Law School Discussion

Specific Groups => Minority and Non-Traditional Law Students => Topic started by: struggles on April 15, 2007, 01:16:10 PM

Title: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schools..
Post by: struggles on April 15, 2007, 01:16:10 PM
I went to visit the school I am going to be attending. And since I am very sensitive to race and equality issues I noticed right off the back that there is a serious lack of hispanics and blacks...tons Asians and East Indians which is expected...It just really makes me sick, maybe if our prisons weren't so over populated with Hispanics and blacks there would be more of them represented in the higher echolen of education. I mean, I knew this was the case, but still it blows my mind.  >:(
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schools..
Post by: jillibean on April 15, 2007, 01:18:11 PM
well then why don't you use your JD to make it so that more blacks and hispanics choose higher education- especially black and hispanic men.
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schools..
Post by: struggles on April 15, 2007, 01:20:42 PM
Thats the plan my dear
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: This is wrong. on April 15, 2007, 01:27:29 PM
I went to visit the school I am going to be attending. And since I am very sensitive to race and equality issues I noticed right off the back that there is a serious lack of hispanics and blacks...tons Asians and East Indians which is expected...It just really makes me sick, maybe if our prisons weren't so over populated with Hispanics and blacks there would be more of them represented in the higher echolen of education. I mean, I knew this was the case, but still it blows my mind.  >:(

i wouldn't blame the prisons.  they're just a symptom, much like the lack of representation in higher echecetera.
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schools..
Post by: struggles on April 15, 2007, 01:38:36 PM
LOL...not blaming the prisons....blaming society
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: This is wrong. on April 15, 2007, 02:59:28 PM
LOL...not blaming the prisons....blaming society

meh, not a big fan of blaming society. 

which isn't to say that society's not screwed up.
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schools..
Post by: cowher101 on April 15, 2007, 05:10:07 PM
I kinda agree with the sentiment here. I think it should be easy for minorities to get admitted to law school. And of course, I also think it should be difficult for whites to get in.

Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schools..
Post by: LuvHurtz on April 16, 2007, 03:04:09 PM
The number of minorities in almost every professional job is low...and it really is sad. I know there are a lot of programs (especially by lawyers) to try and encourage black students to consider becoming attorneys. I do wonder exactly what it is that keeps minorities from pursuing these jobs (outside of financial the financial strain of paying for school). I know that everyone I told that I was going to law school (even black people) were telling me why and I couldn't do that...it was a white profession, etc. I think it really is sad that after all these years a lot of minorities still have this mentality.
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schools..
Post by: leostrauss on April 16, 2007, 03:06:55 PM
Thats the plan my dear

My dear?? jeez, sexist
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schools..
Post by: struggles on April 16, 2007, 07:19:44 PM
Thats the plan my dear

My dear?? jeez, sexist

lol, how is that?
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schools..
Post by: leostrauss on April 16, 2007, 09:20:27 PM
I was seriously joking. Sorry, sometimes such things don't come through well when typed (and my jokes are generally lame).

However, my mom - a feminist - says such terms when said from a male to a female seem condescending to her and patronizing . . . I don't get it.
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schools..
Post by: cowher101 on April 16, 2007, 09:24:16 PM
Another thing that's been bothering me lately, being a baseball fan, why aren't there more black people in major league baseball? And if you really wanna talk about injustice, look at the NHL. Thats probably the most racist sports league in the world.

It starts with lawyers and we need more black lawyers in order to achieve the black vision.

Again, black students should be able to get into schools regardless of what they score on the LSAT. If you are black and you are looking to go to law school, that should be enough to ensure your place.
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schools..
Post by: jillibean on April 17, 2007, 06:49:13 AM
Another thing that's been bothering me lately, being a baseball fan, why aren't there more black people in major league baseball? And if you really wanna talk about injustice, look at the NHL. Thats probably the most racist sports league in the world.

It starts with lawyers and we need more black lawyers in order to achieve the black vision.

Again, black students should be able to get into schools regardless of what they score on the LSAT. If you are black and you are looking to go to law school, that should be enough to ensure your place.

I don't agree with that at all ( I hope you are just being sarcastic). It would forever tarnish the image of a black lawyer.
And how many black people do you know who play hockey? Sports is the one area where I don't think race matters- owners are trying to get the best team and make the most money-- if it's an all white team that is the best then so be it.
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schools..
Post by: struggles on April 17, 2007, 03:59:52 PM
I was seriously joking. Sorry, sometimes such things don't come through well when typed (and my jokes are generally lame).

However, my mom - a feminist - says such terms when said from a male to a female seem condescending to her and patronizing . . . I don't get it.

No, I knew you were joking...It could be seen as sexist and I would take it that way if it was from a male and if say it was in some sort of business or formal setting, but not if we had an informal friendly relationship.
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schools..
Post by: struggles on April 17, 2007, 04:40:44 PM
Another thing that's been bothering me lately, being a baseball fan, why aren't there more black people in major league baseball? And if you really wanna talk about injustice, look at the NHL. Thats probably the most racist sports league in the world.

It starts with lawyers and we need more black lawyers in order to achieve the black vision.

Again, black students should be able to get into schools regardless of what they score on the LSAT. If you are black and you are looking to go to law school, that should be enough to ensure your place.

Well thats probably going a little far, even for my taste, but not too far off. Its not really the schools fault I don't think, I'm sure that blacks and hispanics get preference because it looks good for the school to be diverse. In hindsight I would have applied to better schools and made it more known that I was Mexican had I known it was such a big deal to admissions.  I've gotten accepted to schools I shouldn't have...so makes we wonder how much my URM status really paid off. That said, I think its just more the injustices in our society that keep these minorities out, nothing overtly intentional on behalf of the schools themselves, at least one would hope. Its a problem that needs to be address way before people even get into high school...truthfully it never even dawned on me that I could go to law school or even college for that matter, until I was lucky enough to brush shoulders with people who told me I could and encouraged me to do it. Thats a part of whats missing for many minority and disadvantaged youth. They really are "disadvantaged" the term actually does mean something more then skin color.
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: This is wrong. on April 17, 2007, 04:44:53 PM
Another thing that's been bothering me lately, being a baseball fan, why aren't there more black people in major league baseball? And if you really wanna talk about injustice, look at the NHL. Thats probably the most racist sports league in the world.

It starts with lawyers and we need more black lawyers in order to achieve the black vision.

Again, black students should be able to get into schools regardless of what they score on the LSAT. If you are black and you are looking to go to law school, that should be enough to ensure your place.

this is a pretty lame post.  you come off as pouty.  you can do better.
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: Guess who's coming to dinner?!? on April 18, 2007, 07:27:11 PM
Another thing that's been bothering me lately, being a baseball fan, why aren't there more black people in major league baseball? And if you really wanna talk about injustice, look at the NHL. Thats probably the most racist sports league in the world.

It starts with lawyers and we need more black lawyers in order to achieve the black vision.

Again, black students should be able to get into schools regardless of what they score on the LSAT. If you are black and you are looking to go to law school, that should be enough to ensure your place.

this is a pretty lame post.  you come off as pouty.  you can do better.

First let me preface this with I, unlike most people of color,  did well on the LSAT. 

That being said I do think that there needs to be some sort of reality check about why students of color with sky high gpa's and low LSATS  can't get in to top schools.  I think attention needs to be paid from the start of a person of colors education--meaning look at the schools most of us went to!  From K-12 they are underfunded and poor in quality when you compare them to our white counter parts.  Even at school in the Bay Area regarded as "great" like Berkeley High--this place is actually two schools in one.  You have to test in to AP classes and students of color are often tracked in to classes that will not meet the admission course  requirements of UC or even CSUs.   So while making adjustments in comparing the LSAT scores for the students who are coming up now and applying to law school in the next 15 or so years is something we should do, imagine what would happen if the kids who are in pre-school/ kindergarten were given a quality education?  What if their parents were given parenting class on how to help your child be successful in their academic career?  What if they could afford healthy foods or even knew how to prepare them?  Yes I know there are poor white people as well, but when you're white and you work hard #1 you are more likely to score higher on standardized tests (statistically speaking, not because they are smarter)  and #2 once you work hard it is easier for you to get your foot in the door.  A man of color who is trying to catch a break through hard work can't tap in to the "good old boys" network ( that is present no matter what political party you are in)

The long term answer is not affirmative action BUT it is the best thing we can do right now.  In the long run what needs to be done is that our leaders and those in power (politicians, education admins, social workers, policy makers etc.) take a hard look at WHY these students aren't performing well on the LSAT and actually DO SOMETHING about it.  I know I plan to.

And to the poster who said that they are not a big fan of blaming society for problems....uhhh get real.  Black people still live in the land that enslaved them and racism still exists today. Several companies that reaped the benefits of slavery( i.e JPMorgan Chase and FleetBoston; insurance companies (e.g., Aetna and New York Life); railroads (Norfolk Southern, Union Pacific and CSX); tobacco companies (R.J. Reynolds, Brown & Williamson); and a textile manufacturer (WestPoint Stevens)

Or do you think that everything is fine and all are equal?  It is SOCIETY that creates the disparity between the quality of education students of color receive and that of their white peers...





Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: leostrauss on April 18, 2007, 09:50:55 PM
Another thing that's been bothering me lately, being a baseball fan, why aren't there more black people in major league baseball? And if you really wanna talk about injustice, look at the NHL. Thats probably the most racist sports league in the world.

It starts with lawyers and we need more black lawyers in order to achieve the black vision.

Again, black students should be able to get into schools regardless of what they score on the LSAT. If you are black and you are looking to go to law school, that should be enough to ensure your place.

this is a pretty lame post.  you come off as pouty.  you can do better.

First let me preface this with I, unlike most people of color,  did well on the LSAT. 

That being said I do think that there needs to be some sort of reality check about why students of color with sky high gpa's and low LSATS  can't get in to top schools.  I think attention needs to be paid from the start of a person of colors education--meaning look at the schools most of us went to!  From K-12 they are underfunded and poor in quality when you compare them to our white counter parts.  Even at school in the Bay Area regarded as "great" like Berkeley High--this place is actually two schools in one.  You have to test in to AP classes and students of color are often tracked in to classes that will not meet the admission course  requirements of UC or even CSUs.   So while making adjustments in comparing the LSAT scores for the students who are coming up now and applying to law school in the next 15 or so years is something we should do, imagine what would happen if the kids who are in pre-school/ kindergarten were given a quality education?  What if their parents were given parenting class on how to help your child be successful in their academic career?  What if they could afford healthy foods or even knew how to prepare them?  Yes I know there are poor white people as well, but when you're white and you work hard #1 you are more likely to score higher on standardized tests (statistically speaking, not because they are smarter)  and #2 once you work hard it is easier for you to get your foot in the door.  A man of color who is trying to catch a break through hard work can't tap in to the "good old boys" network ( that is present no matter what political party you are in)
The long term answer is not affirmative action BUT it is the best thing we can do right now.  In the long run what needs to be done is that our leaders and those in power (politicians, education admins, social workers, policy makers etc.) take a hard look at WHY these students aren't performing well on the LSAT and actually DO SOMETHING about it.  I know I plan to.

And to the poster who said that they are not a big fan of blaming society for problems....uhhh get real.  Black people still live in the land that enslaved them and racism still exists today. Several companies that reaped the benefits of slavery( i.e JPMorgan Chase and FleetBoston; insurance companies (e.g., Aetna and New York Life); railroads (Norfolk Southern, Union Pacific and CSX); tobacco companies (R.J. Reynolds, Brown & Williamson); and a textile manufacturer (WestPoint Stevens)

Or do you think that everything is fine and all are equal?  It is SOCIETY that creates the disparity between the quality of education students of color receive and that of their white peers...







My comment regards the above bolded text. I will make no statement about those arguments per se, but I will say this: A person who really made a point of relying on themselves and not pushing things off onto others (someone who never made excuses or shirked responsibility) would likely not make arguments like that. I am not saying anything about the poster above or about blacks in general . . . my point is that it is unlikely that someone with the characteristics I described - values personal responsibility, believes in themselves, doesn't make excuses - would make such args.

I think plenty of people who believe in AA and plenty of people who are for the Advancement of minorities generally do have the values I described (very self reliant, plenty of self confidence, plenty of brains/talent, work ethic, etc. and the tendency not to make excuses) I think that the majority society to a large extent profits from tricking minorities into playing victim and never really taking ownership of their own destiny. I think that if all of the talented black, hispanic, female, etc people in this country spent time encouraging independence, belief in themselves, self reliance, personal accountability, etc, it would be more helpful than ten thousand times as many of these pass the buck arguments that we hear all the time.

I just think that this sort of argument - even if it is factual and true - isn't the best or easiest path to success. Are you really gonna rely on this oppressive group of ppl to change suddenly and start listening to the victim story? Has that been effective in the past? I honestly think you're right about much of what you say, but I question whether it's gonna work. I think you are definitely on the right track with getting a JD and making a difference yourself! That's the key - no one can do anything about it then to hold you back - and you have control of your own destiny! The unbolded in the above post was inspirational and spot on - rant over
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: This is wrong. on April 18, 2007, 09:53:50 PM
Another thing that's been bothering me lately, being a baseball fan, why aren't there more black people in major league baseball? And if you really wanna talk about injustice, look at the NHL. Thats probably the most racist sports league in the world.

It starts with lawyers and we need more black lawyers in order to achieve the black vision.

Again, black students should be able to get into schools regardless of what they score on the LSAT. If you are black and you are looking to go to law school, that should be enough to ensure your place.

this is a pretty lame post.  you come off as pouty.  you can do better.

First let me preface this with I, unlike most people of color,  did well on the LSAT. 

That being said I do think that there needs to be some sort of reality check about why students of color with sky high gpa's and low LSATS  can't get in to top schools.  I think attention needs to be paid from the start of a person of colors education--meaning look at the schools most of us went to!  From K-12 they are underfunded and poor in quality when you compare them to our white counter parts.  Even at school in the Bay Area regarded as "great" like Berkeley High--this place is actually two schools in one.  You have to test in to AP classes and students of color are often tracked in to classes that will not meet the admission course  requirements of UC or even CSUs.   So while making adjustments in comparing the LSAT scores for the students who are coming up now and applying to law school in the next 15 or so years is something we should do, imagine what would happen if the kids who are in pre-school/ kindergarten were given a quality education?  What if their parents were given parenting class on how to help your child be successful in their academic career?  What if they could afford healthy foods or even knew how to prepare them?  Yes I know there are poor white people as well, but when you're white and you work hard #1 you are more likely to score higher on standardized tests (statistically speaking, not because they are smarter)  and #2 once you work hard it is easier for you to get your foot in the door.  A man of color who is trying to catch a break through hard work can't tap in to the "good old boys" network ( that is present no matter what political party you are in)

The long term answer is not affirmative action BUT it is the best thing we can do right now.  In the long run what needs to be done is that our leaders and those in power (politicians, education admins, social workers, policy makers etc.) take a hard look at WHY these students aren't performing well on the LSAT and actually DO SOMETHING about it.  I know I plan to.

And to the poster who said that they are not a big fan of blaming society for problems....uhhh get real.  Black people still live in the land that enslaved them and racism still exists today. Several companies that reaped the benefits of slavery( i.e JPMorgan Chase and FleetBoston; insurance companies (e.g., Aetna and New York Life); railroads (Norfolk Southern, Union Pacific and CSX); tobacco companies (R.J. Reynolds, Brown & Williamson); and a textile manufacturer (WestPoint Stevens)

Or do you think that everything is fine and all are equal?  It is SOCIETY that creates the disparity between the quality of education students of color receive and that of their white peers...

I really hope you weren't addressing me, because I'm way too lazy to read this entire thing.  Good job on the LSAT though.  I hear those play an important role in applications and such.
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: struggles on April 18, 2007, 11:27:07 PM
Another thing that's been bothering me lately, being a baseball fan, why aren't there more black people in major league baseball? And if you really wanna talk about injustice, look at the NHL. Thats probably the most racist sports league in the world.

It starts with lawyers and we need more black lawyers in order to achieve the black vision.

Again, black students should be able to get into schools regardless of what they score on the LSAT. If you are black and you are looking to go to law school, that should be enough to ensure your place.

this is a pretty lame post.  you come off as pouty.  you can do better.

First let me preface this with I, unlike most people of color,  did well on the LSAT. 

That being said I do think that there needs to be some sort of reality check about why students of color with sky high gpa's and low LSATS  can't get in to top schools.  I think attention needs to be paid from the start of a person of colors education--meaning look at the schools most of us went to!  From K-12 they are underfunded and poor in quality when you compare them to our white counter parts.  Even at school in the Bay Area regarded as "great" like Berkeley High--this place is actually two schools in one.  You have to test in to AP classes and students of color are often tracked in to classes that will not meet the admission course  requirements of UC or even CSUs.   So while making adjustments in comparing the LSAT scores for the students who are coming up now and applying to law school in the next 15 or so years is something we should do, imagine what would happen if the kids who are in pre-school/ kindergarten were given a quality education?  What if their parents were given parenting class on how to help your child be successful in their academic career?  What if they could afford healthy foods or even knew how to prepare them?  Yes I know there are poor white people as well, but when you're white and you work hard #1 you are more likely to score higher on standardized tests (statistically speaking, not because they are smarter)  and #2 once you work hard it is easier for you to get your foot in the door.  A man of color who is trying to catch a break through hard work can't tap in to the "good old boys" network ( that is present no matter what political party you are in)

The long term answer is not affirmative action BUT it is the best thing we can do right now.  In the long run what needs to be done is that our leaders and those in power (politicians, education admins, social workers, policy makers etc.) take a hard look at WHY these students aren't performing well on the LSAT and actually DO SOMETHING about it.  I know I plan to.

