to racism... The constitutional command not to discriminate falls miserably to the ground if endemic disadvantage continues to be sustained in society."

Simply asserting that color should not matter doesn't make it so. Color is noticed; often, negative assumptions hinge on it, and opportunities are shaped by it, whether we like it or not.

My second belief is that societies need to explore and understand the origins of inequality and address them with long-term and evolving affirmative action in different sectors...

Many areas of education need affirmative action. For example, it can help bring diversity to the U.S. colleges and universities that have highly selective admissions. Moreover, since their diplomas confer real advantages, these institutions ought to include talented people from chronically under-represented groups. Some contend that this use of affirmative action threatens the rightfully treasured idea of merit, and they simplistically equate merit with test scores.

But consideration of merit in college admissions already includes more than test results. Often for good reasons, it recognizes geographic variety, athletic ability and alumni legacy. Any nuanced search for merit will weigh characteristics like creativity, integrity, leadership and persistence, which cannot be reduced to numerical rankings.

Derek Bok and William Bowen considered merit in their 1998 study of affirmative action, "The Shape of the River." They found that African-Americans generally entered elite U.S. colleges and universities with lower test scores than whites ? not very low, but lower. But after graduation they earned advanced degrees at the same rate as their white classmates, had slightly higher rates for professional degrees in law, medicine and business, and were more active in civic affairs. Students of all colors in these colleges and universities expressed preferences for diversified student bodies, preparing them for future work and life. Other research finds that members of a diverse student body challenge each other intellectually and thereby help promote critical thinking. This all suggests that carefully applied affirmative admissions do contribute to excellence and the common good rather than undermine it...

Affirmative action often works best when it includes incentives, goals and time frames...

 

[vixenell]

(cont'd)

Most people understand that change often requires special effort and that it comes slowly. But the effort can be wearying. We see this in South Africa, where, although apartheid's scars are still fresh, more than a few impatient white South Africans are asking: "How many mea culpas must we say and for how long?" They fail to see the impatience of those whose opportunities were stunted for decades and whose circumstances have not yet significantly changed. The best antidote for everyone's frustration is to speed the change process with goals, timetables and incentives...

India has extended its decades-long use of quotas related to caste, now adding women into the mix. Policy makers set percentages for women and women officers in panchayats, or local government bodies. India's leaders know that without these mandates, progress will come too slowly.

Each country will fashion the incentives that fit its history and culture. My own sense is that the United States still needs various goals-and- timetables approaches such as those that have been helpful in employment and various areas of education.

I believe that affirmative action is still necessary to help us fulfill our aspirations for justice and widespread well-being ? sooner rather than later. Yes, it may occasionally involve individual sacrifice, giving up an advantage, although this occurs far less frequently than is believed. But sacrifice also has positive meaning: action taken to create some-thing of great value, in this case fairer and more unified societies from which we all benefit.

Even some former foes of affirmative action accept this point. For example, former U.S. Solicitor General Charles Fried wrote in The American Prospect magazine: "A society that is segmented by race ? is simply not an integrated society ?If disadvantage is so strongly correlated with color, then color must retain its saliency. This, I believe, is an argument for preferences that seems more effective than the elusive and sometimes contrived 'diversity' argument."

Problem solving is never a straight, upward line. It involves stops and starts requiring patience, imagination and fortitude. Those of us who feel an urgency about injustice and underrepresentation and those of us who believe in multifaceted and long-term affirmative action continually search for new and varied ways to express and achieve our goals. For example, the drafters of South Africa's post-apartheid Constitution included a clause prohibiting "unlawful discrimination," leaving room for race-based policies that advance the common good. And rather than using the phrase "affirmative action," many South Africans prefer terms like "transformation" and "empowerment," which signal the significance and degree of change they expect. Here in the United States, Microsoft's chairman Bill Gates, without articulating a position on affirmative action, expressed his concern about the absence of minorities in math, science, engineering, education and library science with his admirable $1-billion minority-fellowship program for these fields.

