Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

sebster wrote:It isn't that complicated.

They're trying to make a point that it is racist to charge different amounts to different people. They're doing this by charging white people the least. They believe this is an important point to make because they think white people are getting a hard deal in the US, because of affirmative action and a handful of other policies.

This seems like an important point if you're a college activist dick who really, really doesn't want to get the idea of privilege. Predictably, other college activist dicks who understand privilege will make their own highly contrived analogies to explain that the price of a single good really isn't the whole picture. Both groups will shout at each other and nothing will be achieved, because the original grounds for debate were ridiculous.

This is what college politics is.

No. They're charging white people the most $2 per muffin. Women are charge 25 cents less. Native Americans are charged $.25.

Read the OP before you start going off at the mouth.

Let me sum things up for those who don't live in California.

In 1996 the people passed prop 209 that stopped racial diversity quotas. The assembly and senate just passed SB 185 which would overturn prop 209. Once overturned CA universities will reinstate racial diversity quotas to the maximum extent allowed by the 14th amendment, which means they will blatantly violate the 14 amendment with racial diversity quotas by calling racial diversity quotas by some other name and spinning it as a diversity effort. Here is what is basically going to happen.

2010 US Census California's population= 40.1% Non-Hispanic White, 5.8% Black or African American, 12.8% Asian, 4% American Indian, 2% Pacific Islander and 2.6% from two or more races. 37.6% of the total population are Hispanics or Latinos of any race.

That means 5.8% of every university needs to be African American, 4% needs to be Native American, and 37.6% of every university needs to be Hispanic or the university doesn't meet their goal/quota/whatever you want to call it. That pretty much means they will admit African Americans, Native Americans, and Hispanics until they make their goals, and then start letting everybody else in. The total population of those 3 minority groups would then add up to 47.4% of the population of the university.

Now let's look at a few colleges
UB Berkley: Total number of Undergraduates: 25,151; African American/Black: 4%; American Indian/Alaskan Native: 1%; Asian/Pacific Islander: 43%; Hispanic: 12%; White: 32%; International: 3%.

Once Berkley starts to admit 47.4% of the population of the university under racial diversity quotas there is a simple mathematical problem. 47% minority + 43% Asian/Pacific Islander + 32% white=122%. That means about 1/3 of the current UC Berkley white/Asian population would end up being rejected in favor of minorities with lower test scores and lower GPAs. If 12% of the applicants are Hispanic and UC Berkley must have 37.6% of it's student body as Hispanic it's great news for Hispanics applicants and terrible news for anybody else. If your Asian you probably won't get to go to college in California because once racial quotas are restored it will be easier for an Asian to get into Harvard, Yale, Princeton, and Stanford than it would be to get into Berkley, USC, or UCLA.

You can scream that what they are about to do is illegal, unconstitutional, and racist, but the SB185 supporters will scream back that you're the racist and they will reinstate racial quotas anyways. The Asians will eventually take California to a federal court for racially discriminating against them, but that's going to cost millions of dollars and probably take a decade or so as well funded minority advocate groups will spend millions of dollars to stop or stall the case in court.

The trick here is to get a native american to buy up all of the muffins and open a "capitalism bake sale" with them right next door for just under the price of the white muffin.

It amuses me.

Kids point out something that discriminates, and people then point the finger at the kids, seemingly ignoring the whole point of selling the goods. I guess people are too stupid to realize that they aren't a simple bakery shop trying to earn some money...or are they?

Necroshea wrote:It amuses me.

Kids point out something that discriminates, and people then point the finger at the kids, seemingly ignoring the whole point of selling the goods. I guess people are too stupid to realize that they aren't a simple bakery shop trying to earn some money...or are they?

I think they are/were concerned with makeing a political point than they were about selling the muffins.

If they wanted to make money they wouldn't be offering discounts to minorities.

Ok I'm starting to the bake sale was an epic fail that took attention away from the fact that the CA university system is about to enact a new admission policy that may as well be titled "No Dogs No Asians" and has everybody focused on whether or not GOP baked goods are racist.

schadenfreude wrote:Ok I'm starting to the bake sale was an epic fail that took attention away from the fact that the CA university system is about to enact a new admission policy that may as well be titled "No Dogs No Asians" and has everybody focused on whether or not GOP baked goods are racist.

Isn't that how American politics work these days?

schadenfreude wrote:Ok I'm starting to the bake sale was an epic fail that took attention away from the fact that the CA university system is about to enact a new admission policy that may as well be titled "No Dogs No Asians" and has everybody focused on whether or not GOP baked goods are racist.

Likewise, I'm not sure you're hyperbolic "sky is falling" attitude is the best approach to really discuss the issue.

It's a poorly thought out law that will almost assuredly be stayed by either state or federal courts if implemented the way you argue above.