And to the poster who said that they are not a big fan of blaming society for problems....uhhh get real.  Black people still live in the land that enslaved them and racism still exists today. Several companies that reaped the benefits of slavery( i.e JPMorgan Chase and FleetBoston; insurance companies (e.g., Aetna and New York Life); railroads (Norfolk Southern, Union Pacific and CSX); tobacco companies (R.J. Reynolds, Brown & Williamson); and a textile manufacturer (WestPoint Stevens)

Or do you think that everything is fine and all are equal?  It is SOCIETY that creates the disparity between the quality of education students of color receive and that of their white peers...







Yes Indeedy! Well said.
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: Astro on April 18, 2007, 11:53:59 PM
Another thing that's been bothering me lately, being a baseball fan, why aren't there more black people in major league baseball? And if you really wanna talk about injustice, look at the NHL. Thats probably the most racist sports league in the world.

It starts with lawyers and we need more black lawyers in order to achieve the black vision.

Again, black students should be able to get into schools regardless of what they score on the LSAT. If you are black and you are looking to go to law school, that should be enough to ensure your place.

I don't agree with that at all ( I hope you are just being sarcastic). It would forever tarnish the image of a black lawyer.
And how many black people do you know who play hockey? Sports is the one area where I don't think race matters- owners are trying to get the best team and make the most money-- if it's an all white team that is the best then so be it.


Don't bait the trolls.








Also, struggles, you're fun times.   :D
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schools..
Post by: Miss P on April 19, 2007, 09:52:16 AM
tag for the car-wreck factor
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: philibusters on April 20, 2007, 11:37:20 PM
Another thing that's been bothering me lately, being a baseball fan, why aren't there more black people in major league baseball? And if you really wanna talk about injustice, look at the NHL. Thats probably the most racist sports league in the world.

It starts with lawyers and we need more black lawyers in order to achieve the black vision.

Again, black students should be able to get into schools regardless of what they score on the LSAT. If you are black and you are looking to go to law school, that should be enough to ensure your place.

this is a pretty lame post.  you come off as pouty.  you can do better.

First let me preface this with I, unlike most people of color,  did well on the LSAT. 

That being said I do think that there needs to be some sort of reality check about why students of color with sky high gpa's and low LSATS  can't get in to top schools.  I think attention needs to be paid from the start of a person of colors education--meaning look at the schools most of us went to!  From K-12 they are underfunded and poor in quality when you compare them to our white counter parts.  Even at school in the Bay Area regarded as "great" like Berkeley High--this place is actually two schools in one.  You have to test in to AP classes and students of color are often tracked in to classes that will not meet the admission course  requirements of UC or even CSUs.   So while making adjustments in comparing the LSAT scores for the students who are coming up now and applying to law school in the next 15 or so years is something we should do, imagine what would happen if the kids who are in pre-school/ kindergarten were given a quality education?  What if their parents were given parenting class on how to help your child be successful in their academic career?  What if they could afford healthy foods or even knew how to prepare them?  Yes I know there are poor white people as well, but when you're white and you work hard #1 you are more likely to score higher on standardized tests (statistically speaking, not because they are smarter)  and #2 once you work hard it is easier for you to get your foot in the door.  A man of color who is trying to catch a break through hard work can't tap in to the "good old boys" network ( that is present no matter what political party you are in)

The long term answer is not affirmative action BUT it is the best thing we can do right now.  In the long run what needs to be done is that our leaders and those in power (politicians, education admins, social workers, policy makers etc.) take a hard look at WHY these students aren't performing well on the LSAT and actually DO SOMETHING about it.  I know I plan to.

And to the poster who said that they are not a big fan of blaming society for problems....uhhh get real.  Black people still live in the land that enslaved them and racism still exists today. Several companies that reaped the benefits of slavery( i.e JPMorgan Chase and FleetBoston; insurance companies (e.g., Aetna and New York Life); railroads (Norfolk Southern, Union Pacific and CSX); tobacco companies (R.J. Reynolds, Brown & Williamson); and a textile manufacturer (WestPoint Stevens)

Or do you think that everything is fine and all are equal?  It is SOCIETY that creates the disparity between the quality of education students of color receive and that of their white peers...







I am a lot less sure than you, that the data would back you up.  My guess is that most AA recipients did not grow up dirt poor and second you seem to have made the assumption that most white people had excellent educational backgrounds, which I don't think data would confirm.  I do think the data would confirm on the whole African Americans do not have the opportunities that white people have and are given a lot less resources in their early life than white people.  That said, kids at law school and even college usually are not the best sample of their races, most white people who go to college and almost all that go to law school came from good stable backgrounds.  To say that is true for the majority of white people is probably a stretch.  I think the same is true of African Americans at college and law school (though I know less of their personal backgrounds and histories).  But I don't have data myself, so both of us are just speculating, and I doubt data even exists on what we are disagreeing about, so its a moot point, but it substantially affects how each of us views AA (Incidentally we are both pro-AA, just have very different perspectives on it).

In the end, all this focus on whether people were discriminated against (yes, yes I have to agree its pretty damn absurd to hear white people scream they are being discriminated against, at least in the context of dealing with law schools, run by white people) and whether each recipient of AA personally deserves it is petty and pointless.  For example it  is subjective, whether a person personally deserves AA because all African Americans have certain disadvantages that they must overcome, while obviously other disadvantages that many of them face come to them not because of their race, but because they are poor and second people make accusations without knowing the particularly recipient's background.  I think the proper focus should be on trying to sketch out the policy goals of AA and second whether the current system is a good system for promoting those policy goals.  (For what its worth I originally wrote a much longer response, going into my personal background to illustrate points and stuff, but decided that longer post wasn't warranted by the thread, where people have kept it pretty impersonal so far.)
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: struggles on April 21, 2007, 12:51:31 AM
Another thing that's been bothering me lately, being a baseball fan, why aren't there more black people in major league baseball? And if you really wanna talk about injustice, look at the NHL. Thats probably the most racist sports league in the world.

It starts with lawyers and we need more black lawyers in order to achieve the black vision.

Again, black students should be able to get into schools regardless of what they score on the LSAT. If you are black and you are looking to go to law school, that should be enough to ensure your place.

this is a pretty lame post.  you come off as pouty.  you can do better.

First let me preface this with I, unlike most people of color,  did well on the LSAT. 

That being said I do think that there needs to be some sort of reality check about why students of color with sky high gpa's and low LSATS  can't get in to top schools.  I think attention needs to be paid from the start of a person of colors education--meaning look at the schools most of us went to!  From K-12 they are underfunded and poor in quality when you compare them to our white counter parts.  Even at school in the Bay Area regarded as "great" like Berkeley High--this place is actually two schools in one.  You have to test in to AP classes and students of color are often tracked in to classes that will not meet the admission course  requirements of UC or even CSUs.   So while making adjustments in comparing the LSAT scores for the students who are coming up now and applying to law school in the next 15 or so years is something we should do, imagine what would happen if the kids who are in pre-school/ kindergarten were given a quality education?  What if their parents were given parenting class on how to help your child be successful in their academic career?  What if they could afford healthy foods or even knew how to prepare them?  Yes I know there are poor white people as well, but when you're white and you work hard #1 you are more likely to score higher on standardized tests (statistically speaking, not because they are smarter)  and #2 once you work hard it is easier for you to get your foot in the door.  A man of color who is trying to catch a break through hard work can't tap in to the "good old boys" network ( that is present no matter what political party you are in)

The long term answer is not affirmative action BUT it is the best thing we can do right now.  In the long run what needs to be done is that our leaders and those in power (politicians, education admins, social workers, policy makers etc.) take a hard look at WHY these students aren't performing well on the LSAT and actually DO SOMETHING about it.  I know I plan to.

And to the poster who said that they are not a big fan of blaming society for problems....uhhh get real.  Black people still live in the land that enslaved them and racism still exists today. Several companies that reaped the benefits of slavery( i.e JPMorgan Chase and FleetBoston; insurance companies (e.g., Aetna and New York Life); railroads (Norfolk Southern, Union Pacific and CSX); tobacco companies (R.J. Reynolds, Brown & Williamson); and a textile manufacturer (WestPoint Stevens)

Or do you think that everything is fine and all are equal?  It is SOCIETY that creates the disparity between the quality of education students of color receive and that of their white peers...







I am a lot less sure than you, that the data would back you up.  My guess is that most AA recipients did not grow up dirt poor and second you seem to have made the assumption that most white people had excellent educational backgrounds, which I don't think data would confirm.  I do think the data would confirm on the whole African Americans do not have the opportunities that white people have and are given a lot less resources in their early life than white people.  That said, kids at law school and even college usually are not the best sample of their races, most white people who go to college and almost all that go to law school came from good stable backgrounds.  To say that is true for the majority of white people is probably a stretch.  I think the same is true of African Americans at college and law school (though I know less of their personal backgrounds and histories).  But I don't have data myself, so both of us are just speculating, and I doubt data even exists on what we are disagreeing about, so its a moot point, but it substantially affects how each of us views AA (Incidentally we are both pro-AA, just have very different perspectives on it).

In the end, all this focus on whether people were discriminated against (yes, yes I have to agree its pretty damn absurd to hear white people scream they are being discriminated against, at least in the context of dealing with law schools, run by white people) and whether each recipient of AA personally deserves it is petty and pointless.  For example it  is subjective, whether a person personally deserves AA because all African Americans have certain disadvantages that they must overcome, while obviously other disadvantages that many of them face come to them not because of their race, but because they are poor and second people make accusations without knowing the particularly recipient's background.  I think the proper focus should be on trying to sketch out the policy goals of AA and second whether the current system is a good system for promoting those policy goals.  (For what its worth I originally wrote a much longer response, going into my personal background to illustrate points and stuff, but decided that longer post wasn't warranted by the thread, where people have kept it pretty impersonal so far.)

Well, I have seen much of the research and many of the statistics regarding minoritys (and poor whites) and education and attainment, which is probably why I am so sensitive to these issues. So both views are right on certain points according to what I've read and studied. Skin color is not the only factor, the poor and lower class in general do have a larger hurdle then lets say, middle class minorities. Take for example the millions of Asians and East Indians, who are people of color and minorities in America, but who you will no doubt be sitting next to and across from in all your classes. Also, being white does give you an advantage that people of color will never obtain no matter how much education, money or upper class social skills they aquire.

Also, the population of poor, lower class whites is much larger then the population of poor and lower class minorities. Its the over representation thats the issue....last I read, 12% of the US population is black, and 35% of the prison population is black. Same over representation for hispanics.  4 out of every 10 black males will go to prison or jail at some time in their lifetime, only 1 out of 10 will go to college (not nessecarily graduate)!!!! While, +/-25% of the US population has a 4 year degree. I wish I had a link to these statistics...
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: philibusters on April 21, 2007, 09:34:37 AM
I think it's pretty clear Cowher was joking.

Also, for those saying that the problem starts much earlier and we need to reform our elementary and high schools, and for those who talk about minorities being made to felt victimized - do you think a step in the right direction might be eliminating AA?  I guess the argument would go something like:  once we stop telling minorities they need additional help to get into the same schools as whites, won't they eventually start to do better once they're on a level playing field?  Of course the low achievement isn't just a psychological byproduct of AA, I'm sure it mostly has to do with inequities in funding for schools in different communities.  I guess I just don't see what AA is doing to make this whole situation better.

African Americans are underrepresented in law school, but even if they were represented proportionally without AA, that doesn't mean that the inner city problems will have been solved.  Probably the amount of African Americans and hispanics that go to law school is dependent on the size and stablility of those group's middle classes.  Its possible that those segments of those populations could rise in the future and those groups could obtain proportional representation in law schools with affirmative action.  The bad thing though is that wouldn't solve the underfunded schools or the problems with drugs in the inner cities, in fact it might detract attention from it.  I am still not convinced AA especially in law school admissions really has anything to do with helping those worst off in the inner cities.  If I had to guess most of AA  goes to either middle class URM's or URM's that are lower middle class or sometimes that poor, but that came from good stable families free of drug problems and such, for the poster who I am responding to who says I don't see AA making the underfunding of the schools any better-I agree, but I don't think it was meant to address that, I think some of its goals are related, stabilizing and making permanent URM middle classes and enlarging URM middle class by helping poor URM's who wouldn't be able to go to law school reach the middle and professional classes--I think its misleading analysis to say it failed to solve the problem of underfunded primary and secondary education in inner cities, when its goals where always more narrow and limited.
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: Ask a White Dude! on April 21, 2007, 09:38:49 AM
I think it's pretty clear Cowher was joking.

Also, for those saying that the problem starts much earlier and we need to reform our elementary and high schools, and for those who talk about minorities being made to felt victimized - do you think a step in the right direction might be eliminating AA?  I guess the argument would go something like:  once we stop telling minorities they need additional help to get into the same schools as whites, won't they eventually start to do better once they're on a level playing field?  Of course the low achievement isn't just a psychological byproduct of AA, I'm sure it mostly has to do with inequities in funding for schools in different communities.  I guess I just don't see what AA is doing to make this whole situation better.

African Americans are underrepresented in law school, but even if they were represented proportionally without AA, that doesn't mean that the inner city problems will have been solved.  Probably the amount of African Americans and hispanics that go to law school is dependent on the size and stablility of those group's middle classes.  Its possible that those segments of those populations could rise in the future and those groups could obtain proportional representation in law schools with affirmative action.  The bad thing though is that wouldn't solve the underfunded schools or the problems with drugs in the inner cities, in fact it might detract attention from it.  I am still not convinced AA especially in law school admissions really has anything to do with helping those worst off in the inner cities.  If I had to guess most of AA  goes to either middle class URM's or URM's that are lower middle class or sometimes that poor, but that came from good stable families free of drug problems and such, for the poster who I am responding to who says I don't see AA making the underfunding of the schools any better-I agree, but I don't think it was meant to address that, I think some of its goals are related, stabilizing and making permanent URM middle classes and enlarging URM middle class by helping poor URM's who wouldn't be able to go to law school reach the middle and professional classes--I think its misleading analysis to say it failed to solve the problem of underfunded primary and secondary education in inner cities, when its goals where always more narrow and limited.

the solution: give a boost for being URM.  give another boost for coming from underprivileged background.  give another boost for agreeing to provide low-cost legal services for inner city clients.

huh, that third part is actually novel.
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schools..
Post by: struggles on April 21, 2007, 10:10:23 AM
I think it's pretty clear Cowher was joking.

Also, for those saying that the problem starts much earlier and we need to reform our elementary and high schools, and for those who talk about minorities being made to felt victimized - do you think a step in the right direction might be eliminating AA?  I guess the argument would go something like:  once we stop telling minorities they need additional help to get into the same schools as whites, won't they eventually start to do better once they're on a level playing field?  Of course the low achievement isn't just a psychological byproduct of AA, I'm sure it mostly has to do with inequities in funding for schools in different communities.  I guess I just don't see what AA is doing to make this whole situation better.

Its called breaking the cycle...AA may be a late start on the whole problem, but if it worked an a large scale for URM's then the cycle would not keep repeating itself. Yes, a change in our inner city elementary and high schools would be a tremendous help, but thats a much grander feat then AA. Plus, in my opinion AA if a kinda a cop out, false hope. I'm sure our great leaders knew the BEST way to fix the problme wasn't to start wasn't to start at the college level...
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schools..
Post by: struggles on April 21, 2007, 11:36:59 AM
I think it's pretty clear Cowher was joking.

Also, for those saying that the problem starts much earlier and we need to reform our elementary and high schools, and for those who talk about minorities being made to felt victimized - do you think a step in the right direction might be eliminating AA?  I guess the argument would go something like:  once we stop telling minorities they need additional help to get into the same schools as whites, won't they eventually start to do better once they're on a level playing field?  Of course the low achievement isn't just a psychological byproduct of AA, I'm sure it mostly has to do with inequities in funding for schools in different communities.  I guess I just don't see what AA is doing to make this whole situation better.

Its called breaking the cycle...AA may be a late start on the whole problem, but if it worked an a large scale for URM's then the cycle would not keep repeating itself. Yes, a change in our inner city elementary and high schools would be a tremendous help, but thats a much grander feat then AA. Plus, in my opinion AA if a kinda a cop out, false hope. I'm sure our great leaders knew the BEST way to fix the problme wasn't to start wasn't to start at the college level...

I think more than anything it's probably a PR thing, for universities and for politicians.  I think people are very reluctant to say or do anything that has even the slightest hint of not being overwhelmingly positive toward URMs, and admitting 98% whites would fall under that category. 

I'm sure there's also really noble intentions, but for every URM you admit, there's some non-URM that doesn't get admitted, so I guess I just don't see the benefit of letting in that URM over an oftentimes more qualified non-URM.  I don't see the benefit of "breaking the cycle."  I see AA as just changing around a little bit who gets what law school acceptances, jobs, money, etc (i.e. some URMs will get slightly better jobs at the expense of some non-URMs)  I don't see how AA increases the sum of human happiness - it seems that it just redistributes a little who gets what, but does so in a racially discriminatory manner.  I haven't thought about this too deeply, but I just don't see the value in AA.   