As we continue to search for the best policy in the United States, we must not lose sight of the fact that we are still largely "color coded" in housing, schooling, many areas of work, social life and wealth. And we still see enormously different patterns between men's and women's lives ? not all of their own choice...

 

[Ernham]

Is her opinion suppose to be valid for some reason? I would hope not because she is not only ignorant to the nth magnitude here grasp of basic economics is astounding for someone of her position. One could only guess she's playing the "role".


Anyway. It's really all moot. Chances are AA will be gone in a some months time. Those that got the free ride, I hope you enjoyed the trip, particularly the ones with 22 MCAT scores and coming from 100k households. Atrocious.

 

[lotanna]

Originally posted by Ernham
Possible reasons why people believe AA should exist:

1. They believe that due to past discrimination that it has somehow "******ed" modern day URMs on some level.

The problem with this assumption is that even though it might have validity, many other groups that aren't considered "urms" have suffered similar situations but have been given no leg up. Further, although not "PC", in the case of blacks, had they never been here(americas) to be "horribly oppressed, " they'd be back in africa and destitute, possibly in a mud hut. FACT.

In some mud hut my a$$, has ur dumb a$$ been outside the US b4, have u been to any country in Africa b4? do u know how many countries are in Africa even?
Yeah this is coming from someone who lived on the African continent for a significant period and never lived in a mud hut. Your family probably havent even seen the kind of salary, but I wont even go there Destitute my a$$, people like u that spend time watching National Geographis and feel like u know the damn world. I didnt waste my time reading the rest of your garbage, cause ur ignorance stinks! Makes me wonder what lil hick ville u grew up in.
So ur analogy is that African-AMericans should be happy to have been enslaved???????? God help u, cause u sure as heck need salvation.

 

[DarkChild]

Vixenell - I commend you for taking the time to try and reason with Ernham. You're a bigger person than I. I stopped taking his posts seriously when he:
1) In his point #1 described an argument as an assumption.
2) Used "fact" to describe a hypothetical
3) Continued to spew unreferenced pseudo-facts... ernham, should we believe you just cuz you say so?
4) Used stratums as a word
5) Says unintelligble stuff like this: "It's merely a proxy for a Marxists social engineering agenda, wherein well-off whites are usually happy to "go along with the program" due to in group competition, since THEY really do have an advantage."
6) Postulates the existence of a huge conspiracy.
7) Talks with all earnestness about the rich parasitic upper class and in the same breath talks about a Marxist conspiracy that some how exists to perpetuate the dominance of rich whites. Ernham - using all these big words has gotten you a little confused. Do you even know what the parroted rhetoric you spew means? Do you know who Marx was? Have you read the communist manifesto. I suggest you do - ITS ALL ABOUT THE SUPPOSEDLY INEVITABLE TRIUMPH OF THE PROLETARIATS OVER THE RICH PARASITIC UPPER CLASS.
a) You do realize that your views on the parasitic nature of the upper class are Marxist right?
b) You do realize that any system that seeks to perpetuate the proliferation of the wealthy at the expense of the poor (i.e. Mr. Cohen and the others at the AAMCAS as you allege) cannot, by definition, be at all Marxist?!
So to summarize - you are the marxist, not them.
I cant call you a hypocrite, because its clear you dont have the foggiest idea what you are talking about.
8) Most embarrasingly - your original post, for all its enthusiasm, missed the real reason AA continues to get support.

 

[Ernham]

"So ur analogy is that African-AMericans should be happy that they were slaves? God help u, cause u sure as heck need salvation. "

If it's so wonderful there, what the hell are you doing in the US, huh?

 

[lotanna]

Originally posted by Ernham
"So ur analogy is that African-AMericans should be happy that they were slaves? God help u, cause u sure as heck need salvation. "

If it's so wonderful there, what the hell are you doing in the US, huh?

Is that the only response u can give, what happened to ur essays????
tHEN AGAIN WHY WASTE MY TIME TALKIN TO AN
Uneducated (EDUCATION ISNT ALWAYS ACADEMIC), untraveled, globally challenged, mono lingual, ignorant INDIVIDUAL.