Polonius wrote:

schadenfreude wrote:Ok I'm starting to the bake sale was an epic fail that took attention away from the fact that the CA university system is about to enact a new admission policy that may as well be titled "No Dogs No Asians" and has everybody focused on whether or not GOP baked goods are racist.

Likewise, I'm not sure you're hyperbolic "sky is falling" attitude is the best approach to really discuss the issue.

It's a poorly thought out law that will almost assuredly be stayed by either state or federal courts if implemented the way you argue above.

Well, admissions, prior to 209 tended to fall along these lines, hence the reason for it the first time.
On the positive, its California. Its a states issue and frankly they are imploding on almost a goemetric rate. They deserve the politicians they elected.

Frazzled wrote:

Polonius wrote:

schadenfreude wrote:Ok I'm starting to the bake sale was an epic fail that took attention away from the fact that the CA university system is about to enact a new admission policy that may as well be titled "No Dogs No Asians" and has everybody focused on whether or not GOP baked goods are racist.

Likewise, I'm not sure you're hyperbolic "sky is falling" attitude is the best approach to really discuss the issue.

It's a poorly thought out law that will almost assuredly be stayed by either state or federal courts if implemented the way you argue above.

Well, admissions, prior to 209 tended to fall along these lines, hence the reason for it the first time.
On the positive, its California. Its a states issue and frankly they are imploding on almost a goemetric rate. They deserve the politicians they elected.

My attitude is not hyperbolic. I lived in California before prop 209. I went to high school in California before prop 209. All of my friends finished high school before prop 209. I remember the bad old days when straight A students in AP classes could not get into a California college because the color of their skin was yellow. I remember the demoralizing effect that had on many white and Asian students. I went to a JC in California before prop 209 and saw a campus full of disgruntled Asian students many of whom were rejected from every CA university because the color of their skin was yellow. When I joined the navy I saw a lot of California enlisted members who joined so that they could go to college out of state because their family was too poor to send them to school out of state, and they could not get into a CA college because their color of their skin was yellow. Don't tell me I'm being hyperbolic when I'm the one that lived in CA before 1996, it really was that bad.

The original policies that allowed discrimination against Asians were never overturned by the courts it was CA prop 209 that ended anti Asian racism in the CA universities. As far as placing our faith in the court system to stop racial quotas at CA universities all I have to say is don't hold your breath. It's going to take years to go through the courts and millions of dollars. Who's going to pay for it? Also keep in mind multiple Latino advocate groups will spend millions of $ to defend SB185 in the courts. Also as a good example look at prop 8, after 3 years and millions of $ spent on both sides it's still not resolved.

The only upside that has been pointed was Frazzled reminding everybody that CA is about to financially implode upon it's own butthole, and while that will be awesomely amusing to watch from outside the state it's not good news for any of us that might be in the People's Republic of California when it happens.

schadenfreude wrote:
My attitude is not hyperbolic. I lived in California before prop 209. I went to high school in California before prop 209. All of my friends finished high school before prop 209. I remember the bad old days when straight A students in AP classes could not get into a California college because the color of their skin was yellow. I remember the demoralizing effect that had on many white and Asian students. I went to a JC in California before prop 209 and saw a campus full of disgruntled Asian students many of whom were rejected from every CA university because the color of their skin was yellow. When I joined the navy I saw a lot of California enlisted members who joined so that they could go to college out of state because their family was too poor to send them to school out of state, and they could not get into a CA college because their color of their skin was yellow. Don't tell me I'm being hyperbolic when I'm the one that lived in CA before 1996, it really was that bad.

Indeed. I did as well. It was an interesting time. This had the effect of making jr. college heavily Asian and Hispanic, and ditto on the Hispanic front for University. As a Selma Hayek fan, this made the scenery quite excellent.

I'm not saying that the old system wasn't bad, as I have no real knowledge of it. But assuming that the current proposal will result in the exact same situation is... perhaps premature.

Polonius wrote:If you're getting straight A's in Honor's classes, than you can afford to go to college out of state.

I'm a lily white honky and got a good scholarship in the late 90's out of state. Talented students will find seats at top colleges. There simply aren't enough brilliant minds to fill every top college.

As a Michigan resident, I knew I would get hardly any scholarship money to UM, whereas if I were black with my same credentials I would have gotten substantial aid. Life's not always fair. Instead I went to a top notch private school with a full tuition scholarship.

I'm just tired of this litany of "I was as straight A student with an 1600 SAT and I couldn't get into this school because I wasn't black."

Go to a different school!

As a society, we constantly tell the poor to work harder, accept less, and do what they have to to get by with less government aid. Yet when it's the talented and/or privileged that are inconvenienced, suddently racism is a terrible, terrible thing.

And yes, it's an inconvenience, at most, for the majority of tradtional college students to go out of state or to a private school. It's not going to destroy lives or careers.