Ok. If you dont' see the benefit of "breaking the cycle" then we are obviously are completely opposite ends of the spectrum and there's really no point in arguing. 
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schools..
Post by: Miss P on April 21, 2007, 12:04:52 PM
I haven't thought about this too deeply....
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: Ask a White Dude! on April 21, 2007, 12:10:24 PM
I'm sorry I wasn't clear.  Obviously I see the benefit for the people who benefit from AA.  I just don't see how the benefit outweighs the detriment it causes to the people who are adversely affected by AA.

Positive externalities.
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schools..
Post by: struggles on April 21, 2007, 12:48:39 PM
Well, from my point of view there's no true detriment cause by AA. I believe in equality and for things to get closer to equal some get pulled back and some get pushed up. Which, is not entirely "fair" if your not the one reaping the benefits. However, there's a greater good here. Yes, is unfair if some over priveledged wealhty white kid gets pushed out of their spot in school X (if that's even the reality of what happens, and I'm not saying it is). But, that poor black kid who climbed mountains to get there is just as deserving of the spot, even if that means a few less points on the LSAT. If the LSAT can even be used as a good measurement or predictor of a minorities qualifications to go to law school. It will take years and years to change society into one that brings up equal black and whites in terms of education. And small steps along the way help. Its not so much an individual thing, that white kid vs that black kid. Its more a macro picture, there's no detriment to society for giving that URM an extra push, but there's possibly a detriment to that losing idividual....In fact, the more and more URMs that get in push us somewhere closer to a more equal society. Whats on the other side of that coin? there's a few less spot for whites? doesn't seem like much detriment to me.
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schools..
Post by: Chibundu on April 21, 2007, 01:14:04 PM
I do not mean to be long but bear with me. Affirmative Action is an extremely temporary solution for a problem that is greater than the policy can actually overcome. It is like placing a bandaid on a gash, you dont do that. There will still be huge problems and even more negative recourse than the positive of placing the bandaid on the gash. The best possible solution for the gash is stitches, but like a previous poster stated, it actually behooves SOCIETY and the governemt to not solve this problem. The growing disparity between the HAVES and the HAVE NOTS continues to grow due to capitalisms need for educated workers and those who are uneducated.

So why spend money educating citizens who would wind up being problems to society in the long run. The more educted a society, this less likely the government is able to do what it wwants without negative backlash.

So affirmative action attempts to right a wrong that is more complicated than sticking a few minorities in the office, in a law school, a business school, Med school. I wrote a paper on AA my freshman year and have done significant research on not so much the effects of AA, but moreso the need for it. And if my mom is not educated and does not propose education as a means to acquire greater upward societal mobility, then why would I feel like it would help me? This is the problem in many inner city neighborhoods and rural towns. Education is not a priority within the community and so the youth do not have that additional reinforcement at home once they leave school. So the percentage of minorities that graduate from high school is smaller than that of the majorities  and those entering college is even smaller. Then you look at the stats of those who graduate and the numbers continue to be more miniscule. So there is no mathematical way that the numbers of minorities in higher education will ever be equal as long as society continues along this path. Which is why we must try to break the cycle AND like another poster said, try to not use or have a Victim's mindset.

We must acknowledge that a problem exists so that we can work towards a solution. Which is why racism is still so prevalent in society. No one wants to talk about it or acknowledge it and so the problems continue. If alcoholics never admit they have a problem, they will remain alcoholics.

So is AA good, yes. Does it harm more then the good it provides, NO. Numbers do not mean that someone is smarter than another. If those same students were not bringing a different perspective in the classroom and ended up failing out of school, then maybe, but I doubt that they are not as smart and wont end up making the smae if not more contributions to the classroom in the greater whole. I knoe, speaking for MYSELF personally, I will voice my opinion and state it from my point of view, where if they admitted someone who was like others in the class but had better numbers those lawyers would not be better for it. My opinion. HTH ::)
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: mugatu on April 21, 2007, 02:16:16 PM
::begins setting up argument::

Where does the cycle of poverty begin?
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schools..
Post by: Chibundu on April 21, 2007, 03:44:42 PM
Let's be for real in this, especially if we are talking numbers and stats. White women, WHITE WOMEN benefit THE MOST by AA since it has been in existence. Just so we know that. So all of those kids who were/are complaining should cuss their moms out, becuase she was able to get into a better college and get a better paying job becuase of AA. Although she still aint being paid spit, compared to her white male counterparts of the SAME credentials AND her minority counterparts are still being paid EVEN Less than she is. So if all things are equal, can I get paid more or should I just have resentment for my white counterparts, for benefitting from the white man's priviledge (sp?)

::begins setting up argument::

Where does the cycle of poverty begin?

It begins in education and based on history, but if education was adjusted and the home was focused on education and environment also less focused on other things, then education would and should be the equalizer. Everyone is socialized through 5 major arenas; Home, School, Religion, Government, ??? can't remember the last one. Educationwould work better if the home environment were fixed, but yea poverty starts at the home and with education or lack there of.
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: mugatu on April 21, 2007, 04:44:16 PM
::begins setting up argument::

Where does the cycle of poverty begin?

It begins in education and based on history, but if education was adjusted and the home was focused on education and environment also less focused on other things, then education would and should be the equalizer. Everyone is socialized through 5 major arenas; Home, School, Religion, Government, ??? can't remember the last one. Educationwould work better if the home environment were fixed, but yea poverty starts at the home and with education or lack there of.

::continues setting up argument::

What happens if we fix education completely, and totally?*

*good facilities, 25 students per teacher, safety, extracurricular activities, provide school supplies for those unable to afford them, etc.

(Open to anybody.)
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schools..
Post by: Miss P on April 21, 2007, 05:00:17 PM
I know as a URM that if I can study enough to get a 3.7 and 165, then I will get into Harvard  So what's my motivation to get a 3.9 and 175? 

You are a URM?
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schools..
Post by: jillibean on April 21, 2007, 06:15:22 PM
I know as a URM that if I can study enough to get a 3.7 and 165, then I will get into Harvard  So what's my motivation to get a 3.9 and 175? 

You are a URM?

No - sorry I didn't mean to imply that...just speaking hypothetically.

whats your motivation? lets see, you obviously studied enough to get a 165 which is much higher than the average black LSAT sore, and you have a 3.7-- a 3.9 isn't even a significant enough of a jump. Use another example if you are trying to make a point
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schools..
Post by: LuvHurtz on April 21, 2007, 06:33:55 PM
I know as a URM that if I can study enough to get a 3.7 and 165, then I will get into Harvard  So what's my motivation to get a 3.9 and 175? 

I don't think all urms feel that if they have certain numbers they are guaranteed to get in anywhere. I am a urm and studying for the LSAT again and I do not think that a 165 is a good enough score for me to get into the schools I am aiming for. I have to say when I study I don't say I'm black I don't need to score that high. I look at the medians for the schools I am applying and try to score as high above them as possible just like everyone else. That's it.

That being said, I do see where you are coming from. Sadly, there are some minorities who do think that all they have to have is say a 165 and as such don't really aim for much higher than that. I would hope that is not the general consensus though.
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: philibusters on April 21, 2007, 06:48:51 PM
I agree with what I think is the overall point the proponents of AA are making on this board:  bringing races together is good.  Having a more equal society in terms of race is good.

Struggles....my problem is not with a poor black kid with a 165 who "climbed mountains" getting into Harvard over a "privileged wealthy white kid" with a 175.  If that black kid can talk about the mountains he climbed, and how that can add to the learning of others at Harvard, then fine let him in over the privileged white kid, because he'll add a different viewpoint that people at Harvard will benefit from.  But that same opportunity isn't open to a poor white kid with a 170 who climbed mountains to get there.  In addition, there are plenty of privileged URMs with 165s that can offer less than that poor white kid to the classroom discussion, but will get in over that poor white kid with a 170 who worked his ass off.

Say in this country of about 300 million people, there's going to be 50 million "rich" people, 100 million "middle class" people, and 150 million "poor" people.  Assuming those numbers are going to stay the same, why do I care what the color of the skin is of the 150 million poor people?  Why is it better to have 50 million poor whites and 100 million poor minorities, as opposed to 150 million poor minorities? (this is kinda a weird and probably stupid way of demonstrating what I'm trying to say, but do you know what I mean?)

And this is all assuming that 1) URMS benefit from AA as a whole and 2) that racial awareness, respect, tolerance, etc are increased by AA.  I think in general AA is probably a good thing for that second notion of awareness and respect of other races, cultures, etc.  But there is also oftentimes resentment by whites towards URMs, when the whites miss out on a job, or a college or law school admission, etc in favor of a URM with lower numbers.  I think bringing different races together is overall a good thing, and AA is a good step toward this goal, but the positive effects are also mitigated by the fact that so many whites get angry and say things like "If I was black, I wouldn't have been rejected from Harvard," and turn that anger at being rejected from Harvard into an anger directed at URMs.  I don't agree with these people, but anyone who's been on a college campus knows it exists.

And again, I'm not sure that lowering the standards for URMs will benefit URMs in the long run.  It's this paternalistic aspect of AA that I have the biggest problem with.  I know as a URM that if I can study enough to get a 3.7 and 165, then I will get into Harvard  So what's my motivation to get a 3.9 and 175?  Keep in mind that I know admissions is not solely a numbers thing, and that people aren't only motivated by grades and getting into good colleges, law schools, etc, but it's the easiest way to give examples.

So I'm just not sure that AA is a good way to accomplish what I see as it's two goals 1) bringing races together to increase awareness, respect, tolerance, etc 2) benefiting URMs

I still not a fan of that analysis:focusing on how much each recipient deserves AA (how much they overcame, what diversity they bring to the school).  I still the better way is to look at its effect on a macro level and ask such questions, Are there more URM lawyers?  Has this contributed to growing URM professional class?  If it has increased the number of URM lawyers is it making it easier for URM's to access to lawyers?  And other questions along those lines that focus on the macro effect rather than focusing on whether each recipient deserves it.
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schools..
Post by: Ersatz on April 21, 2007, 07:05:24 PM
Well, from my point of view there's no true detriment cause by AA. I believe in equality and for things to get closer to equal some get pulled back and some get pushed up. Which, is not entirely "fair" if your not the one reaping the benefits. However, there's a greater good here. Yes, is unfair if some over priveledged wealhty white kid gets pushed out of their spot in school X (if that's even the reality of what happens, and I'm not saying it is). But, that poor black kid who climbed mountains to get there is just as deserving of the spot, even if that means a few less points on the LSAT. If the LSAT can even be used as a good measurement or predictor of a minorities qualifications to go to law school. It will take years and years to change society into one that brings up equal black and whites in terms of education. And small steps along the way help. Its not so much an individual thing, that white kid vs that black kid. Its more a macro picture, there's no detriment to society for giving that URM an extra push, but there's possibly a detriment to that losing idividual....In fact, the more and more URMs that get in push us somewhere closer to a more equal society. Whats on the other side of that coin? there's a few less spot for whites? doesn't seem like much detriment to me.

This is starting to come across as an elaborate flame. Nice strawman there - you got "over priviledged wealhty white kid" on one side and "the poor black kid who climbed mountains to get there" on the other. Are you serious with this?
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schools..
Post by: Chibundu on April 21, 2007, 07:08:08 PM
::begins setting up argument::

Where does the cycle of poverty begin?

It begins in education and based on history, but if education was adjusted and the home was focused on education and environment also less focused on other things, then education would and should be the equalizer. Everyone is socialized through 5 major arenas; Home, School, Religion, Government, ??? can't remember the last one. Educationwould work better if the home environment were fixed, but yea poverty starts at the home and with education or lack there of.

::continues setting up argument::

What happens if we fix education completely, and totally?*

*good facilities, 25 students per teacher, safety, extracurricular activities, provide school supplies for those unable to afford them, etc.

(Open to anybody.)


If education is fixed, then more minoriries will graduate from high school and attend college and thusly have higher grades overall, and better scores and a greater percentage of those who try to pursue higher education and more advanced level degrees.
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: mugatu on April 21, 2007, 07:10:22 PM
::begins setting up argument::

Where does the cycle of poverty begin?

It begins in education and based on history, but if education was adjusted and the home was focused on education and environment also less focused on other things, then education would and should be the equalizer. Everyone is socialized through 5 major arenas; Home, School, Religion, Government, ??? can't remember the last one. Educationwould work better if the home environment were fixed, but yea poverty starts at the home and with education or lack there of.

::continues setting up argument::

What happens if we fix education completely, and totally?*

*good facilities, 25 students per teacher, safety, extracurricular activities, provide school supplies for those unable to afford them, etc.

(Open to anybody.)


If education is fixed, then more minoriries will graduate from high school and attend college and thusly have higher grades overall, and better scores and a greater percentage of those who try to pursue higher education and more advanced level degrees.

Why will all those things happen?

(Again, open to everybody.)
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schools..
Post by: struggles on April 21, 2007, 08:55:37 PM
Well, from my point of view there's no true detriment cause by AA. I believe in equality and for things to get closer to equal some get pulled back and some get pushed up. Which, is not entirely "fair" if your not the one reaping the benefits. However, there's a greater good here. Yes, is unfair if some over priveledged wealhty white kid gets pushed out of their spot in school X (if that's even the reality of what happens, and I'm not saying it is). But, that poor black kid who climbed mountains to get there is just as deserving of the spot, even if that means a few less points on the LSAT. If the LSAT can even be used as a good measurement or predictor of a minorities qualifications to go to law school. It will take years and years to change society into one that brings up equal black and whites in terms of education. And small steps along the way help. Its not so much an individual thing, that white kid vs that black kid. Its more a macro picture, there's no detriment to society for giving that URM an extra push, but there's possibly a detriment to that losing idividual....In fact, the more and more URMs that get in push us somewhere closer to a more equal society. Whats on the other side of that coin? there's a few less spot for whites? doesn't seem like much detriment to me.

This is starting to come across as an elaborate flame. Nice strawman there - you got "over priviledged wealhty white kid" on one side and "the poor black kid who climbed mountains to get there" on the other. Are you serious with this?

I'm sorry, but I don't get where you are coming from. Yes I was serious in that scenero I outlined. Because you see in society, the "over priviledge, wealthy white kid" does get into law school often very easily. And if a poor black kid made it to the same spot, he definately had to climb over moutains to get there. So I'm sorry, but I don't see what you view as a flame, thats the reality of it..but please do explain your position because I don't see it.
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: Ask a White Dude! on April 21, 2007, 08:59:04 PM
I think he's saying that you're oversimplifying people into two categories: 1) rich and white; 2) poor and black.
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: Ersatz on April 21, 2007, 09:12:44 PM
I think he's saying that you're oversimplifying people into two categories: 1) rich and white; 2) poor and black.

Right - that's exactly what I'm saying. The reason I'm calling your posts flame, struggle, is that you present an incredibly skewed and overly simplistic view of law school admissions and insist that it's right. You can't seriously believe it's that simple.
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: struggles on April 21, 2007, 10:44:38 PM
I think he's saying that you're oversimplifying people into two categories: 1) rich and white; 2) poor and black.

Right - that's exactly what I'm saying. The reason I'm calling your posts flame, struggle, is that you present an incredibly skewed and overly simplistic view of law school admissions and insist that it's right. You can't seriously believe it's that simple.

Oh, Ok. Ouch, yes I see your point. It was an extreme oversimplification. I think I feel into that old "go to the extremes to make or break your point." But, yes your correct it was very simplistic and I do understand thats things are not truly that simple.  Also, I think I don't quite have a grasp on what this board calls a "flame."

But, there's more to my argument then just those two extremes.
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: struggles on April 21, 2007, 11:11:22 PM
I think he's saying that you're oversimplifying people into two categories: 1) rich and white; 2) poor and black.

Right - that's exactly what I'm saying. The reason I'm calling your posts flame, struggle, is that you present an incredibly skewed and overly simplistic view of law school admissions and insist that it's right. You can't seriously believe it's that simple.

Oh, Ok. Ouch, yes I see your point. It was an extreme oversimplification. I think I feel into that old "go to the extremes to make or break your point." But, yes your correct it was very simplistic and I do understand thats things are not truly that simple.  Also, I think I don't quite have a grasp on what this board calls a "flame."

But, there's more to my argument then just those two extremes.

Reading over your posts, it seems like some of what you're saying is sarcasm, or taking a position you don't really have.  I didn't notice at first, but after Ersatz pointed it out, most of your posts seem to be subtly sarcastic, and sometimes they're not so subtle.  That's what he means by flame.  Of course it's possible you know exactly what flame means, and you're just messing around.

Lol, well I had a general idea what a flame was, but then I didn't see what he talking about at first and so I thought maybe I just didn't have the right grasp of it. And yes, there's been a bit of sarcasm here and there in my posts. I think its because this is a hot button issue for me, as I have strong beliefs regarding race, class and equality that I know differ from that of the majority.
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schools..
Post by: cowher101 on May 02, 2007, 03:04:42 PM
I'm serious about my stance. I follow a lot of sports and watch ESPN often.  They have made some points that I think touch on some of the points raised in this thread. There is always an outcry for more black head coaches in the NFL and now owners are paying attention and hiring black head coaches. And rightfully so.

There are some people who think that AA is reverse racism. Well, like so many influnetial black people have pointed out, its impossible for black people to be racist because we don't have any power. We are the minority. If you don't understand this, its because you're probably not black.
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: mugatu on May 02, 2007, 03:12:04 PM
Racism doesn't depend on power.
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: mugatu on May 02, 2007, 03:23:29 PM
Racism doesn't depend on power.