 

[vixenell]

Originally posted by Ernham
Is her opinion suppose to be valid for some reason? I would hope not...

Well, you attempted to collect reasons why some people support affirmative action. You were off. I simply added this to show why some (at least one) person believes that affirmative action should exist. I believe that it is relevant to the topic of this post. Unless, of course, you would argue that whining and URM/AA bashing is the way in which you intend to correct this "failed communication" on SDN.

because she is not only ignorant to the nth magnitude here grasp of basic economics is astounding for someone of her position. One could only guess she's playing the "role".

So, you've once again resorted to the ad hominem attacks that you seemed oh so opposed to. Hypocritical, eh? What does this have to do with her stance on affirmative action?

Anyway. It's really all moot. Chances are AA will be gone in a some months time. Those that got the free ride, I hope you enjoyed the trip, particularly the ones with 22 MCAT scores and coming from 100k households. Atrocious.

Again with numbers. Without going on about how it takes more than numbers to get into med school (us premeds should know this) socioeconomic status is not the only factor that drives support for affirmative action.

Lets talk about the non-URMS who are admitted with 22 MCAT scores, shall we?

AA won't be abolished because of the UMich decision. If anything, the decision will be so specific that it will rule against point systems. They aren't attempting to overturn the executive order that put AA in place. So regardless of what the court decides in the UMich case, schools will find some way to admit whoever they see fit.

 

[Ernham]

"1) In his point #1 described an argument as an assumption."

Often synonymous.

"2) Used "fact" to describe a hypothetical"

Umm? Sure, whatever.

"3) Continued to spew unreferenced pseudo-facts... ernham, should we believe you just cuz you say so?"

I usually give cites when asked. It would not be my fault you are either too lazy to follow them up, or too dumb to figure out how.

"4) Used stratums as a word"

--One of a number of layers, levels, or divisions in an organized system: a complex poem with many strata of meaning.

"5) Says unintelligble stuff like this: "It's merely a proxy for a Marxists social engineering agenda, wherein well-off whites are usually happy to "go along with the program" due to in group competition, since THEY really do have an advantage."

Well, if you have a decent reading comprehension level, that's a pretty simple passage. (see, this is what we get for dumbing down admissions for URMs)

"6) Postulates the existence of a huge conspiracy."

Sort of like blacks do when rallying for AA??

"7) Talks with all earnestness about the rich parasitic upper class and in the same breath talks about a Marxist conspiracy"

Blah, blah, blah. Snipped most of your tripe. You need a vocabulary lesson or ten thousand. Marxist means more than just your bassackwards education taught you.

 

[Ernham]

"Well, you attempted to collect reasons why some people support affirmative action. You were off. I simply added this to show why some (at least one) person believes that affirmative action should exist. I believe that it is relevant to the topic of this post. Unless, of course, you would argue that whining and URM/AA bashing is the way in which you intend to correct this "failed communication" on SDN."

I covered all of them. 57 shades of the same rhetoric, all revolving around 2-3 central issues.. No data cited at all. Hoc ergo propter hocs all over the place. Her opinion is written as if for a tabloid, definitely not for the college educated.


"So, you've once again resorted to the ad hominem attacks that you seemed oh so opposed to. Hypocritical, eh? What does this have to do with her stance on affirmative action?"

How can I ad hominem attack someone whom I'm not even speaking with?


"AA won't be abolished because of the UMich decision. If anything, the decision will be so specific that it will rule against point systems. They aren't attempting to overturn the executive order that put AA in place. So regardless of what the court decides in the UMich case, schools will find some way to admit whoever they see fit."

It's not going to be abolished; it doesn't need to be abolished. All they need to do is create a precedent. Capitalism will take care of the rest.

