Supreme Court guts affirmative action in college admissions

In this country race no longer needs to be a factor. The best students, black, white, brown or yellow are the students that should be rewarded to attend this lefty ivy league schools. Under no circumstance should someone be turned away soley based on race. As Charles Payne said earlier today, maybe now finally those lefty cities will do something about inner city minorities getting NO EDUCATION, literally graduating without functional reading skills. The left wants our minorities to believe they're not smart enough to succeed, so they slap paper tiger degrees on these kids, then offer freebies to keep their vote. Minorities are catching on that the left refuses to fix these educational issues and seem intent on ensuring minorities stay down. They don't want them to have choice of other schools, they don't want to encourage higher standards and they sure as hell let the teachers and teachers' unions produce pathetic results.

 

that is what you want to believe and have had spoon-fed to you.

What is when you state to a black person that they are incapable of getting good scores on a test because their skin is dark? That test would also include a Sgt exam within the police

really think about that. Who is the bigot? It's not those who look at all as equal.

While Democrat voters such as yourself tend to think they are enlightened by supporting AA, it goes back to the Democrat party not supporting abolition as well as not supporting the civil rights act, or suffrage. Heck, a Democrat POTUS OK'd internment camps as well as Leper colonies.The Democrat party is rich in history of bigotry. It really isn't your fault for being misguided because you have been misled by your own political party. I suggest that you cast aside the loyalty to the Democrat party and learn the facts. Oh, are you also aware that the Irish were treated worse than the Africans in this country? Are you aware that the Irish were kidnapped into slavery while the Africans were sold by tribe leaders? Neither is better but you really need to stop toeing the Democrat party line.

All men are created EQUAL

 

It is because they put up massive grants for low income students. And since most black people are poor, because until rather recently they got redlined and discriminated in general so that other ethnicities could massively profit of it... it pretty much works out.

And undoubtingly this is going to be pushed through elsewhere.

 

But that theme is not applied by the fast majority of white people till the late 1960's. And even then, white corporate America massively decimated black people, depriving them from economical opportunities.

And them economical gains the black people were not getting due to their skin color is mostly why they are poor now. It is not as if Hunter Biden would have the exact same opportunities if he was born black in a low income family.

 

gotta feel bad for liberals on this one. They’ll have to succeed on their own merits.

I suspect a new class of victim hood to be created that is intersectional with race. That might soften the sting of having to work hard for something.

 

The reality of the situation was I voted against the two candidates I disliked the most, the two candidates I never wanted to become president. I voted for Johnson, not so much for him as against Trump and Clinton. What interesting about 2016 is 25% of all those who voted, voted against a candidate, not for a candidate. I call them the anti-voter. Any name on the ballot would have done as long as the last name wasn’t the candidate one was voting against. Trump won the anti-voters 50-39 over Clinton with 11% voting third party. Trump also won the independent vote over Clinton 46-42 with 12% voting third party. This is what happens when both parties nominate candidates that most Americans don’t want as their next president.


https://www.cnn.com/election/2016/results/exit-polls


Mine was also an anti-vote, against the two candidates I didn’t want to become the next president. Nothing says I must vote for one of the two major party candidates when I think both suck and will make a very bad president. A friend of mine summed up 2016 nicely. He said that they voted for the devil they didn’t know, Trump being a businessman, a reality TV show host, no one knew how he’d govern. They voted for the devil they didn’t over the devil they did know, Clinton. Everyone knew exactly how she would govern.


The fact is at least a quarter of the population viewed both major party candidates as devils. A lot of people refused to choose between them by either voting third party or staying home and not voting. You want to blame the voter, how about blaming the parties who nominate candidates most Americans didn’t want? Take responsibility for your party’s actions and choices.

 

What every Asian-American kid that got denied college admission for having too HIGH of a GPA is doing right now:

 

there will still be affirmative action in my state. It’ll just be more muted.

Take Nayshaunquay. He’s a solid student in Alief, Texas. He can read, takes some honors classes, and does extra curriculars. He’s the valedictorian, has a 4.16 GPA and got an 1150 on the SAT. He’s getting into UT as an automatic admit.

Jaxsynn goes attends school in the Woodlands, Texas. He takes multiple AP classes, does four hours of homework a night, and has to balance that with band and baseball. He has a 4.42 GPA and got a 1460 on the SAT but is ranked 156 out of 1100. So he isn’t automatically accepted to UT.

 

Many people work hard. Conservatives just have the delusion of isolated self-made people who weren't bolstered by their privileges such as family income, race, social connections, etc. giving them various unearned advantages in addition to hard work.