It does, kind of.

Racism doesn't. 

The ability to limit or prevent other persons from entry into certain arenas of society does depend on power, however.
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: Ersatz on May 02, 2007, 03:39:24 PM
I'm serious about my stance. I follow a lot of sports and watch ESPN often.  They have made some points that I think touch on some of the points raised in this thread. There is always an outcry for more black head coaches in the NFL and now owners are paying attention and hiring black head coaches. And rightfully so.

There are some people who think that AA is reverse racism. Well, like so many influnetial black people have pointed out, its impossible for black people to be racist because we don't have any power. We are the minority. If you don't understand this, its because you're probably not black.

That makes absolutely no sense. Are there any influential black people who had actually said this?

As others pointed out, possessing power is not a requisite component for racism. A backward hillbilly who spends his entire days drinking cheap whiskey, muttering angry threats against black people, and blaming them for all his failings has no power, objectively speaking. Would that lead you to deny that he is a racist?
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: leostrauss on May 02, 2007, 03:42:32 PM
I'm serious about my stance. I follow a lot of sports and watch ESPN often.  They have made some points that I think touch on some of the points raised in this thread. There is always an outcry for more black head coaches in the NFL and now owners are paying attention and hiring black head coaches. And rightfully so.

There are some people who think that AA is reverse racism. Well, like so many influnetial black people have pointed out, its impossible for black people to be racist because we don't have any power. We are the minority. If you don't understand this, its because you're probably not black.

That makes absolutely no sense. Are there any influential black people who had actually said this?

As others pointed out, possessing power is not a requisite component for racism. A backward hillbilly who spends his entire days drinking cheap whiskey, muttering angry threats against black people, and blaming them for all his failings has no power, objectively speaking. Would that lead you to deny that he is a racist?

Is this hillbilly black or white? does it make a difference?
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: Ersatz on May 02, 2007, 03:44:48 PM
Doesn't matter, strictly speaking. Let's say white, just to keep to the Southern stereotypes.
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: leostrauss on May 02, 2007, 03:53:50 PM
Doesn't matter, strictly speaking. Let's say white, just to keep to the Southern stereotypes.

I hate southern stereotypes worse than anything in the entire world - seriously. You have officially made my day worse. Thanks.

*quietly fumes and takes note of signs of increased blood pressure*
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: Ersatz on May 02, 2007, 04:02:49 PM
I don't think I've ever read anything on these boards that made me even a little frustrated. Take it easy. The interweb is not serious business, contrary to the popular meme.
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schools..
Post by: cowher101 on May 02, 2007, 07:07:37 PM
Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson are great leaders of the black movement in this country.  And through their leadership we've gotten a lot done. We now have AA and we took out that racist Don Imus.

Reparations are needed. We need to be paid back..... and gimme my law degree, thank you.
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: mugatu on May 02, 2007, 07:13:53 PM
Thank you for stating facts and conclusions.
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schools..
Post by: Miss P on May 02, 2007, 07:44:10 PM
Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson are great leaders of the black movement in this country.  And through their leadership we've gotten a lot done. We now have AA and we took out that racist Don Imus.

Reparations are needed. We need to be paid back..... and gimme my law degree, thank you.

Gotta be a flame.

A rare moment of insight.
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schools..
Post by: struggles on May 08, 2007, 02:26:20 PM
Wow is everything you don't agree with a flame?  ???
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: Astro on May 08, 2007, 02:28:21 PM
Wow is everything you don't agree with a flame?  ???


No.  Just things that are obviously intended to be provocative without lending any insight.


By the way, you should come out to our San Francisco LSD meetings!   ;D

Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schools..
Post by: struggles on May 08, 2007, 02:30:33 PM
What are the details about this SF LSD meeting?
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: Astro on May 08, 2007, 02:42:23 PM
What are the details about this SF LSD meeting?


We've had a few already.  I'm moving to the Bay Area for school, and there are a few of us who've struck up friendships.  The next official meet-up probably won't be until late July or early August, but people do get together from time to time.

Just go to this thread to check for details:

http://www.lawschooldiscussion.org/prelaw/index.php/topic,80098.0.html
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: mugatu on May 08, 2007, 02:50:24 PM
Trying to get "details" out of that thread is, I think, harder than finding the proverbial needle.   :D
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: Astro on May 08, 2007, 02:58:47 PM
That's why I posted the first page of the thread.  That'll force you to keep it updated.   :D
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: mugatu on May 08, 2007, 03:07:28 PM
Trying to get "details" out of that thread is, I think, harder than finding the proverbial needle.   :D

I'll show YOU details!

::gets shown details::

::is impressed::

That's why I posted the first page of the thread.  That'll force you to keep it updated.   :D


Think about this for a second.  :D
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: Astro on May 08, 2007, 03:09:59 PM
When we have meetups, mugatu will post details on the first page. 

See?
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: mugatu on May 08, 2007, 03:10:50 PM
Not the "details" part.  The "forced" part.
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: Astro on May 08, 2007, 03:22:26 PM
::shows up at your house::

::gets aggressive::















::is soothed by elegant piano and beautiful bay window view::
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: mugatu on May 08, 2007, 03:24:03 PM
::rolls eyes::

oh, wait

 ::)
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: Astro on May 08, 2007, 03:41:18 PM
::moves in::
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: mugatu on May 08, 2007, 03:44:06 PM
:D
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: Astro on May 08, 2007, 03:47:20 PM
 :D :D :D



<-- excited for end of July
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: Astro on May 08, 2007, 04:07:25 PM
Please allow me to preface my comments by explaining that I am going to play the role of the Devil's Advocate in this post, so I don't want anyone trying to draw the conclusion that my actual opinions are represented here.  I simply want to bring up some things for people to think about.  I do think, however, that it is important for readers to know that I support AA to some degree, though I think it is a detestable practice.  (Sort of like my opinion that we have the worst government in the world, except for all the others.)


I'm sure I will put my foot in my mouth at least several times, so I might as well get started. 

First, I noticed quite a few posts in this thread by (purportedly) minorities (including the OP) who have less than impressive grammar.  While I completely understand the factors that could possibly have led to that fact, and I also understand that bad grammar is not in any way limited to minorities, I would like you to consider a premise for the sake of argument. 

If it is true that URM's have a statistically higher chance of having bad grammar (and I'm not saying it is true, I am simply making an argument), and they are let into law school in greater numbers because of AA, is it not also true that the quality of lawyers (who rely on the written and spoken word for much of the work they produce) will decline?  In a field where so much importance is placed on the precise construction of arguments, wouldn't the overall quality of the work produced by sub-standard writers be inherently inferior?

Further, even if it were not true that substantive mistakes would occur more frequently, would it not be true that arbiters reading obvious grammatical and spelling errors in legal documents presented to them would be (consciously or subconsciously) likely to be prejudiced against the client being represented?

Again, I am not trying to argue that all minorities have bad grammar and spelling.  If there is any correlation at all, it would almost certainly be between students at substandard schools and bad grammar/spelling.  I am not even making an argument based on my opinions.  I am just saying that there are other things to consider when you make an argument that URM's should be given preferential treatment when being considered for admission to law school.  If you are making the argument that AA does not have a detrimental effect on society, remember that you cannot possibly know or recognize the effects of AA (and neither, by the way, can politicians).  Just because you can't see all of the possible consequences of something doesn't mean they don't exist.   


If you're going to play devil's advocate, there needs to be a relevant point to it all.

What's your point?
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: Astro on May 08, 2007, 04:41:13 PM

I think his overall point is that people who argue in favor of violating the 14th amendment through AA, do so because they think there are such great benefits.  He's just questioning the ability of those people to know what those benefits actually are.  I don't know if that really qualifies as playing devil's advocate.


That's what I understood from it as well. 

Which led me to the same conclusion you came to.  Hence my confusion.  Who's he playing devil's advocate to, and how is it devil's advocacy?
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schools..
Post by: struggles on May 08, 2007, 06:32:07 PM
Please allow me to preface my comments by explaining that I am going to play the role of the Devil's Advocate in this post, so I don't want anyone trying to draw the conclusion that my actual opinions are represented here.  I simply want to bring up some things for people to think about.  I do think, however, that it is important for readers to know that I support AA to some degree, though I think it is a detestable practice.  (Sort of like my opinion that we have the worst government in the world, except for all the others.)


I'm sure I will put my foot in my mouth at least several times, so I might as well get started.  

First, I noticed quite a few posts in this thread by (purportedly) minorities (including the OP) who have less than impressive grammar.  While I completely understand the factors that could possibly have led to that fact, and I also understand that bad grammar is not in any way limited to minorities, I would like you to consider a premise for the sake of argument.  

If it is true that URM's have a statistically higher chance of having bad grammar (and I'm not saying it is true, I am simply making an argument), and they are let into law school in greater numbers because of AA, is it not also true that the quality of lawyers (who rely on the written and spoken word for much of the work they produce) will decline?  In a field where so much importance is placed on the precise construction of arguments, wouldn't the overall quality of the work produced by sub-standard writers be inherently inferior?

Further, even if it were not true that substantive mistakes would occur more frequently, would it not be true that arbiters reading obvious grammatical and spelling errors in legal documents presented to them would be (consciously or subconsciously) likely to be prejudiced against the client being represented?

Again, I am not trying to argue that all minorities have bad grammar and spelling.  If there is any correlation at all, it would almost certainly be between students at substandard schools and bad grammar/spelling.  I am not even making an argument based on my opinions.  I am just saying that there are other things to consider when you make an argument that URM's should be given preferential treatment when being considered for admission to law school.  If you are making the argument that AA does not have a detrimental effect on society, remember that you cannot possibly know or recognize the effects of AA (and neither, by the way, can politicians).  Just because you can't see all of the possible consequences of something doesn't mean they don't exist.    

Interesting that you pointed this out. Ever heard of the idea of cultural capital and lingusitic capital?? Well as a URM I can tell you that my vocab and grammar is severly limited compared with, forgive me for generalizing "white America," But, its something I have to deal with, and its a big obstical for me in many ways.
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: Astro on May 08, 2007, 06:39:45 PM
I wouldn't really pay attention to his argument.  It was ridiculous.
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: H5CS on May 08, 2007, 06:47:01 PM
I wouldn't really pay attention to his argument.  It was ridiculous.

thanks for the warning.
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schools..
Post by: H5CS on May 08, 2007, 07:54:35 PM
are you guys sure that reading this wouldn't have some entertainment value?
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: H5CS on May 08, 2007, 08:16:17 PM
I laughed.  He thinks he's being thoughtful and provocative.

everybody thinks they're like that.  not everyone's funny about it.
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: mugatu on May 08, 2007, 08:51:40 PM
::grabs popcorn::

::knows this isn't going anywhere::

::throws popcorn away::

---

I don't think people who haven't worked very hard at educating themselves deserve my spot

That isn't what happens.  At all.
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: H5CS on May 08, 2007, 08:59:46 PM

everybody thinks they're like that. 

<-- No

you're asserting that you don't believe you're thoughtful and provocative?  ::)
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: H5CS on May 08, 2007, 10:06:40 PM

you're asserting that you don't believe you're thoughtful and provocative?  ::)

You're doing that lawyer-talk thing again.  I worry.

Yes, I'm asserting that Quibbles is never thoughtful and hasn't been provocative in at least ten months to a year. 

well that's true.  but you don't believe that.

i think it's funny when people feel entitled to things.
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schools..
Post by: H5CS on May 08, 2007, 10:12:23 PM
it is.

"Mommy, he took my toy!"

hilarious.
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: Qui Ju on May 08, 2007, 10:31:00 PM
She didn't lose her spot to a minority--she wasn't even competing against the minorities.  She was competing against the other white people for the slots that weren't going to be given to minorities.  One of them got her slot, and probably did so because they were more qualified.  

???
Yeah, but because of AA, there were less slots available to her.  That's the whole point.  And as far as I know, after Bakke, schools aren't allowed to use quota systems like the one you're talking about.  In response to a much earlier post by you.... I know you weren't talking about the 14th amendment, but the 14th amendment does apply to state schools, so they are not free to admit people for whatever reason they want.  Of course there's still a quota system, but they're not allowed to call it that.


Sorry for the serious response, carry on everyone.

bakke only applies to state schools.  private schools can do whatever they like. 

well not really, but whatever 14th amendment --> state instrumentalities only, etc. etc. bs state action doctrine.
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: mugatu on May 08, 2007, 10:33:28 PM
::grabs popcorn::

::knows this isn't going anywhere::

::throws popcorn away::

---

I don't think people who haven't worked very hard at educating themselves deserve my spot

That isn't what happens.  At all.

***(1)If you are taking it as some sort of insult to minorities, you are wrong.***

***

(2)The minorities who get the AA slots in undergrad and law school probably (for the most part) deserve them more than the other minorities that they are competing against.  (3)They probably work hard, but they almost certainly don't work harder than me.  (4)If I don't get into my first choice, it will not be because I didn't work hard enough.  I will be well above the medians for both GPA and LSAT, so I shouldn't have anything to worry about. 

***(5)If their qualification are not as good as mine, but they take someone else's spot because he or she didn't work hard enough or just wasn't smart enough to get high enough scores, I have no problem with that--my spot is the one that I said is not up for grabs. (6)Maybe my statement was not as clear as it could have been.  I wasn't making reference to someone who has not worked--I was referring to someone who has worked, but just not hard enough to be able to claim something of mine.

(1) We'll see about that.
(2) Condescending.  It presumes that minorities never compete with non-minorities.  False.
(3) There's the insult!
(4) While they don't predominate, some places look at more things than numbers.
(5) So you're just selfish...
(6) The basic problem with your position is that you assume that the field is level.  It isn't.  There are circumstances wherein a person might need to work much harder than you to achieve your same stats.  They would then be more qualified.
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: Qui Ju on May 08, 2007, 10:36:18 PM
::grabs popcorn::

::knows this isn't going anywhere::

::throws popcorn away::

---

I don't think people who haven't worked very hard at educating themselves deserve my spot

That isn't what happens.  At all.

***(1)If you are taking it as some sort of insult to minorities, you are wrong.***

***

(2)The minorities who get the AA slots in undergrad and law school probably (for the most part) deserve them more than the other minorities that they are competing against.  (3)They probably work hard, but they almost certainly don't work harder than me.  (4)If I don't get into my first choice, it will not be because I didn't work hard enough.  I will be well above the medians for both GPA and LSAT, so I shouldn't have anything to worry about. 

***(5)If their qualification are not as good as mine, but they take someone else's spot because he or she didn't work hard enough or just wasn't smart enough to get high enough scores, I have no problem with that--my spot is the one that I said is not up for grabs. (6)Maybe my statement was not as clear as it could have been.  I wasn't making reference to someone who has not worked--I was referring to someone who has worked, but just not hard enough to be able to claim something of mine.

(1) We'll see about that.
(2) Condescending.  It presumes that minorities never compete with non-minorities.  False.
(3) There's the insult!
(4) While they don't predominate, some places look at more things than numbers.
(5) So you're just selfish...
(6) The basic problem with your position is that you assume that the field is level.  It isn't.  There are circumstances wherein a person might need to work much harder than you to achieve your same stats.  They would then be more qualified.

haven't you heard?  racism is a thing of the past.  so, for that matter, is pacifism.

okay that last part was a joke, but seriously, all races now have the same advantages.  seriously.  it's true.
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: Astro on May 08, 2007, 10:37:07 PM
It should have some entertainment value, I hope.  It was meant to be a ridiculous argument.  If I had taken more time, perhaps I could have expressed that more clearly and effectively.  Nibbles and Quibbles must not have taken it in the spirit in which it was meant (or else they just don't like me, which would break my heart). 


You're forgiven if you're being sincere.  I have my doubts, though.
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: Astro on May 08, 2007, 10:37:30 PM


This is gibberish and I'm honestly sorry that I read it.


 :D :D :D
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: Qui Ju on May 08, 2007, 10:38:24 PM
It should have some entertainment value, I hope.  It was meant to be a ridiculous argument.  If I had taken more time, perhaps I could have expressed that more clearly and effectively.  Nibbles and Quibbles must not have taken it in the spirit in which it was meant (or else they just don't like me, which would break my heart). 

You're forgiven if you're being sincere.  I have my doubts, though.

you're not allowed to grant absolution.  you overestimate your powers.
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: mugatu on May 08, 2007, 10:47:37 PM
haven't you heard?  racism is a thing of the past.  so, for that matter, is pacifism.

okay that last part was a joke, but seriously, all races now have the same advantages.  seriously.  it's true.

crap.  i totally missed the memo
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: Astro on May 08, 2007, 10:49:27 PM
haven't you heard?  racism is a thing of the past.  so, for that matter, is pacifism.

okay that last part was a joke, but seriously, all races now have the same advantages.  seriously.  it's true.

crap.  i totally missed the memo


It's the Bluewarrior Decree.  Should be able to Google it.
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: mugatu on May 08, 2007, 10:51:46 PM
haven't you heard?  racism is a thing of the past.  so, for that matter, is pacifism.

okay that last part was a joke, but seriously, all races now have the same advantages.  seriously.  it's true.

crap.  i totally missed the memo


It's the Bluewarrior Decree.  Should be able to Google it.


I'll get on it tomorrow.
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: Qui Ju on May 08, 2007, 10:55:20 PM
She didn't lose her spot to a minority--she wasn't even competing against the minorities.  She was competing against the other white people for the slots that weren't going to be given to minorities.  One of them got her slot, and probably did so because they were more qualified.  