 

[DarkChild]

Ok Ernham. I have to give you credit for your persistence in responding to every single person is really commendable. Its clear now how you have remained so clueless though:
a) you dont listen
b) you dont try to understand
a few points:
an argument and an assumption are never synonymous.
the plural of stratum is strata not stratums.
hmmm looking at your comments below its clear that you have started to flame. Thats not good. You're personal attacks reveal you for the troll that you are. BTW - I am well aware that this is the second time you have made disparaging comment about me personally. The first was in a completely unrelated thread on spelling mistakes, where you responded to something I said with: That dude is a URM; he could probably get into harvard if he wrote his essay in ebonics. That comment, along with these are disrespectful and a little disappointing. Remember, if people are going to take your garbage seriously, you cant continue to attack people personally.
So please, cease and desist with the name calling. Its making me sad and the mods might not like it
Lastly. If an ivy-league educated person with a 13V cant make heads or tails out of what you're saying... the problem might be you.

Originally posted by Ernham

I usually give cites when asked. It would not be my fault you are either too lazy to follow them up, or too dumb to figure out how.

Well, if you have a decent reading comprehension level, that's a pretty simple passage. (see, this is what we get for dumbing down admissions for URMs)

You need a vocabulary lesson or ten thousand. Marxist means more than just your bassackwards education taught you.

 

[vixenell]

Originally posted by Ernham
I covered all of them. 57 shades of the same rhetoric, all revolving around 2-3 central issues.. No data cited at all. Hoc ergo propter hocs all over the place. Her opinion is written as if for a tabloid, definitely not for the college educated.

This coming from someone without a full college education? Your posts don't appear to be aimed toward the college educated either. "If you don't like it, then leave" mentality is pretty childish.

How can I ad hominem attack someone whom I'm not even speaking with?

So you're telling me that had she, herself, posted the same argument, you would've come up with a different response? Somehow I doubt it. If you're going to criticize someone's opinion, then criticize their OPINION.

And again, what does her economical qualifications have to do with her stance on affirmative action[/B][/QUOTE]

It's not going to be abolished; it doesn't need to be abolished. All they need to do is create a precedent. Capitalism will take care of the rest.

There's already a precedent against affirmative action. Yet it still exists. Capitalism is sleeping on the job.

 

[Ernham]

"Ok Ernham. I have to give you credit for your persistence in responding to every single person is really commendable. Its clear now how you have remained so clueless though:
a) you dont listen
b) you dont try to understand"

Your little a)s & b)s are cute. Unfortunately, they don't make up for your post's otherwise vacuous nature.

"a few points:
an argument and an assumption are never synonymous."

They can be if the argument is based on an assumption.

"the plural of stratum is strata not stratums."

It's either. Strata would be more appropriate if we were speaking pure Latin; however, in English, it is generally better used with the s ending. The three dictionaries I have available confirm this.

" If an ivy-league educated person with a 13V cant make heads or tails out of what you're saying... the problem might be you."

I bet. Weren't you the guy with a half an hour time left over in all your MCAT sections. If not, you two sound a lot alike; pure BSers.

 

[vixenell]

Originally posted by Ernham

"Overall, it seems incredibly hypocritical, and leads me to believe that you would have no problem with AA if you were in fact one of its beneficiaries."

You base this on what? What this your supposed hypocritical element???

I base it on the content and tone of the last paragraphs of your OP. From it, I assumed that you are in fact a poor, white male from rural america, who is pretty apprehensive concerning his own chances of being admitted to medical school. So instead of spending his summer studying for the one thing that he feels is the most important factors of a successful medical school applicant (the MCAT), he instead attempts to comfort himself in believing that (and attempting to convince others that) some liberal conspiracy is destined to give up his potential spot to a seemingly undeserving minority. By convincing himself that the world is working against him reaching his goals, he will be able to easily write off his failures in the future.

I could be a little off.

This may not be true, but its how you've come across in every one of these threads. I'm obviously not the only person who sees this. Perhaps you don't realize it.

 

[snoopdizzle]

Two problems with Ernham...

1) He still plays Magic: The Gathering even though he's in college (he changed his profile and avatar likely because they had nerdy Magic references). I used to play when I was 14-15 and quit playing when I realized what a huge waste of time it is, much like his effort to single handedly bring down AA.