I'm not saying that the old system wasn't bad, as I have no real knowledge of it. But assuming that the current proposal will result in the exact same situation is... perhaps premature.

Tuition + living expenses are both through the roof, and good luck finding a scholarship for Asians with a high GPA+SAT. It's not the rich that will suffer from reverse discrimination, it's the poor. The rich as you have correctly said can just send their kids to a private college or out of state. What do you expect low income families to do? Low income Asian parents often have to work 100+ hours a week so that their kids can go to college, how many more hours per week do you expect them to work so they can send their kids to a private college instead? The children and grandchildren of immigrants that came to this country with nothing but the shirt on their backs and not speaking the language are hardly the beneficiaries of growing up in a privileged upper class blue blooded lifestyle.

Michigan politics are a lot different than CA politics so you have no appreciation for the insanity that CA suffers. First off the problem here isn't a problem between African Americans and Whites. African Americans are <6% of the population and make up about 4% of the college population. Most African American activists in California are far more concerned about the failing K-12 schools than they are restoring affirmative action to the University system. The issue is with Latino activists many of whom are so insane nothing short of reverting the borders back to year 1835 and having every white Californian donate a kidney as reparations will make them happy. As far as they are concerned 37.6% of colleges need to be Latino even if only 12% of the applicants are. They have a huge amount of power when dealing with politicians and can quickly doom a politician's career by labeling them anti Latino. They have the political clout to make it happen, and they will stomp all over the 14th amendment if it can get them what they want.

The old system was insane. As far as assuming things will revert to the way things were before prop 209 it's a hell of a lot safer of an assumption than assuming we can give an unregulated power to the universities that allows them to discriminate based upon race. That's a hell of a dangerous assumption you're making while I'm assuming we should error on the side of caution. You also have to look at how horrifically abused affirmative action was in California before prop 209. I remember voting for prop 209, it was in the same year as the first presidential election that I was old enough to vote for. I remember the past, and how bad it was. I also know those who don't remember the past are doomed to repeat it.

PS the reason why this is passing now with no real media attention is it's being throwing in at the same time the CA dream act is going through which conservatives are absolutely losing their minds over. The drama over the CA dream act is so insane the conservative media is almost completely ignoring the overturn of prop 209.

Hey, I realized I wasn't fully aware of what I was talking about an retracted my comments.

I don't overly care much for affirmative action, but I also don't find the applications I've witnessed horribly abusive.

If what you've described is accurate (and I'm willing to concede that it's possible), than that's a different story.

schadenfreude wrote:

Frazzled wrote:

Polonius wrote:

schadenfreude wrote:Ok I'm starting to the bake sale was an epic fail that took attention away from the fact that the CA university system is about to enact a new admission policy that may as well be titled "No Dogs No Asians" and has everybody focused on whether or not GOP baked goods are racist.

Likewise, I'm not sure you're hyperbolic "sky is falling" attitude is the best approach to really discuss the issue.

It's a poorly thought out law that will almost assuredly be stayed by either state or federal courts if implemented the way you argue above.

Well, admissions, prior to 209 tended to fall along these lines, hence the reason for it the first time.
On the positive, its California. Its a states issue and frankly they are imploding on almost a goemetric rate. They deserve the politicians they elected.

My attitude is not hyperbolic. I lived in California before prop 209. I went to high school in California before prop 209. All of my friends finished high school before prop 209. I remember the bad old days when straight A students in AP classes could not get into a California college because the color of their skin was yellow. I remember the demoralizing effect that had on many white and Asian students. I went to a JC in California before prop 209 and saw a campus full of disgruntled Asian students many of whom were rejected from every CA university because the color of their skin was yellow. When I joined the navy I saw a lot of California enlisted members who joined so that they could go to college out of state because their family was too poor to send them to school out of state, and they could not get into a CA college because their color of their skin was yellow. Don't tell me I'm being hyperbolic when I'm the one that lived in CA before 1996, it really was that bad.

The original policies that allowed discrimination against Asians were never overturned by the courts it was CA prop 209 that ended anti Asian racism in the CA universities. As far as placing our faith in the court system to stop racial quotas at CA universities all I have to say is don't hold your breath. It's going to take years to go through the courts and millions of dollars. Who's going to pay for it? Also keep in mind multiple Latino advocate groups will spend millions of $ to defend SB185 in the courts. Also as a good example look at prop 8, after 3 years and millions of $ spent on both sides it's still not resolved.

The only upside that has been pointed was Frazzled reminding everybody that CA is about to financially implode upon it's own butthole, and while that will be awesomely amusing to watch from outside the state it's not good news for any of us that might be in the People's Republic of California when it happens.

Im not having a go at you mate because im totally ignorant of this affair, but I just read your post to my missus (born and raised in CA, left two years ago to live here) said that everything you posted was a huge exaggeration, half of her high school teachers were asian, and that your basically full of gak. She is latino as well btw..