???
Yeah, but because of AA, there were less slots available to her.  That's the whole point.  And as far as I know, after Bakke, schools aren't allowed to use quota systems like the one you're talking about.  In response to a much earlier post by you.... I know you weren't talking about the 14th amendment, but the 14th amendment does apply to state schools, so they are not free to admit people for whatever reason they want.  Of course there's still a quota system, but they're not allowed to call it that.


Sorry for the serious response, carry on everyone.

bakke only applies to state schools.  private schools can do whatever they like. 

well not really, but whatever 14th amendment --> state instrumentalities only, etc. etc. bs state action doctrine.

Yeah, I don't know that much about private schools, which is why I only said state schools...I didn't say anything that contradicted this did I?

oops.  only read first sentence.  :-[

Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: Astro on May 08, 2007, 10:58:05 PM
In other words, AA is not fair.  Correct?
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: Astro on May 08, 2007, 11:02:16 PM
It should have some entertainment value, I hope.  It was meant to be a ridiculous argument.  If I had taken more time, perhaps I could have expressed that more clearly and effectively.  Nibbles and Quibbles must not have taken it in the spirit in which it was meant (or else they just don't like me, which would break my heart). 


You're forgiven if you're being sincere.  I have my doubts, though.


Serious about the argument being ridiculous or about my heart being broken?


Sincere.  Argument.

Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: mugatu on May 08, 2007, 11:03:03 PM
In other words, AA is not fair.  Correct?


That seems to be the case.  I'm stomping my foot right now.
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: Miss P on May 08, 2007, 11:03:21 PM
violating the 14th amendment through AA

Eh?  Come again?

 
To clarify what I said originally, if someone has worked their butt off and has better qualification than me, I will tip my hat and accept defeat.  If their qualification are not as good as mine, but they take someone else's spot because he or she didn't work hard enough or just wasn't smart enough to get high enough scores, I have no problem with that--my spot is the one that I said is not up for grabs.  Maybe my statement was not as clear as it could have been.  I wasn't making reference to someone who has not worked--I was referring to someone who has worked, but just not hard enough to be able to claim something of mine.

1. You don't have a spot until a school elects to admit you.  HTH.

2. You're one to talk about other people's sloppy grammar and typos on a message board.  Was your sentence structure just too complex for Word's grammar check to pick all that up?
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: Astro on May 08, 2007, 11:04:00 PM
In other words, AA is not fair.  Correct?


If you are asking me, I would definitely agree that AA is not fair.  That doesn't mean I would not support it (again, conditionally).  But then again, I don't think there is much in the world that is fair, nor do I think there is much that can be.


In this case, unfair = right.  Why?  Because it starts off unfair.


There are problems with AA, of course.  I'd like to hear your conditions.
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: mugatu on May 08, 2007, 11:05:07 PM
Dude, the condition is that it can't affect him.
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: mugatu on May 08, 2007, 11:12:24 PM
violating the 14th amendment through AA

Eh?  Come again?

That was in the middle of some sentence I wrote earlier.  I don't remember exactly what I said, but I was just trying to state my opinion that AA programs at state schools violate the Constitution.

How?
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: mugatu on May 08, 2007, 11:21:48 PM
My comprehension is fine.  You have repeatedly said that AA is fine so long as no one "takes my spot."  That would make this discussion about you.

In any case, have fun at Yale!
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: mugatu on May 08, 2007, 11:22:12 PM
violating the 14th amendment through AA

Eh?  Come again?

That was in the middle of some sentence I wrote earlier.  I don't remember exactly what I said, but I was just trying to state my opinion that AA programs at state schools violate the Constitution.

How?

I believe it violates the equal protection clause.

Well, yes, that part is obvious.  How?
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: mugatu on May 08, 2007, 11:35:23 PM
violating the 14th amendment through AA

Eh?  Come again?

That was in the middle of some sentence I wrote earlier.  I don't remember exactly what I said, but I was just trying to state my opinion that AA programs at state schools violate the Constitution.

How?

I believe it violates the equal protection clause.

Well, yes, that part is obvious.  How?

Without launching into a huge explanation, AA discriminates on the basis of race.  That seems to me to be a violation of the Equal Protection Clause, and I believe that many schools use a quota system under the guise of looking for "diversity" in the students they admit.

What right is being violated?  (And there isn't usually a quota system.  It's a number bump.)
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: mugatu on May 08, 2007, 11:42:04 PM
violating the 14th amendment through AA

Eh?  Come again?

That was in the middle of some sentence I wrote earlier.  I don't remember exactly what I said, but I was just trying to state my opinion that AA programs at state schools violate the Constitution.

How?

I believe it violates the equal protection clause.

Well, yes, that part is obvious.  How?

Without launching into a huge explanation, AA discriminates on the basis of race.  That seems to me to be a violation of the Equal Protection Clause, and I believe that many schools use a quota system under the guise of looking for "diversity" in the students they admit.

What right is being violated?  (And there isn't usually a quota system.  It's a number bump.)

The right to equal protection of the laws.  I'm not sure exactly what you mean by number bump.

What laws?

--

Especially for undergrad institutions (large, state schools) it is reasonable to assume (I don't really know) that everyone goes into the database with easily quantifiable data.  This will generate a number.  If the school is practicing AA, the number is given a bump up.
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: Astro on May 09, 2007, 12:43:16 AM

Perhaps one of my conditions should be that AA be allowed, as long as society admits that it is being lazy and there could be many better solutions to the problems with education in America. 




Hence me saying you're not being sincere.

This sentence displays a fundamental misunderstanding of the principles guiding AA.
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: mugatu on May 09, 2007, 12:57:41 AM
As for the laws, I don't know exactly how to make the leap from "laws" to a University, which obviously doesn't pass laws, except to say that as far as I know, it is accepted that the Equal Protection Clause applies to state schools' AA policies.  In Bakke and the Michigan cases, I don't think anyone was arguing that state universities don't have to abide by the 14th amendment.  Of course I could be wrong, but that was my general understanding.  Some stuff about instrumentalities, etc. that I don't yet understand.

There's no doubt that the equal protection clause applies to the states (and their schools.)

However, in order to violate the equal protection clause, you have to show that AA policies are in violation of the laws of the United States.  (The equal protection clause makes the US constitution applicable to the states.)  Other than that, states can do whatever they want.
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: Qui Ju on May 09, 2007, 06:56:16 AM
violating the 14th amendment through AA

Eh?  Come again?

 
To clarify what I said originally, if someone has worked their butt off and has better qualification than me, I will tip my hat and accept defeat.  If their qualification are not as good as mine, but they take someone else's spot because he or she didn't work hard enough or just wasn't smart enough to get high enough scores, I have no problem with that--my spot is the one that I said is not up for grabs.  Maybe my statement was not as clear as it could have been.  I wasn't making reference to someone who has not worked--I was referring to someone who has worked, but just not hard enough to be able to claim something of mine.

1. You don't have a spot until a school elects to admit you.  HTFH.

2. You're one to talk about other people's sloppy grammar and typos on a message board.  Was your sentence structure just too complex for Word's grammar check to pick all that up?

this what you meant?
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: Qui Ju on May 09, 2007, 07:02:44 AM
Dude, you are having a problem with comprehension, and are thus trying to impugn my character in an attempt to sidestep the argument.  

"if i'm being unclear, it's YOUR fault."  :D
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: Miss P on May 09, 2007, 08:15:20 AM
There's no doubt that the equal protection clause applies to the states (and their schools.)

However, in order to violate the equal protection clause, you have to show that AA policies are in violation of the laws of the United States.  (The equal protection clause makes the US constitution applicable to the states.)  Other than that, states can do whatever they want.

Er, not exactly.  It's the DPC through which the Bill of Rights has (mostly) been incorporated.  Furthermore, state statutes and administrative decisions (such as admissions and hiring decisions at the public universities) are reviewable under the EPC.

Nonetheless, the state of the law now, as bosco surely knows, is that law school affirmative action programs that give individualized, holistic review to applications with the aim of creating diverse class are constitutional.  Thus, a throwaway line about "violating the 14th Amendment through AA" is just inflammatory and dishonest rhetoric.
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: Qui Ju on May 09, 2007, 08:16:41 AM
There's no doubt that the equal protection clause applies to the states (and their schools.)

However, in order to violate the equal protection clause, you have to show that AA policies are in violation of the laws of the United States.  (The equal protection clause makes the US constitution applicable to the states.)  Other than that, states can do whatever they want.

Er, not exactly.  It's the DPC through which the Bill of Rights has (mostly) been incorporated.  Furthermore, state statutes and administrative decisions (such as admissions and hiring decisions at the public universities) are reviewable under the EPC.

Nonetheless, the state of the law now, as bosco surely knows, is that law school affirmative action programs that give individualized, holistic review to applications with the aim of creating diverse class are constitutional.  Thus, a throwaway line about "violating the 14th Amendment through AA" is just inflammatory and dishonest rhetoric.

eh, he might honestly be unsure about it.  i mean gratz-grutter is kind of splitting hairs.
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: Miss P on May 09, 2007, 08:21:20 AM
eh, he might honestly be unsure about it.  i mean gratz-grutter is kind of splitting hairs.

Eh, the kid is referring to his reading of the statistics in the dissents.  I think he knows the difference: two programs; two holdings.  As for whether O'Connor was able to come up with a principled distinction between the two programs, I think you're right.  It's her typical muddle.  (And, FWIW, the undergraduate program looks much less like a quota system than the law school program does, if that's what strikes fear in so many hearts.)
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: Qui Ju on May 09, 2007, 08:22:38 AM
eh, he might honestly be unsure about it.  i mean gratz-grutter is kind of splitting hairs.

Eh, the kid is referring to his reading of the statistics in the dissents.  I think he knows the difference: two programs; two holdings.  As for whether O'Connor was able to come up with a principled distinction between the two programs, I think you're right.  It's her typical muddle.  (And, FWIW, the undergraduate program looks much less like a quota system than the law school program does, if that's what strikes fear in so many hearts.)

i'm generally disposed to giving people the benefit of the doubt.  but eh, we'll see.
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: Qui Ju on May 09, 2007, 08:26:56 AM
Why can't people who don't know or aren't sure simply ask questions, read, or stfu?

people should know when they're conquered?

you expect this level of self-awareness why?
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: Qui Ju on May 09, 2007, 08:39:15 AM
There's no doubt that the equal protection clause applies to the states (and their schools.)

However, in order to violate the equal protection clause, you have to show that AA policies are in violation of the laws of the United States.  (The equal protection clause makes the US constitution applicable to the states.)  Other than that, states can do whatever they want.

Er, not exactly.  It's the DPC through which the Bill of Rights has (mostly) been incorporated.  Furthermore, state statutes and administrative decisions (such as admissions and hiring decisions at the public universities) are reviewable under the EPC.

Nonetheless, the state of the law now, as bosco surely knows, is that law school affirmative action programs that give individualized, holistic review to applications with the aim of creating diverse class are constitutional.  Thus, a throwaway line about "violating the 14th Amendment through AA" is just inflammatory and dishonest rhetoric.

Well, yes I know the state of the law now, I was just stating my disagreement with it.  I didn't think anyone would see my post and say "Wow, the current state of the law says that AA violates the 14th amendment, and schools are still doing it illegally."  Perhaps I was being inflammatory, but I wasn't trying to be dishonest.  I figured people would know that I meant - which is in my opinion, AA should be held unconstitutional.  I wasn't trying to imply that AA is currently held unconstitutional by the Court - I'm sorry if it seemed that way.

To clarify, I've read a bunch of the big AA cases (adarand, bakke, and the michigan cases) and in reading the Michigan law case, I seem to agree more with the Scalia/Rehnquist/Thomas dissents than O'Connor and the majority.  My knowledge and opinions are based on an undergrad Constitutional Law class, so I'll be the first to admit I'm no expert and that there are some questions that mugatu was asking that I don't really know the answer to - so I appreciate you helping me out.  But I think have the general idea of what's going on in those cases, namely all the justices are analyzing Michigan Law's AA program under strict scrutiny - O'Connor and the majority are upholding it under strict scrutiny, while the dissenters are not.  A couple months ago when I read the opinions and we discussed them in class, I agreed with the dissenters' analysis.

if there's a dissent that i somewhat agreed with, it was rehnquist's: "if it looks like a quota...  and we've already ruled out quotas."

but assuming on a theoretical level that it wasn't an actual quota, i don't see it failing strict scrutiny. 

of course, it's all make believe anyway.
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: Miss P on May 09, 2007, 08:52:37 AM
Well, yes I know the state of the law now, I was just stating my disagreement with it.  I didn't think anyone would see my post and say "Wow, the current state of the law says that AA violates the 14th amendment, and schools are still doing it illegally."  Perhaps I was being inflammatory, but I wasn't trying to be dishonest.  I figured people would know that I meant - which is in my opinion, AA should be held unconstitutional.  I wasn't trying to imply that AA is currently held unconstitutional by the Court - I'm sorry if it seemed that way.

To clarify, I've read a bunch of the big AA cases (adarand, bakke, and the michigan cases) and in reading the Michigan law case, I seem to agree more with the Scalia/Rehnquist/Thomas dissents than O'Connor and the majority.  My knowledge and opinions are based on an undergrad Constitutional Law class, so I'll be the first to admit I'm no expert and that there are some questions that mugatu was asking that I don't really know the answer to - so I appreciate you helping me out.  But I think have the general idea of what's going on in those cases, namely all the justices are analyzing Michigan Law's AA program under strict scrutiny - O'Connor and the majority are upholding it under strict scrutiny, while the dissenters are not.  A couple months ago when I read the opinions and we discussed them in class, I agreed with the dissenters' analysis.

Neat.  Like I said, you knew better.  In my book, that counts as both inflammatory and dishonest.  Your reference to the "dissents" in an earlier posts so indicated; they clearly wouldn't have been dissenting opinions had your esteemed interpretation of the constitution won out.

I'm sure you do have a general idea of what's going on in those cases.  What you're obviously missing is an understanding of the origins of the 14th Amendment, the history of race relations in our country, and the lack of access to higher education for some minority communities.  
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: Qui Ju on May 09, 2007, 08:55:36 AM
That's not an answer to your questions, but there it is: I'm tired of it.

sounds like someone hasn't lowered their expectations of humanity enough.
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: Qui Ju on May 09, 2007, 09:00:02 AM
I'm sure you do have a general idea of what's going on in those cases.  What you're obviously missing is an understanding of the origins of the 14th Amendment, the history of race relations in our country, and the lack of access to higher education for some minority communities.  

hey your opinion: bakke right or wrong?
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: Ender Wiggin on May 09, 2007, 09:11:12 AM

As for Quibbles, I don't see the problem in people stating opinions, even when they have not mastered the subject matter 100%.  If people only said things they were 100% sure of, no one would ever say anything.  The people responding to me know more about this than I do, but I'm sure they are not even 100% sure of all the legal questions, technicalities, history etc. involved.  By responding to me, they're helping me understand the topic better, and maybe even further clarifying their own views a little more.  I don't see the harm in that.

You may have noticed, bosco, that people feel most free to be uninformed and rude on subjects that relate to race and that are most likely to be offensive to minorities.  That is not a coincidence.  There are many other topics on which one can have an uninformed opintion -- for example, should consideration be done away with?; is the reasonable person standard equivalent to the rational person standard?; is string theory science?; is it possible to make sense of The Real?; where are we on the Laffer curve?

But no.  The very first subject that these people turn to is race. Anything goes, you see, because who gives a sh*t if minority applicants are called "unqualified", "uneducated", "lazy", "undeserving of admission to X school" and so on? 

I just wanted to point out your spelling error to further elucidate the point that it is ok to criticize mistakes that others make even if you make the same mistakes yourself.

Also, your comments about people "feel[ing] most free to be uninformed and rude on subjects that relate to race and that are most likely to be offensive to minorities" is a clear example of dicto simpliciter.  From the limited examples I have seen of the quality of your comments, I would have to say that this is not your finest.  I, for one, feel free to be uninformed and rude on many subjects, and race never enters into the equation.  
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: Qui Ju on May 09, 2007, 09:11:58 AM
I don't disagree with Quibbles at all.

You owe an apology to struggles and a responsibility to yourself to become more thoughtful and informed.   I simply can't engage in a discussion where the standards for conduct are so low.  Peace.

i still don't understand why you insist on addressing people whom you should be ignoring.
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: Ender Wiggin on May 09, 2007, 09:15:07 AM
I don't disagree with Quibbles at all.

You owe an apology to struggles and a responsibility to yourself to become more thoughtful and informed.   I simply can't engage in a discussion where the standards for conduct are so low.  Peace.

Why do I owe an apology to struggles?  For saying that his grammar and spelling need work?  They do!  There is nothing wrong with that, unless you think he should be held to a lower standard, or that he should not strive to be the best that he can be.  

I recognize the responsibility I have to myself to become more thoughtful and informed.  I also see the value of discussion and debate in achieving those goals.  Like I said, if I'm full of crap, call me on it.  It won't hurt my feelings.  
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: Miss P on May 09, 2007, 09:16:22 AM
I'm sure you do have a general idea of what's going on in those cases.  What you're obviously missing is an understanding of the origins of the 14th Amendment, the history of race relations in our country, and the lack of access to higher education for some minority communities.  

hey your opinion: bakke right or wrong?