I get the white victimhood thing though. I was unable to get need-based loans and grants for my education because the government thought my family made enough to pay all of my expenses many times over, but in reality they weren't paying for my education, and the result was a lot of extra debt from interest and having to work in college. Point is, efforts to level the playing field can have unfair-feeling effects upon those who are more privileged on paper.

 

I know it won't disappear but I still feel this is a step in the right direction. That person sound amazing, I'd hire them!

 

You're not advocating for leveling the playing field. This is a mistake liberals often make. You're advocating for the exact opposite. "Leveling the playing field" means you set up a game where everyone plays by the same rules. Affirmative action is the opposite of leveling the playing field. You're advocating for handicapping certain individuals based on their race. This is often referred to as racism and it is illegal for the government to be involved in doing this.

 

Hunter Biden had the opportunities because we the people have allowed corruption to be the norm within DC. We vote for "our guy" rather than those who actually understand their role, the role of the fed govt and the Constitution. No matter what you want to believe is righteous, creating different rules that benefit someone because they are black is bigoted in the largest sense. We are all equal. To suggest that a Hispanic cannot improve themselves because they are Hispanic is bigotry.
If I went to France and wanted to get ahead, I would need to speak French and adapt to their culture.

I'm sorry if you've been misled about history of the Democrat party but the bigotry persists within it. I actually used to vote Democrat years ago. It is what my folks did so I simply followed suit. I then started businesses and my eyes were opened. I am now undeclared and vote for those who understand the Constitution, regardless of party.

 

wait what, but you found a way; didn't you? You just made our point about racism = AA

this is the land of opportunity; not the land of guarantees

 

We’re all different man. The privilege a person has was earned at some point by someone. Do you have kids? Do you have a problem with them benefiting from your hard work?

 

.... because who is father is. Ivanka got her opportunities because of her father.
Joe as well as Donald both went to college when the US was a full fletched apartheid state.

 

i wouldn’t hire them because they can’t spell Jackson. That might be discriminatory.

I live in the Woodlands. There are so many Cadyns, aidyns , Ethyns, braxxtons , eruns, etc. running around, I find myself feeling relieved when I meet one of my daughters’ non-white friends.

 

"shills", "shysters", crooks". Take your pick.

 

Well, this was going to happen by the year 2028 anyway, which was when the courts were going to review race-based college admissions policy. I see that we're ahead of schedule. Good!

This doesn't mark the end of diversity in education. This means the ones who do make the cut will be smart as a whip.


And, what about all of the race-based funding grants and scholarships? It seems to me that they will have to either go away or open up to the general public and become generic accounts.


And, what kind of precedent does this set for other race-based things, such as reparations? You can't have those if the courts have ruled that race isn't a qualifier for admittance because unfairness is no longer needed.

 

I don't think I overtly advocated for anything, but life isn't a game that can be set up so that people play by the same rules. Being born with educated, attentive and rich parents who send you to the finest private school is simply not going to be the same as being born in the hood in terms of opportunities for early educational development.

 

Opportunities aren't the same for everybody. And birthright-based opportunities flourish under republican policies based upon the delusion of individual meritocracy.

 

Oh good, higher education is now segregated, once again.

Now, advanced degrees in CRT can be taught without the interference of whitey. Lawyers can graduate with degrees in Black law.

The lines are drawn !

 

Interesting take. I just don't think it's optimal policy, in terms of promoting meritocracy or excellence, to leave some merit uncultivated for lack of opportunity, and some merit undeveloped for not having to work for it. And then there's a whole other layer for diversity, in terms of providing what communities need, e.g. doctors or lawyers that come from the same background as those they serve, and so can better serve their community's needs.

 

Why should white and Asian students who are more qualified be not admitted for a black or Mexican student who is less qualified?

 

Why not admit students based on credentials alone.

Certainly varying races will be admitted.

The only one claiming blacks aren't as smart is you suggesting their ethnicity must be considered.

 

Well, the issue is supposed to be focused on how we are EQUAL UNDER THE LAW! Some of us have been screaming about this for decades, with our cries falling on deaf ears.

We have had the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965 in effect for over 58 years. And since that time there was no logical or ethical reason why any American citizen should be given preferential treatment over any other. NONE.

Next? The Supreme Court needs to eliminate long-standing policies of the Federal Government to reserve and "set-aside" millions of dollars in federal government contracts and purchase orders to minorities ONLY. How many more decades will it take until this disgusting, unfair, un-American practice is gotten rid of?