2) In attempting to be such a scholar on this issue, he failed to recognize the paradox he is creating for himself. He is becoming just as "whiny" as the URMs he's trashing for trying to "cheat" the system. If Ernham really wanted to prove something, he would shut up and work hard to get into med school. As a white male I did it, so it can be done. Life is seldom fair and justice is a myth, and Ernham needs to get over that as soon as possible. Plus, truth is subjective (to take the postmodernist stance) and you can never be entirely "right" except to yourself. Oh the futility...

Also, big words are the punches of an pseudo-intellectual bully. Not cool, man.

 

[Ryo-Ohki]

I never understood these "life is unfair, you can't do anything about it, so f*** off" arguments. Is AA unfair? Yes. Can AA be eliminated? Yes. I guess it is a convenient argument to make when you can not justify your arguments or refute others' arguments.

 

[Ernham]

"This coming from someone without a full college education? Your posts don't appear to be aimed toward the college educated either. "If you don't like it, then leave" mentality is pretty childish."

Where did you get this from? Taken entirely out of context, I bet.

"So you're telling me that had she, herself, posted the same argument, you would've come up with a different response? Somehow I doubt it. If you're going to criticize someone's opinion, then criticize their OPINION."

No. I'd address her opinion point by point, ask for data to back assertions, present counter points/data, etc.; a little thing called civil discourse and/or intellectual debate.

"And again, what does her economical qualifications have to do with her stance on affirmative action["

Because this person has nothing to lose by endorsing AA, and everything to gain, merely because of her status. She's the farmer in the roost.


"There's already a precedent against affirmative action. Yet it still exists. Capitalism is sleeping on the job."

No. That was not "against AA." That ruling is actually what turned AA into the worm-filled apple it is today.

 

[Ernham]

Two problems with Ernham...

"1) He still plays Magic: The Gathering even though he's in college (he changed his profile and avatar likely because they had nerdy Magic references). I used to play when I was 14-15 and quit playing when I realized what a huge waste of time it is, much like his effort to single handedly bring down AA."

I haven't played MTG since I moved out of New York(far younger than 14-15 years old, by the way). I guess that makes you "nerdier" than me. Hah. Now you are a nerd with a wigger name. Nice combo, chief.

The fact is, if I still had my cards and a decent play group, I'd probably still play a little MTG when I had the time. Got a problem with that, muh homey vanilla ice?

"2) In attempting to be such a scholar on this issue, he failed to recognize the paradox he is creating for himself. He is becoming just as "whiny" as the URMs he's trashing for trying to "cheat" the system. If Ernham really wanted to prove something, he would shut up and work hard to get into med school. As a white male I did it, so it can be done. Life is seldom fair and justice is a myth, and Ernham needs to get over that as soon as possible. Plus, truth is subjective (to take the postmodernist stance) and you can never be entirely "right" except to yourself. Oh the futility..."

I agree, nothing will every be completely fair. However, that tangent is completely irrelevant to the discussion and I have no idea why you even brought it up, Snoopvanilla-T.


"Also, big words are the punches of an pseudo-intellectual bully. Not cool, man."

That's ok. I've got the big balls to back them up. You feel me? G-out.

 

[vixenell]

Originally posted by Ernham
Where did you get this from? Taken entirely out of context, I bet.

"If its so wonderful there, then what the hell are you doing in the US, huh?"

Because this person has nothing to lose by endorsing AA, and everything to gain, merely because of her status. She's the farmer in the roost.

I don't see what you have to gain by opposing AA. I certainly don't have anything to gain or lose, namely nothing that I can attribute to the existance or nonexistance of AA. Abolishing it is not going to get you into med school. Odds are, you won't be displaced by a minority, rather, by one of Cohan's grandchildren.

 

[vixenell]

So much for opening the lines of communication.

I can now officially state that Ernham is racist.

Now, moving on...

 

[vixenell]

How about this... instead of pretending to want to gain a better understanding of why people support AA, why don't you just tell us what you think the solution should be, or what you dislike about AA. Then we can go from there.

And none of that Marxist crap.