Whoops, sorry, didn't see this.  Briefly: right insofar as it allowed race to be a consideration in admissions, wrong insofar as it prohibited Davis' creative admissions scheme.  The anti-affirmative action brigade gets so much mileage out of stomping around complaining about quotas.  Personally, I don't see the problem with them as long as they're flexible and set at reasonable levels.  I really challenge someone to come up with a principled opposition to quota systems that is not merely an opposition to consideration of race in general.
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: Ender Wiggin on May 09, 2007, 09:18:41 AM
I don't disagree with Quibbles at all.

You owe an apology to struggles and a responsibility to yourself to become more thoughtful and informed.   I simply can't engage in a discussion where the standards for conduct are so low.  Peace.

i still don't understand why you insist on addressing people whom you should be ignoring.

Why should I be ignored?  For not being as smart or as good at making points as you?  Maybe I grew up in an environment where those skills were not fostered.  In the spirit of consistency, shouldn't you make an effort to level the playing field for me?  (I am not trying to be an idiot with this comment--I think it is a valid point, especially in a discussion about this topic.)  
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: Astro on May 09, 2007, 09:20:26 AM
I'm sure you do have a general idea of what's going on in those cases.  What you're obviously missing is an understanding of the origins of the 14th Amendment, the history of race relations in our country, and the lack of access to higher education for some minority communities. 

hey your opinion: bakke right or wrong?

Whoops, sorry, didn't see this.  Briefly: right insofar as it allowed race to be a consideration in admissions, wrong insofar as it prohibited Davis' creative admissions scheme.  The anti-affirmative action brigade gets so much mileage out of stomping around complaining about quotas.  Personally, I don't see the problem with them as long as they're flexible and set at reasonable levels.  I really challenge someone to come up with a principled opposition to quota systems that is not merely an opposition to consideration of race in general.


Bingo.
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: Qui Ju on May 09, 2007, 09:22:06 AM
I'm sure you do have a general idea of what's going on in those cases.  What you're obviously missing is an understanding of the origins of the 14th Amendment, the history of race relations in our country, and the lack of access to higher education for some minority communities.  

hey your opinion: bakke right or wrong?

Whoops, sorry, didn't see this.  Briefly: right insofar as it allowed race to be a consideration in admissions, wrong insofar as it prohibited Davis' creative admissions scheme.  The anti-affirmative action brigade gets so much mileage out of stomping around complaining about quotas.  Personally, I don't see the problem with them as long as they're flexible and set at reasonable levels.  I really challenge someone to come up with a principled opposition to quota systems that is not merely an opposition to consideration of race in general.

that's what i figured.  what would you prefer though: individual review or quota?
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: Miss P on May 09, 2007, 09:22:44 AM
Again, I agree with dissents in the case more than than the majority opinion.  The fact that 5 out of 9 agreed with a different interpretation in Grutter doesn't necessarily mean that one side is right or wrong.  Also, I'm not sure why you say "esteemed" - I think my tone has been appreciative of you and others who are discussing this, and I haven't acted as if my opinion is the only valid one, and that you who disagree are stupid.  On the contrary, I appreciate you taking the time to respond and help clarify the issue for me.  

And I don't think I'm "obviously missing" anything about the origins of the 14th, race relations, etc - 4 Supreme Court justices, who are much smarter than me, and probably have greater understanding of those issues than you, still thought that the Michigan Law admissions policy was unconstitutional - that leads me to believe that there is at least room for reasonable arguments on either side.  I don't think anyone who takes the side of the dissenters is necessarily ignorant about all the things you said, they might just have a different opinion on it.

I don't think the mere fact of your agreement with Scalia, et al., means you're uninformed.  I am referring to your discussion earlier in the thread of the lack of need for affirmative action programs.  
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: Astro on May 09, 2007, 09:24:22 AM
I don't disagree with Quibbles at all.

You owe an apology to struggles and a responsibility to yourself to become more thoughtful and informed.   I simply can't engage in a discussion where the standards for conduct are so low.  Peace.

i still don't understand why you insist on addressing people whom you should be ignoring.

Why should I be ignored?  For not being as smart or as good at making points as you?  Maybe I grew up in an environment where those skills were not fostered.  In the spirit of consistency, shouldn't you make an effort to level the playing field for me?  (I am not trying to be an idiot with this comment--I think it is a valid point, especially in a discussion about this topic.) 


Ignore those two.  They're flirting.

As for struggles, you owe her an apology for making an insincere yet derogatory argument that clearly conflated race, intelligence and work ethic, even if you were doing so tongue-in-cheek.  It didn't come across as (you're saying) you meant it to -- it really does look like poor spelling = lower intelligence/work ethic = minorities, whether you make the "just devil's advocating" disclaimer or not.  And she clearly took offense to it.
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: Qui Ju on May 09, 2007, 09:25:24 AM
I don't disagree with Quibbles at all.

You owe an apology to struggles and a responsibility to yourself to become more thoughtful and informed.   I simply can't engage in a discussion where the standards for conduct are so low.  Peace.

i still don't understand why you insist on addressing people whom you should be ignoring.

Why should I be ignored?  For not being as smart or as good at making points as you?  Maybe I grew up in an environment where those skills were not fostered.  In the spirit of consistency, shouldn't you make an effort to level the playing field for me?  (I am not trying to be an idiot with this comment--I think it is a valid point, especially in a discussion about this topic.) 


Ignore those two.  They're flirting.

As for struggles, you owe her an apology for making an insincere yet derogatory argument that clearly conflated race, intelligence and work ethic, even if you were doing so tongue-in-cheek.  It didn't come across as (you're saying) you meant it to -- it really does look like poor spelling = lower intelligence/work ethic = minorities, whether you make the "just devil's advocating" disclaimer or not.  And she clearly took offense to it.


the same criticism for you. 

honestly, i don't understand the point of fighting every single minor battle.  go for the big ones; the ones where there will be some actual benefit.

Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: Miss P on May 09, 2007, 09:33:42 AM
I'm sure you do have a general idea of what's going on in those cases.  What you're obviously missing is an understanding of the origins of the 14th Amendment, the history of race relations in our country, and the lack of access to higher education for some minority communities.  

hey your opinion: bakke right or wrong?

Whoops, sorry, didn't see this.  Briefly: right insofar as it allowed race to be a consideration in admissions, wrong insofar as it prohibited Davis' creative admissions scheme.  The anti-affirmative action brigade gets so much mileage out of stomping around complaining about quotas.  Personally, I don't see the problem with them as long as they're flexible and set at reasonable levels.  I really challenge someone to come up with a principled opposition to quota systems that is not merely an opposition to consideration of race in general.

that's what i figured.  what would you prefer though: individual review or quota?

These two policies aren't opposed.  Certainly, one can fill a quota using individual review of the candidates.  Obviously, I believe that admissions committees should endeavor to consider each application as carefully as possible; having flexible race-based quotas in no way inhibits them from doing so.  Furthermore, the "individual review" of candidates as employed at a place like Michigan probably is an ad hoc quota system (bosco is right about this); why not make the standards and thresholds public so that we can make sure they're set at the right levels?  In the alternative, a remedial program like the undergraduate admissions program in Gratz, which attempts to balance the numerical credentials of the candidates based on (a) admissions priorities of different groups of students (athletes, Michiganders, etc.) and (b) analysis of the disadvantages faced by some groups of students (poor kids, black kids, kids who went to poor schools), seems entirely fair to me.  

I forgot to mention perhaps the most dangerous thing about Bakke: the focus on diversity as the sole constitutional rationale for affirmative action programs in education.  I can imagine more significant and demonstrable government interests (remediation, etc.).
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: Astro on May 09, 2007, 09:35:14 AM
I don't disagree with Quibbles at all.

You owe an apology to struggles and a responsibility to yourself to become more thoughtful and informed.   I simply can't engage in a discussion where the standards for conduct are so low.  Peace.

i still don't understand why you insist on addressing people whom you should be ignoring.

Why should I be ignored?  For not being as smart or as good at making points as you?  Maybe I grew up in an environment where those skills were not fostered.  In the spirit of consistency, shouldn't you make an effort to level the playing field for me?  (I am not trying to be an idiot with this comment--I think it is a valid point, especially in a discussion about this topic.) 


Ignore those two.  They're flirting.

As for struggles, you owe her an apology for making an insincere yet derogatory argument that clearly conflated race, intelligence and work ethic, even if you were doing so tongue-in-cheek.  It didn't come across as (you're saying) you meant it to -- it really does look like poor spelling = lower intelligence/work ethic = minorities, whether you make the "just devil's advocating" disclaimer or not.  And she clearly took offense to it.


the same criticism for you. 



 ???


Do you mean your criticism to red., or do you mean my criticism to this guy?   :D




Nah, I know what you mean.  Honestly, it's worthwhile here.  I'm interested in praxis -- something might actually happen here that solves the issue, even if it's a small one, so I'm fighting the battle.
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: Qui Ju on May 09, 2007, 09:37:53 AM
I forgot to mention perhaps the most dangerous thing about Bakke: the focus on diversity as the sole constitutional rationale for affirmative action programs in education.  I can imagine more significant and demonstrable government interests (remediation, etc.).

right, obviously even a quota would require individual attention, but i meant to draw an either or distinction (i.e. my choices WOULD have been mutually exclusive, somewhat).  

i don't know, i like the diversity thing, if only because it's basically saying: "hey white people, this is good for YOU."

though personally i think the best way of thinking about it is in terms of adversity, etc. etc.

???


Do you mean your criticism to red., or do you mean my criticism to this guy?   :D




Nah, I know what you mean.  Honestly, it's worthwhile here.  I'm interested in praxis -- something might actually happen here that solves the issue, even if it's a small one, so I'm fighting the battle.

obviously i mean that i address MY criticism to you in the same way.  ::)

if you think so.  myself personally, i've given up on humanity and am committed to screwing it over in every way possible.
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: Astro on May 09, 2007, 09:40:16 AM

I forgot to mention perhaps the most dangerous thing about Bakke: the focus on diversity as the sole constitutional rationale for affirmative action programs in education.  I can imagine more significant and demonstrable government interests (remediation, etc.).


Again, bingo.  Bakke's rationale allows for crazies to do "diversity consultations".  Bakke's rationale is (almost legitimate) cannon fodder for opponents of affirmative action.  It needs work.
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: Qui Ju on May 09, 2007, 09:44:59 AM

I forgot to mention perhaps the most dangerous thing about Bakke: the focus on diversity as the sole constitutional rationale for affirmative action programs in education.  I can imagine more significant and demonstrable government interests (remediation, etc.).


Again, bingo.  Bakke's rationale allows for crazies to do "diversity consultations".  Bakke's rationale is (almost legitimate) cannon fodder for opponents of affirmative action.  It needs work.

gunner.

and grutter's rationale?
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: Miss P on May 09, 2007, 09:45:38 AM
I forgot to mention perhaps the most dangerous thing about Bakke: the focus on diversity as the sole constitutional rationale for affirmative action programs in education.  I can imagine more significant and demonstrable government interests (remediation, etc.).

right, obviously even a quota would require individual attention, but i meant to draw an either or distinction (i.e. my choices WOULD have been mutually exclusive, somewhat).  

Do you mean, then, do I prefer a Gratz-type program or a Grutter-type program?  I think Gratz is better, but it might not work as well for a law school.  In general, I favor more open (in the sense of publicized) standards.
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: Astro on May 09, 2007, 09:45:45 AM

i don't know, i like the diversity thing, if only because it's basically saying: "hey white people, this is good for YOU."

though personally i think the best way of thinking about it is in terms of adversity, etc. etc.



If I may speak for Miss P (which, of course, I may not, but I'm going to do it anyway), the other rationales behind AA are also saying, "Hey white people, this is good for YOU," except there's a fog of ignorance that prevents this from being seen. 

"Hey white people*, righting a centuries-long injustice by subtle measures in a few areas to level the playing field will eventually help improve those 'issues' you worry about -- you know, them poors, them illegals, them black communities with them gangsters..."




Note:  definitely does not apply to all white people across the board.
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: Qui Ju on May 09, 2007, 09:47:41 AM

i don't know, i like the diversity thing, if only because it's basically saying: "hey white people, this is good for YOU."

though personally i think the best way of thinking about it is in terms of adversity, etc. etc.



If I may speak for Miss P (which, of course, I may not, but I'm going to do it anyway), the other rationales behind AA are also saying, "Hey white people, this is good for YOU," except there's a fog of ignorance that prevents this from being seen. 

"Hey white people*, righting a centuries-long injustice by subtle measures in a few areas to level the playing field will eventually help improve those 'issues' you worry about -- you know, them poors, them illegals, them black communities with them gangsters..."




Note:  definitely does not apply to all white people across the board.

this requires acknowledgement of fault.  people won't do this because people suck.

you think gratz system is preferable?  huh.  okay.
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: Miss P on May 09, 2007, 09:49:14 AM
Oh ok sorry...I didn't catch your reference to my earlier posts.  I'm not going to go back and read my earlier posts.  But my general position on AA is that I question whether it does more harm than good, and I'm sure the earlier posts reflect that.

I also agree that with what you're saying about quotas - if you're going to take race into consideration, I don't see why quotas are such a bad idea.  I think my problem is that fundamental problem of whether or not to take race into consideration - I see the benefits you're alluding to, so I don't think I'm necessarily ignorant on race relations, history, etc., but I also think there are some negative effects, or potential negative effects.  By the way, I'm not necessarily opposed to AA - I'm just unsure about it - just wanted to make that clear.

Thank you for your thoughtful and honest responses.  We disagree sharply on whether the potential negative effects of affirmative action programs could ever outweigh the (real) benefits, but I appreciate the care you've taken to clarify your position.  I'm sorry I've been a bit hostile.
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: Qui Ju on May 09, 2007, 09:50:22 AM
More, even, than the "they're taking my spot" exhibition of entitlement, the idea that one feels that one can make a strong affirmative statement on a subject that one doesn't understand at all is both baffling and annoying.  Yet another signpost in the decline of our civilization.

The right to privacy doesn't exist!

Too obscure?

they screwed up that entire line in my opinion.
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schools..
Post by: Miss P on May 09, 2007, 09:50:38 AM
S2DNT, man, just cut your losses, eh?
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schools..
Post by: Qui Ju on May 09, 2007, 09:51:22 AM
S2DNT, man, just cut your losses, eh?

ALL THREE OF YOU!

seriously people.  seriously.

::falls asleep::
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: Miss P on May 09, 2007, 09:54:14 AM
you think gratz system is preferable?  huh.  okay.

Why not?  It announced clear standards, gave bumps to some groups of students based on their perceived disadvantages (and statistical evidence), and then permitted individualized review of all borderline candidates.  As long as schools are going to rely on standardized tests and grades, they should contextualize those numbers as much as possible.
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schools..
Post by: Miss P on May 09, 2007, 09:55:11 AM
S2DNT, man, just cut your losses, eh?

ALL THREE OF YOU!

seriously people.  seriously.

::falls asleep::

It's the first I've engaged or addressed him since the post you liked (HTFH), so don't get all pissy with me.
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: Qui Ju on May 09, 2007, 09:56:02 AM
It didn't look good when I made errors in my grammar and spelling, though to argue that I was wrong in pointing out another's faults because I may have the same faults myself is just silly.

No it's not.

okay seriously, i give up.

you think gratz system is preferable?  huh.  okay.

Why not?  It announced clear standards, gave bumps to some groups of students based on their perceived disadvantages (and statistical evidence), and then permitted individualized review of all borderline candidates.  As long as schools are going to rely on standardized tests and grades, they should contextualize those numbers as much as possible.

i forgot about that part.

bright line rules are overrated in my opinion.

S2DNT, man, just cut your losses, eh?

ALL THREE OF YOU!

seriously people.  seriously.

::falls asleep::

It's the first I've engaged or addressed him since the post you liked (HTFH), so don't get all pissy with me.

fine.  i'll redirect pissiness at J.  ;)
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: Qui Ju on May 09, 2007, 10:00:12 AM
I usually ignore it, as you probably know. This is just particularly dumb.

and i've successfully redirected the ire of everyone in this thread toward myself.

i should have used the Charles "pay attention to me" account instead.
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: Astro on May 09, 2007, 10:00:30 AM

Ignore those two.  They're flirting.

As for struggles, you owe her an apology for making an insincere yet derogatory argument that clearly conflated race, intelligence and work ethic, even if you were doing so tongue-in-cheek.  It didn't come across as (you're saying) you meant it to -- it really does look like poor spelling = lower intelligence/work ethic = minorities, whether you make the "just devil's advocating" disclaimer or not.  And she clearly took offense to it.


These are two quotes from my earlier posts. 

"Again, I am not trying to argue that all minorities have bad grammar and spelling.  If there is any correlation at all, it would almost certainly be between students at substandard schools and bad grammar/spelling.  I am not even making an argument based on my opinions."

"struggles, I hope I did not give you the idea that I was condemning you in any way, or saying that you don't deserve to be a law student.  I always get myself in trouble at family gatherings because I like to take the opposite side of any argument.  I do think if you are serious about becoming a good lawyer, you should work tirelessly towards improving your grammar and spelling.  Take it from me, an old guy who is still trying to improve himself--it is never too late to learn.  However, it is up to you to improve yourself.  If the plight of minorities in America is really important to you, it is critical that you educate yourself to the point that your arguments are not lost because you are unable to express them well. You must work to make yourself better than your detractors, or you will be supplying them with all the ammunition they need to defeat you."

Let's ignore for a minute the condescending tone.

