<p>Indiana is where Joshua Bell went right?</p>
<p>are you a fan of his?</p>
<p>
[quote]
Under Represented Minority (Blacks, Hispanics, Native Americans)</p>
<p>It's because the liberals like me have taken over the universities and we think it's important to repair centuries of oppresion by whites on those groups.</p>
<p>If enough people were were truly against affirmative action, all it would take is a million man march on Washington. And oh yeah, don't vote Hilary in '08. (if you don't like AA.)
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Fortunately, not everybody in this country is willing to conflate being Black, Hispanic, or Native American with being disadvantaged. Sometimes the two coincide, other times they don't. Repair centuries of oppression by whites? Depends on who you're looking at; the migrant worker's son or the daughter of the wealthy investment banker. </p>
<p>Unfortunately, the admissions processes at elite colleges don't seem to care very much. If giving people an equal opportunity was really the issue, Harvard's median family income would not be 150K.</p>
<p>
[quote]
At Harvard, for instance, financial-aid forms suggest that the median family income is about $150,000.
[/quote]
- NY Times.</p>
<p>If affirmative action were really about helping poor and disadvantaged people, it would not raise such a fuss. And while there may be no "million man march" on Washington to decry affirmative action, 51% of this country did NOT identify with your political leanings last election. Clearly, if they supported concepts as liberal as affirmative action, John Kerry would be our president, since most of what he supported wasn't nearly as radically to the left as affirmative action is.</p>
<p>Joey</p>
<p>Thank you, Joey!</p>
<p>I've said it a million times, but I'll say it again: AA should be based on economic status, not race. This would be the optimal way to help all those who are truly at a disadvantage in terms of academic opportunities, whether minority or majority. Some minorities do not need help, and enforcing AA as it currently stands only strengthens the stereotype that minorities have lower standards of performance.</p>
<p>Honestly, AA is not correcting the injustice of the past, but is refueling the fire and keeping racism alive in our society. If we were to remove the race question from the application and evaluate students based on their achievements given their economic situation and academic opportunities, applicants would be treated fairly without causing racial tensions or discrimination.</p>
<p>Just my $0.02.</p>
<p>DJ Mack: Economic status and race are far more connected than one would like to think-- but perhaps that reinforces your point.
Seth blue: NEC is the New England Conservatory, one of the premier music schools (esp. for violin) in the country and the world. Yes, I'm a violinist. What bearing do my stats have on this discussion? You can find them if you go to "find more posts by fiddlefrog" and go to the 1st page of my old posts. Again, good luck to your friend.<br>
My question with the type of orchestra thing was just what caliber of orchestra you meant. My friends play in relatively obscure regional-- that is, not full-time, but fully professional-- orchestras. If your friend is a substitute in the Boston Symphony or something, that will make a huge impression, though such a student probably wouldn't actually join Harvard ensembles.</p>
<p>You're male, fiddlefroggy? Wow, I would never have guessed(no sarcasm here). What an attitude, you soud like the self-appeasing type, do you know that? I seriously don't mean to offend you or anything, but its just that you come across as a catty female to me. Anyways, since this is an anonymous site, i hope you don't take this personally. (Maybe its just that the males in my school are big dumbass jock.)</p>
<p>What do you mean by self-appeasing? It doesn't sound like something I want to be!
(never mind, I don't care.) Sorry if I said something that sounded arrogant.
The fact that you don't know my name doesn't mean you can be rude, though. Personal comments are still personal.</p>
<p>sorry(I mean it sincerely), but seriously though I have yet to meet a male(esp. a white one)with your type of personality(this is not an attack on your personality, which I don't know or care a lot about). Well maybe this is your adopted web persona, you probably lighten up when you're with your friends.</p>
<p>Fair enough. (I thought there were a lot of people like me on this forum. Maybe they're all female! Never thought of it like that.)
I guess I'm not the most laid back guy in the world, but I hope I'm not uptight either. Thanks for being sincere. That's what I care most about. (I think that's why sometimes I come off as stuffy-- in real life, too.)</p>
<p>stuffy? Anyways, Canada is different from the states, people are less motivated and there is way less competition.(they are less involved making them less intelligent. myself included. Even those who are intelligent become stupid due to the tremendous amount of stupidity floating around my school that's as thick as London fog). sigh, thats why it really doesn't have a lot of potential as a country.
(maybe this is why I thought of you as being uptight)</p>
<p>At least you Canadians didn't voluntarily elect a head of state who stole the previous election. Damn but we sound backwards when we USofA folks describe ourselves.</p>
<p>Whether or not what the Republicans do is right, they've done an excellent job of securing power in all three branches of government. They have convinced the majority of Americans that they are right for America.</p>
<p>They have painted the Democrats as the party of immorality, medical malpractice abuse, and the party of everything bad in America. I would go right ahead and add affirmative action and wasteful entitlement programs into the mix of what's wrong with the Democrats. And the reason why many of the 47% of Americans DID vote for John Kerry was not because they liked the Democrats. It was because they hated Dubya.</p>
<p>Personally, I think that the Democrats are RIGHT on tons of things. But they need to work on fixing their image, and part of that entails dropping the most radically leftist parts of their platforms, and reworking their voting base. I think the key is to still emphasize change, but at a more moderate and restrained rate.</p>
<p>Joey</p>
<p>I like your style joey. I don't necessarily agree with the republicans completely, but hey, they did a brilliant job of campagning (aka spreading propganda) so what can one do but give them credit for that. People think American politics is flawed(I don't really though), well none of the parties of the Canadian government has any "umph" or magnetism to them that make people want to get involved. Canada is just plain boring. Seriously, only come here if you want to have peace and quiet and no action for the rest of your life!(I should also warn you about our canadian winters which are really only suited for polar bears).</p>
<p>don't get me wrong, there are many great things about Canada. However, if you've lived in say China, or Sweden(I've lived there, its paradise, enough said), or the states, canada won't appeal to you at all.</p>