Think about the highlighted.  There are some things you're missing in this statement that might be offensive.  There are also inferences that can be drawn from it that even I find offensive.

Not that it's wrong to be offensive, necessarily.  It's just going to be hard for anyone to take you seriously if you're offensive because of ignorance (in its most specific sense).


I did not conflate race and bad grammar--I believe the comment I made was that, if anything, there was a correlation between bad schools and bad grammar. 


Do you seriously want to go there?  Don't make me pull up the old post.  Qui Ju's right -- that battle would be a waste of my time, as well as yours. 
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: Qui Ju on May 09, 2007, 10:01:39 AM
Do you seriously want to go there?  Don't make me pull up the old post.  Qui Ju's right -- that battle would be a waste of my time, as well as yours. 

on the other hand, THAT has some serious entertainment value.  :D

there is no right to privacy.  that's because there's no such thing as rights.  QEP.

wait, what?
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: Astro on May 09, 2007, 10:03:16 AM
Do you seriously want to go there?  Don't make me pull up the old post.  Qui Ju's right -- that battle would be a waste of my time, as well as yours. 

on the other hand, THAT has some serious entertainment value.  :D

there is no right to privacy.  that's because there's no such thing as rights.  QEP.

wait, what?


::throws sand::

Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schools..
Post by: Qui Ju on May 09, 2007, 10:05:15 AM
seriously, what bothers me most about the anti-AA trolls is how whiny they are.  somebody took my spot.

personally, i think that instead of blaming the system, people should start taking some f-ing personal responsiblity.  if you're a marginal candidate, stop pointing fingers and figure out what you need to be doing differently.  then go do it.
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: Miss P on May 09, 2007, 10:07:21 AM
you think gratz system is preferable?  huh.  okay.

Why not?  It announced clear standards, gave bumps to some groups of students based on their perceived disadvantages (and statistical evidence), and then permitted individualized review of all borderline candidates.  As long as schools are going to rely on standardized tests and grades, they should contextualize those numbers as much as possible.

i forgot about that part.

bright line rules are overrated in my opinion.

I agree, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't have standards at all.  Furthermore, I have more faith in standards that are a product of conscious, ex ante group deliberation than those whimsically employed by an individual admissions officer.

I found this portion of Souter's dissent in Gratz particularly persuasive:

Quote from: 539 U.S. at 297-8
 Without knowing more about how the Admissions Review Committee actually functions, it seems especially unfair to treat the candor of the admissions plan as an Achilles’ heel. In contrast to the college’s forthrightness in saying just what plus factor it gives for membership in an underrepresented minority, it is worth considering the character of one alternative thrown up as preferable, because supposedly not based on race. Drawing on admissions systems used at public universities in California, Florida, and Texas, the United States contends that Michigan could get student diversity in satisfaction of its compelling interest by guaranteeing admission to a fixed percentage of the top students from each high school in Michigan. Brief for United States as Amicus Curiae 18; Brief for United States as Amicus Curiae in Grutter v. Bollinger, O. T. 2002, No. 02—241, pp. 13—17.

    While there is nothing unconstitutional about such a practice, it nonetheless suffers from a serious disadvantage.4 It is the disadvantage of deliberate obfuscation. The “percentage plans” are just as race conscious as the point scheme (and fairly so), but they get their racially diverse results without saying directly what they are doing or why they are doing it. In contrast, Michigan states its purpose directly and, if this were a doubtful case for me, I would be tempted to give Michigan an extra point of its own for its frankness. Equal protection cannot become an exercise in which the winners are the ones who hide the ball.
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schools..
Post by: Qui Ju on May 09, 2007, 10:09:16 AM
i suppose i'm just uncomfortable with the mechanical nature of the thing.  it's kind of like the spring gun thing.

also, notable first: May 9, 2007: miss p directs harsh words at stanley for the first time.  this brings the % of lsders to have done so up to 100.  :D
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schools..
Post by: Miss P on May 09, 2007, 10:13:19 AM
i suppose i'm just uncomfortable with the mechanical nature of the thing.  it's kind of like the spring gun thing.

also, notable first: May 9, 2007: miss p directs harsh words at stanley for the first time.  this brings the % of lsders to have done so up to 100.  :D

You don't think I directed harsh words at you in the "Anyone here think the LSAT is easy?" thread?  That's good, I suppose.  :D  Also, just to clarify, when I wrote that "HTFH" above, it wasn't directed at you but rather intended to signal to which post I was referring, where you had replaced my "HTH" with a "HTFH."

Never mind me.  I'm feeling even testier than usual because of exams.  No pun intended.
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schools..
Post by: Qui Ju on May 09, 2007, 10:20:12 AM
i suppose i'm just uncomfortable with the mechanical nature of the thing.  it's kind of like the spring gun thing.

also, notable first: May 9, 2007: miss p directs harsh words at stanley for the first time.  this brings the % of lsders to have done so up to 100.  :D

You don't think I directed harsh words at you in the "Anyone here think the LSAT is easy?" thread?  That's good, I suppose.  :D  Also, just to clarify, when I wrote that "HTFH" above, it wasn't directed at you but rather intended to signal to which post I was referring, where you had replaced my "HTH" with a "HTFH."

Never mind me.  I'm feeling even testier than usual because of exams.  No pun intended.

wait, i don't even remember posting in the LSAT is easy thread.  :D

no worries.  i understand.  just wanted to say :).
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schools..
Post by: Miss P on May 09, 2007, 10:26:49 AM
S2DNT, man, just cut your losses, eh?

Would it be unfair of me to equate "cut your losses" with "stop trying to learn something and better yourself through discussions with intelligent people?"  Exactly what am I losing?

Your credibility, perhaps.  Your first post in this thread was condescending, racist (in that it identified posters by race and then ascribed their grammar and spelling to their race), and thoughtless.  Defending it is not helping your cause.  You've admitted that you weren't being entirely thoughtful.  You've told us your post doesn't adequately represent your views.  Move on.  None of us are learning anything or bettering ourselves by arguing about your good intentions.
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: Miss P on May 09, 2007, 10:28:49 AM
Sorry--there is something else I forgot to mention.  Admittedly, I am new at this whole "thinking" thing, but your saying that even you find my comment offensive does not mean it is offensive--just that you think it is.  


Actually, if your post offended someone (or, in this case, people), it is, by definition, offensive.
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: Miss P on May 09, 2007, 10:30:39 AM
Miss P, Qui Ju is Stanley and I'm me

Oh, no, I know!  I may not have spent a lot of time in these parts lately, but I tend to keep up with these things.  I thought I had been harsh with all three of you, Kitty, Stanley, and Scott (RIP), in that thread ("fanboy," etc.).
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: Qui Ju on May 09, 2007, 10:33:25 AM
Miss P, Qui Ju is Stanley and I'm me

Oh, no, I know!  I may not have spent a lot of time in these parts lately, but I tend to keep up with these things.  I thought I had been harsh with all three of you, Kitty, Stanley, and Scott (RIP), in that thread ("fanboy," etc.).

oh right.  that WAS a pretty obnoxious exchange.
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: Miss P on May 09, 2007, 10:35:41 AM
Miss P, Qui Ju is Stanley and I'm me

Oh, no, I know!  I may not have spent a lot of time in these parts lately, but I tend to keep up with these things.  I thought I had been harsh with all three of you, Kitty, Stanley, and Scott (RIP), in that thread ("fanboy," etc.).

oh right.  that WAS a pretty obnoxious exchange.

::smiles meekly::  Sorry, I guess.  I was very angry.   :-\
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: Qui Ju on May 09, 2007, 10:36:15 AM
Miss P, Qui Ju is Stanley and I'm me

Oh, no, I know!  I may not have spent a lot of time in these parts lately, but I tend to keep up with these things.  I thought I had been harsh with all three of you, Kitty, Stanley, and Scott (RIP), in that thread ("fanboy," etc.).

oh right.  that WAS a pretty obnoxious exchange.

::smiles meekly::  Sorry, I guess.  I was very angry.   :-\

oh everybody yells sometimes.  you should see me.  i've destroyed continents.
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: Qui Ju on May 09, 2007, 10:38:01 AM
I still don't see how it's possible for me to be condescending to someone that I don't consider myself superior to in any way, but you can believe what you want. 

It's pretty easy, actually.

Actually, it's not, unless you know a definition of condescend that I don't.  

:D :D :D
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: Qui Ju on May 09, 2007, 10:39:24 AM
I still don't see how it's possible for me to be condescending to someone that I don't consider myself superior to in any way, but you can believe what you want. 

It's pretty easy, actually.

Actually, it's not, unless you know a definition of condescend that I don't. 

http://www.google.com/search?q=define%3A+condescend&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a

# debase oneself morally, act in an undignified, unworthy, or dishonorable way; "I won't stoop to reading other people's mail"

Just for starters.

And seriously Stan, STFU.

ouch.

::leaves::
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: struggles on May 09, 2007, 10:43:34 AM
I don't think people who haven't worked very hard at educating themselves deserve my spot, and I don't particularly care what race they are. 

Struggles would be disappointed in you for minimizing the mountains he's climbed.

Not exactly, how many mountains had he climbed if he didn't work very hard at educating himself? he didn't climb that one, which is a big one.
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: Astro on May 09, 2007, 10:47:33 AM
I still don't see how it's possible for me to be condescending to someone that I don't consider myself superior to in any way, but you can believe what you want. 

It's pretty easy, actually.

Actually, it's not, unless you know a definition of condescend that I don't. 

http://www.google.com/search?q=define%3A+condescend&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a

# debase oneself morally, act in an undignified, unworthy, or dishonorable way; "I won't stoop to reading other people's mail"

Just for starters.

And seriously Stan, STFU.

ouch.

::leaves::


This reminds me of Cheesesteak last night.

"::eats, shoots and leaves::"


 :D
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: Astro on May 09, 2007, 10:51:29 AM
S2DNT, man, just cut your losses, eh?

Would it be unfair of me to equate "cut your losses" with "stop trying to learn something and better yourself through discussions with intelligent people?"  Exactly what am I losing?

Your credibility, perhaps.  Your first post in this thread was condescending, racist (in that it identified posters by race and then ascribed their grammar and spelling to their race), and thoughtless.  Defending it is not helping your cause.  You've admitted that you weren't being entirely thoughtful.  You've told us your post doesn't adequately represent your views.  Move on.  None of us are learning anything or bettering ourselves by arguing about your good intentions.

Again, I was not being condescending or racist, I did not ascribe grammar and spelling to race, and I have admitted that I may have been thoughtless.  None of you may be learning anything, but I certainly am.  This is my first serious foray into a LSD discussion, and I am learning a lot about how much I have to learn, and that even those who are more intellectually advanced than me are not perfect. 

On a positive note, I wish I was more knowledgable about case law (and law in general) in America.  Reading your posts in particular, and everyone's in general, has really opened my eyes to how much fun it will be to learn about the law. 

I will apologize if I've wasted anyone's time, and especially if I have offended anyone.


This is really all it came down to.

I'm going to drop the rest of it.  I suppose struggles can take care of herself now that she's back. 


You haven't done anything too egregious, but there are certain nuances that you don't seem to have picked up on.  I suppose Miss P and I are not helping by not pointing out where and how the things you've said have been offensive despite your protestations to the contrary.  That's my bad.  I'm lazy.  Sorry.

You should feel comforted by the fact that we're even having this discussion with you.  It means we don't think you're a troll and that you're actually worth debating this.  And I do appreciate your reflexivity.  I also now agree that you're being sincere.
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: Astro on May 09, 2007, 11:01:36 AM
 :D

You remind me a lot of my roommate. 

Unless we're talking about vocal jazz or loud anime, that's a good thing, by the way.
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schools..
Post by: struggles on May 09, 2007, 05:01:31 PM
This thread jumped from 8 pages to 16 in a matter of hours and I haven't been able to read all of it as of yet (long hours at work!!)...so I'm a little lost...therefore, suffice to say, I'm not offended.
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schools..
Post by: blackpowerman on May 15, 2007, 12:18:54 AM
lets not blame the prisons, lets not blame society, lets blame the blacks, latinos or whites or WHOEVER

MAKES THE FREE CHOICE TO COMMIT CRIME AND NOT STUDY FOR LSAT!

and jillybean said "in sports race doesnt matter because owners are just trying to get the "best" teams"

well, this should apply everywhere.  our country should have the best lawyers and dammnit, if blacks dont qualify, then there wont be any!    omg this is ridiculous! 
also, there are no black swimmers on the swim team- why? because none qualified!!! tell THAT to al sharpton!
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: Astro on May 15, 2007, 01:49:51 AM
lets not blame the prisons, lets not blame society, lets blame the blacks, latinos or whites or WHOEVER

MAKES THE FREE CHOICE TO COMMIT CRIME AND NOT STUDY FOR LSAT!

and jillybean said "in sports race doesnt matter because owners are just trying to get the "best" teams"

well, this should apply everywhere.  our country should have the best lawyers and dammnit, if blacks dont qualify, then there wont be any!    omg this is ridiculous! 
also, there are no black swimmers on the swim team- why? because none qualified!!! tell THAT to al sharpton!


 ::) ::) ::)
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schools..
Post by: Chibundu on May 15, 2007, 08:32:59 AM
lets not blame the prisons, lets not blame society, lets blame the blacks, latinos or whites or WHOEVER

MAKES THE FREE CHOICE TO COMMIT CRIME AND NOT STUDY FOR LSAT!

and jillybean said "in sports race doesnt matter because owners are just trying to get the "best" teams"

well, this should apply everywhere.  our country should have the best lawyers and dammnit, if blacks dont qualify, then there wont be any!    omg this is ridiculous! 
also, there are no black swimmers on the swim team- why? because none qualified!!! tell THAT to al sharpton!

Are you serious?????
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schools..
Post by: blackpowerman on May 15, 2007, 10:19:12 AM
how could i not be serious?  MOST computer programmers are INDIAN but theres no outcry!
MOST fast runners are black!  Theres no outcry.

But when most lawyers are white, there is a problem??  It's called "finding what you are good at".  I am of Greek descent, european american, and im not a particularly fast athlete- should nfl teams HAVE to coddle me and train me because there is an underrepresented minority group of european americans in the NFL?? hell no!  why does it apply here?
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: Ersatz on May 15, 2007, 10:20:04 AM
You're flame, we get it.
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: Astro on May 15, 2007, 01:05:26 PM
You're flame, we get it.


 :D :D :D :D :D
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schools..
Post by: struggles on May 15, 2007, 01:41:50 PM
lets not blame the prisons, lets not blame society, lets blame the blacks, latinos or whites or WHOEVER

MAKES THE FREE CHOICE TO COMMIT CRIME AND NOT STUDY FOR LSAT!

and jillybean said "in sports race doesnt matter because owners are just trying to get the "best" teams"

well, this should apply everywhere.  our country should have the best lawyers and dammnit, if blacks dont qualify, then there wont be any!    omg this is ridiculous! 
also, there are no black swimmers on the swim team- why? because none qualified!!! tell THAT to al sharpton!

you totally missed the point.  ::)
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schools..
Post by: blackpowerman on May 15, 2007, 03:21:34 PM
ok, first of all how did i miss the point?  i just MADE your point-

too many blacks in the NFL- according to affirmative action and equality, non athletes should be trained to compete and the league should potentially suffer just to make it "fair"

indians program computers, rednecks work construction, greeks own restaurants- its just the way of the world.

by the way, this is your logic, not mine!  im simply outlining "due process" as deemed by the "struggles"
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schools..
Post by: law_dawg_07 on May 23, 2007, 08:30:08 PM
lets not blame the prisons, lets not blame society, lets blame the blacks, latinos or whites or WHOEVER

MAKES THE FREE CHOICE TO COMMIT CRIME AND NOT STUDY FOR LSAT!

and jillybean said "in sports race doesnt matter because owners are just trying to get the "best" teams"

well, this should apply everywhere.  our country should have the best lawyers and dammnit, if blacks dont qualify, then there wont be any!    omg this is ridiculous! 
also, there are no black swimmers on the swim team- why? because none qualified!!! tell THAT to al sharpton!

Equating law to a sport was an initial comparison made by another poster.  For you to logically draw the conclusion that the two are one in the same is utterly ridiculous.   The thread is about lack of minorities at institutions of law and you clearly outted yourself (and we both know what I mean when I say that) when you leaped to your reasoning of best lawyers and blacks not qualifying under that status.  The barrier for many minorities is performance on the LSAT.  The LSAT really does not determine one's success in law school and it surely is not a defining factor in whether or not one is considered a great lawyer...regardless of them being black. 

*Resist the urge to show your true colors on this site, or at the very least try to refrain from making ill-thought out statements about the other colors that exist.
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schools..
Post by: blackpowerman on May 24, 2007, 12:05:54 AM
dear law dog 07,

im deeply insulted you assume im racist.  i made an analogy, using an example that if blacks dont qualify for law school, why should there be any.  im not saying that they dont.  its hypothetical.  in fact, you can replace black with whites.  if no whites qualify for law school there damn sure shouldnt be any.  and comparing it to sports is justified.  its the principle at hand.  in my area, most of the garbage men are black.  i rarely if ever seen any whites doing this profession.  nothing wrong with it, just definitely a lack of represented whites.  why/ who knows, just the way it is, but i doubt whites are being discriminated against.  its just the way things are. 

also- foot locker in my area, not a single white person in the store as of last weekend.  all black employees.  why?  maybe no whites applied.  maybe no whites qualified for the positions. 

my point is, why do we, as in this country, willingly sacrifice the good of the country to please the agitated.  i am in no way saying that blacks cant be good lawyers- there are Lots of awesome black lawyers and judges out there.  and i believe u said something along the lines that the lsat is not an indicator of how you do in law school?  i think that is ridiculous- that is the measuring tool by which law schools use to determine acceptance. 

i am really floored that you think i "outted" myself by comparing best lawyers to blacks- a statement which YOU manipulated and curved to fit your agenda.  you know very well that it was not in that context, i was simply using a formula to make a point.  if there are no qualifying white doctors, there should be no white doctors.  happy now? 
sports and law are not one in the same.  but the principle behind placement is.  i want you to argue that there arent enough cambodians in the MLB.  or there aren't enough asians in the NFL.  you won't do it because you know that sports are based on qualifications, just like anything should be- why wouldnt you want your team to be the best?  why wouldnt you want your lawyer to be the best?  i bet if the NFL gave me a chance- gave me an extra edge, i may very well become a great running back.  then again, they dont have to because there are plenty of people out ther with talent and ability who can do it without the edge.

anyways, im not going to bite your racist bait, you know damn well what you were trying to do.
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schools..
Post by: awesomepossum on May 24, 2007, 01:18:22 AM
I don't want to start or perpetuate a flame, but I do have an honest question.

Lawdog07, you said that the LSAT is the barrier for many minorities.  Do you think it is an unfair barrier?  Are minorities somehow disadvantaged from doing well on the LSAT?  Does this disadvantage carry over to non-URM minorities? 

I personally don't know the answer to those questions.  I am a minority but not a URM.  I personally don't believe that these standardized tests can have a cultural bias.  However, if there is something intrinsic to the LSAT that is unfair to minorities is it something that can be somehow rectified? 

Again, I'm not looking to start a flame.  I just would like to get folks opinion on the issue.  Preferrably from URMs who have taken the LSAT who may or may believe that the LSAT is unfair to minorities. 
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schools..
Post by: law_dawg_07 on May 24, 2007, 09:48:32 AM
I don't want to start or perpetuate a flame, but I do have an honest question.

Lawdog07, you said that the LSAT is the barrier for many minorities.  Do you think it is an unfair barrier?  Are minorities somehow disadvantaged from doing well on the LSAT?  Does this disadvantage carry over to non-URM minorities? 

I personally don't know the answer to those questions.  I am a minority but not a URM.  I personally don't believe that these standardized tests can have a cultural bias.  However, if there is something intrinsic to the LSAT that is unfair to minorities is it something that can be somehow rectified? 

Again, I'm not looking to start a flame.  I just would like to get folks opinion on the issue.  Preferrably from URMs who have taken the LSAT who may or may believe that the LSAT is unfair to minorities. 

I think the LSAT is a barrier for many minorities.  Reason being that many minorities cannot afford to pay the astronomical fees that are charged for the prep courses or prep materials.  The LSAT does not test your intelligence.  If you can manipulate the test, you will do well.  This is what the prep courses teaches you.  I know people with ugly GPA's that have scored in the 160's on their LSAT.  Personally, I had a good GPA and my diagnostic score was a 148 on the LSAT (even though my GRE and SAT scores were good enough to work for Kaplan).  I took the EXTENDED Kaplan course twice and learned the tricks like the back of my hand.  I ended up scoring in the 170's.  I could afford to pay the $1500 because I am a working professional.  A lot of minorities do not have that option or the finances which leaves them behind the curve...
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schools..
Post by: law_dawg_07 on May 24, 2007, 10:02:56 AM
dear law dog 07,

im deeply insulted you assume im racist.  i made an analogy, using an example that if blacks dont qualify for law school, why should there be any.  im not saying that they dont.  its hypothetical.  in fact, you can replace black with whites.  if no whites qualify for law school there damn sure shouldnt be any.  and comparing it to sports is justified.  its the principle at hand.  in my area, most of the garbage men are black.  i rarely if ever seen any whites doing this profession.  nothing wrong with it, just definitely a lack of represented whites.  why/ who knows, just the way it is, but i doubt whites are being discriminated against.  its just the way things are. 

also- foot locker in my area, not a single white person in the store as of last weekend.  all black employees.  why?  maybe no whites applied.  maybe no whites qualified for the positions. 

my point is, why do we, as in this country, willingly sacrifice the good of the country to please the agitated.  i am in no way saying that blacks cant be good lawyers- there are Lots of awesome black lawyers and judges out there.  and i believe u said something along the lines that the lsat is not an indicator of how you do in law school?  i think that is ridiculous- that is the measuring tool by which law schools use to determine acceptance. 

i am really floored that you think i "outted" myself by comparing best lawyers to blacks- a statement which YOU manipulated and curved to fit your agenda.  you know very well that it was not in that context, i was simply using a formula to make a point.  if there are no qualifying white doctors, there should be no white doctors.  happy now? 
sports and law are not one in the same.  but the principle behind placement is.  i want you to argue that there arent enough cambodians in the MLB.  or there aren't enough asians in the NFL.  you won't do it because you know that sports are based on qualifications, just like anything should be- why wouldnt you want your team to be the best?  why wouldnt you want your lawyer to be the best?  i bet if the NFL gave me a chance- gave me an extra edge, i may very well become a great running back.  then again, they dont have to because there are plenty of people out ther with talent and ability who can do it without the edge.

anyways, im not going to bite your racist bait, you know damn well what you were trying to do.

#1  I call it like I see it.
#2  You are talking to the wrong person because unlike other people I understand that the term minority is a number issue and not a color issue.  I work in a pre-dominantly black environment and I actively recruit asians, hispanics, and whites because they are considered the minority.  Are there barriers preventing them from easily gaining access into the environment I work...YES!!!  But since I am not a hypocrite, I constantly work on ways to alleviate those barriers for those group of people.
#3  I am going to ignore the garbage man comment because it just continues to show how ignorant you are.
#4  Have a wonderful day!
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schools..
Post by: blackpowerman on May 24, 2007, 11:30:06 AM
law dog 07 wrote:
I think the LSAT is a barrier for many minorities.  Reason being that many minorities cannot afford to pay the astronomical fees that are charged for the prep courses or prep materials.  The LSAT does not test your intelligence.  If you can manipulate the test, you will do well.  This is what the prep courses teaches you.  I know people with ugly GPA's that have scored in the 160's on their LSAT.  Personally, I had a good GPA and my diagnostic score was a 148 on the LSAT (even though my GRE and SAT scores were good enough to work for Kaplan).  I took the EXTENDED Kaplan course twice and learned the tricks like the back of my hand.  I ended up scoring in the 170's.  I could afford to pay the $1500 because I am a working professional.  A lot of minorities do not have that option or the finances which leaves them behind the curve...

your logic on why minorities can't ace the lsat is ignorant and severely flawed!  you are making the assumption that all, if not most minorities do not have jobs or well paying jobs and can't come up with 1500 bucks.  in addition, you are saying they are all lazy and do not want to study unless they have top notch classes to attend.  aside from that, you do not need to pay that money to ace the lsat.  there are public libraries littered with materials, online free materials and relatively cheap books on the LSAT at bookstores.  for you to say that one MUST take a kaplan lsat prep class to excel is ridiculous.
Furthermore, plenty of non minority- i.e. whites do very very bad on the lsat.  some of them do not have money either.  although i am a first generation greek (my parents immigrated here in the 70's) i am not considered a miniority because of my skin color- im "european american" and if you look at the definition of minority in the applications, you will see the white box is often described as "of european descent".  that's me, even though i am not from this country per se.  so it is about color for the most part, if not all.  i can, however, self appoint myself as a minority, but they will see right through it and decide that i am white- even though i have dark olive complexion.

second of all, my garbage line was not an insult- it was an illustration and you won't comment because you know i am right about that.  if there were all white garbage men, our state would actively recruit more blacks and asians and what not.  but i will bet they aren't even trying to recruit more whites to the job.  and you can replace the sanitation profession with anything, it doesnt matter, its just the point. 


i hope this time you call it like it is- not how you WANT to see it.  be fair, you don't have to agree with me, but you should see both sides and know that i am not a bigot/racist or anything of that nature. 

have a blessed day
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: Astro on May 24, 2007, 11:35:36 AM
PUBLIC SERVICE ANNOUNCEMENT:


Yes, yanni is a bigot.

No, yanni is actually NOT a troll.  At least, not intentionally.

No, it is not worth your time discussing things further with yanni. 

Yes, you're right and he's wrong.

No, there's no way he'll ever understand that.



Go on with your lives.
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: mugatu on May 24, 2007, 11:36:35 AM
 :D
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schools..
Post by: awesomepossum on May 24, 2007, 01:24:47 PM
I don't want to start or perpetuate a flame, but I do have an honest question.

Lawdog07, you said that the LSAT is the barrier for many minorities.  Do you think it is an unfair barrier?  Are minorities somehow disadvantaged from doing well on the LSAT?  Does this disadvantage carry over to non-URM minorities? 

I personally don't know the answer to those questions.  I am a minority but not a URM.  I personally don't believe that these standardized tests can have a cultural bias.  However, if there is something intrinsic to the LSAT that is unfair to minorities is it something that can be somehow rectified? 

Again, I'm not looking to start a flame.  I just would like to get folks opinion on the issue.  Preferrably from URMs who have taken the LSAT who may or may believe that the LSAT is unfair to minorities. 

I think the LSAT is a barrier for many minorities.  Reason being that many minorities cannot afford to pay the astronomical fees that are charged for the prep courses or prep materials.  The LSAT does not test your intelligence.  If you can manipulate the test, you will do well.  This is what the prep courses teaches you.  I know people with ugly GPA's that have scored in the 160's on their LSAT.  Personally, I had a good GPA and my diagnostic score was a 148 on the LSAT (even though my GRE and SAT scores were good enough to work for Kaplan).  I took the EXTENDED Kaplan course twice and learned the tricks like the back of my hand.  I ended up scoring in the 170's.  I could afford to pay the $1500 because I am a working professional.  A lot of minorities do not have that option or the finances which leaves them behind the curve...


The thing about the prep courses is actually a really valid point.  I didn't take one, but I did buy a few hundred dollars worth of books from LSAC. 

I wonder though if this in as of itself is really a barrier.  I agree that a 1500 course is crazy expensive.  I'm probably upper middle class, and I thought it was too expensive.  However, there are plenty of materials available that aren't 1500.  I don't think taking a course like that is really the norm is it?

The other thing is that people URM or not who are applying to law school have their degree (bachelors) or are on the verge of getting their degree no?  I have a hard time believing that they REALLY don't have any access to any study materials.  I guess I have trouble believing that a prep course is standard for people getting high LSAT scores.

However, lawdog, I really do think that you make a good point.  I guess I have trouble believing that one factor makes all the difference in terms of URM LSAT performance.  I guess those courses weren't something I had considered because.....I hadn't taken one.... self centered I know.  I wish there was some real evidence somewhere (not published by Kaplan and not just anecdotal) that demonstrated how effective those courses are vs. cheaper self-study alternatives.

I think that diversity is really important to a law school.  I was pretty upset when I found out about Proposal 2 at Michigan.  When I said that to a friend of mine (who was white admittedly) he said, why can't schools give an advantage to those who are ECONOMICALLY disadvantaged, not just those who are URM's.  Each of those factors don't necessarily imply the other.  I didn't really have a good answer to that beyond the fact that racial diversity in a law school is important.  If there was some intrinsic reason why the LSAT is tougher for URM's and not just the economically disadvantaged, things like affirmative action would be easier to defend.

Admittedly I'm also bummed that Asians aren't considered URMs.
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schools..
Post by: law_dawg_07 on May 24, 2007, 04:32:19 PM
I don't want to start or perpetuate a flame, but I do have an honest question.

Lawdog07, you said that the LSAT is the barrier for many minorities.  Do you think it is an unfair barrier?  Are minorities somehow disadvantaged from doing well on the LSAT?  Does this disadvantage carry over to non-URM minorities? 

I personally don't know the answer to those questions.  I am a minority but not a URM.  I personally don't believe that these standardized tests can have a cultural bias.  However, if there is something intrinsic to the LSAT that is unfair to minorities is it something that can be somehow rectified? 

Again, I'm not looking to start a flame.  I just would like to get folks opinion on the issue.  Preferrably from URMs who have taken the LSAT who may or may believe that the LSAT is unfair to minorities. 

I think the LSAT is a barrier for many minorities.  Reason being that many minorities cannot afford to pay the astronomical fees that are charged for the prep courses or prep materials.  The LSAT does not test your intelligence.  If you can manipulate the test, you will do well.  This is what the prep courses teaches you.  I know people with ugly GPA's that have scored in the 160's on their LSAT.  Personally, I had a good GPA and my diagnostic score was a 148 on the LSAT (even though my GRE and SAT scores were good enough to work for Kaplan).  I took the EXTENDED Kaplan course twice and learned the tricks like the back of my hand.  I ended up scoring in the 170's.  I could afford to pay the $1500 because I am a working professional.  A lot of minorities do not have that option or the finances which leaves them behind the curve...


The thing about the prep courses is actually a really valid point.  I didn't take one, but I did buy a few hundred dollars worth of books from LSAC. 

I wonder though if this in as of itself is really a barrier.  I agree that a 1500 course is crazy expensive.  I'm probably upper middle class, and I thought it was too expensive.  However, there are plenty of materials available that aren't 1500.  I don't think taking a course like that is really the norm is it?

The other thing is that people URM or not who are applying to law school have their degree (bachelors) or are on the verge of getting their degree no?  I have a hard time believing that they REALLY don't have any access to any study materials.  I guess I have trouble believing that a prep course is standard for people getting high LSAT scores.

However, lawdog, I really do think that you make a good point.  I guess I have trouble believing that one factor makes all the difference in terms of URM LSAT performance.  I guess those courses weren't something I had considered because.....I hadn't taken one.... self centered I know.  I wish there was some real evidence somewhere (not published by Kaplan and not just anecdotal) that demonstrated how effective those courses are vs. cheaper self-study alternatives.

I think that diversity is really important to a law school.  I was pretty upset when I found out about Proposal 2 at Michigan.  When I said that to a friend of mine (who was white admittedly) he said, why can't schools give an advantage to those who are ECONOMICALLY disadvantaged, not just those who are URM's.  Each of those factors don't necessarily imply the other.  I didn't really have a good answer to that beyond the fact that racial diversity in a law school is important.  If there was some intrinsic reason why the LSAT is tougher for URM's and not just the economically disadvantaged, things like affirmative action would be easier to defend.

Admittedly I'm also bummed that Asians aren't considered URMs.

Awesome...first off thanks for having something logical to say  :)

Second, I know it would seem like there are so many other other avenues to study other than a test prep class and there are but the class adds a dimension of discipline (at least for me it did) and support.  Those test prep courses (not just Kaplan) not only offer live feedback but they also administer the test several times under real conditions.  I do not think that test itself is biased.  I do believe that finances prevent a lot of people from taking that course and why should that be?  Why should only those who can  afford it be allowed to benefit from it? 

And I am a firm believer that the majority of high scorers have taken a prep course.  I have no evidence to support this but after speaking with those in my testing room for the actual LSAT, only 2 people had not taken some type of prep course.

P.S.  I am not a big proponent of Affirmative Action.  I think the policy and what it stands for has been muddled over the years and highly understood.  I think it needs to be re-named and re-defined.
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schools..
Post by: wellpreserved on August 29, 2007, 06:22:55 AM
I went to visit the school I am going to be attending. And since I am very sensitive to race and equality issues I noticed right off the back that there is a serious lack of hispanics and blacks...tons Asians and East Indians which is expected...It just really makes me sick, maybe if our prisons weren't so over populated with Hispanics and blacks there would be more of them represented in the higher echolen of education. I mean, I knew this was the case, but still it blows my mind.  >:(


Go easy on the blacks and hispanics.  It's not necessarily their fault their they're all in jail.  :-\

And maybe they just don't want to attend law school.  No reason for you to get upset with them.  People have different goals.

fixt by literate jail bird darkie.
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schools..
Post by: Miss P on August 29, 2007, 06:58:42 AM
Go easy on the blacks and hispanics.  It's not necessarily their fault their they're all in jail.  :-\

And maybe they just don't want to attend law school.  No reason for you to get upset with them.  People have different goals.

fixt by literate jail bird darkie.


Oh, honey, you can't fix ugly.
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: Astro on August 30, 2007, 12:51:07 AM
Go easy on the blacks and hispanics.  It's not necessarily their fault their they're all in jail.  :-\

And maybe they just don't want to attend law school.  No reason for you to get upset with them.  People have different goals.

fixt by literate jail bird darkie.


Oh, honey, you can't fix ugly.


How I missed thee.
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: Miss P on August 30, 2007, 02:10:56 AM
How I missed thee.

Well looky here!
Title: Re: Just really frustrated about the lack of unrepresented minority at law schoo
Post by: The F-cktard Express on August 30, 2007, 03:00:33 PM
Go easy on the blacks and hispanics.  It's not necessarily their fault their they're all in jail.  :-\

And maybe they just don't want to attend law school.  No reason for you to get upset with them.  People have different goals.

fixt by literate jail bird darkie.


Oh, honey, you can't fix ugly.

Shhh. I'm sure Limburger is fixing up a way to include looks into his affirmative action plan. Uggos should get similar preference to darkies.

Or something like that. But just thank goodness deformed people aren't applying to college.  ::)