Retort and ill read her it!

mattyrm wrote:

schadenfreude wrote:

Frazzled wrote:

Polonius wrote:

schadenfreude wrote:Ok I'm starting to the bake sale was an epic fail that took attention away from the fact that the CA university system is about to enact a new admission policy that may as well be titled "No Dogs No Asians" and has everybody focused on whether or not GOP baked goods are racist.

Likewise, I'm not sure you're hyperbolic "sky is falling" attitude is the best approach to really discuss the issue.

It's a poorly thought out law that will almost assuredly be stayed by either state or federal courts if implemented the way you argue above.

Well, admissions, prior to 209 tended to fall along these lines, hence the reason for it the first time.
On the positive, its California. Its a states issue and frankly they are imploding on almost a goemetric rate. They deserve the politicians they elected.

My attitude is not hyperbolic. I lived in California before prop 209. I went to high school in California before prop 209. All of my friends finished high school before prop 209. I remember the bad old days when straight A students in AP classes could not get into a California college because the color of their skin was yellow. I remember the demoralizing effect that had on many white and Asian students. I went to a JC in California before prop 209 and saw a campus full of disgruntled Asian students many of whom were rejected from every CA university because the color of their skin was yellow. When I joined the navy I saw a lot of California enlisted members who joined so that they could go to college out of state because their family was too poor to send them to school out of state, and they could not get into a CA college because their color of their skin was yellow. Don't tell me I'm being hyperbolic when I'm the one that lived in CA before 1996, it really was that bad.

The original policies that allowed discrimination against Asians were never overturned by the courts it was CA prop 209 that ended anti Asian racism in the CA universities. As far as placing our faith in the court system to stop racial quotas at CA universities all I have to say is don't hold your breath. It's going to take years to go through the courts and millions of dollars. Who's going to pay for it? Also keep in mind multiple Latino advocate groups will spend millions of $ to defend SB185 in the courts. Also as a good example look at prop 8, after 3 years and millions of $ spent on both sides it's still not resolved.

The only upside that has been pointed was Frazzled reminding everybody that CA is about to financially implode upon it's own butthole, and while that will be awesomely amusing to watch from outside the state it's not good news for any of us that might be in the People's Republic of California when it happens.

Im not having a go at you mate because im totally ignorant of this affair, but I just read your post to my missus (born and raised in CA, left two years ago to live here) said that everything you posted was a huge exaggeration, half of her high school teachers were asian, and that your basically full of gak. She is latino as well btw..

Retort and ill read her it!

In his defense this is a big deal in Asian communities, or was back in the dark ages when I was there. At the time there was some concern that Asians would make up 50% of the University of California student body. Those dern over achievers...

Half baked muffins.

http://ca.opengovernment.org/system/bill_documents/001/221/054/original/sb_185_bill_20110503_amended_sen_v97.html?1310498301

Do not let fear control you. Read the amendment for yourself. The parts that have been crossed out were removed and the parts in italics added.

This bill is to amend the UC system to be in line with the CSU system. Words such as require and shall have been removed and replaced with may. I live in California myself. I am there right now in fact. There is no left wing conspiracy taking place. The California college systems enroll students using various criteria. California recognizes that people come from differing backgrounds and live unique lives. We are a state that celebrates diversity. There is no racism in this policy.

Radiation wrote:Half baked muffins.

http://ca.opengovernment.org/system/bill_documents/001/221/054/original/sb_185_bill_20110503_amended_sen_v97.html?1310498301

Do not let fear control you. Read the amendment for yourself. The parts that have been crossed out were removed and the parts in italics added.

This bill is to amend the UC system to be in line with the CSU system. Words such as require and shall have been removed and replaced with may. I live in California myself. I am there right now in fact. There is no left wing conspiracy taking place. The California college systems enroll students using various criteria. California recognizes that people come from differing backgrounds and live unique lives. We are a state that celebrates diversity. There is no racism in this policy.

Can you explain how this law is consistent with Prop 209?

Radiation wrote:There is no racism in this policy.

Are we making decisions based on the social construct of 'race?'

Yes? Then there is racism, and the folk in California find this particular usage of racism in policy acceptable and just. That's fine.

No? Wait, we're talking about affirmative action right?

Frazzled wrote:

mattyrm wrote:

schadenfreude wrote:

Frazzled wrote:

Polonius wrote:

schadenfreude wrote:Ok I'm starting to the bake sale was an epic fail that took attention away from the fact that the CA university system is about to enact a new admission policy that may as well be titled "No Dogs No Asians" and has everybody focused on whether or not GOP baked goods are racist.

Likewise, I'm not sure you're hyperbolic "sky is falling" attitude is the best approach to really discuss the issue.

It's a poorly thought out law that will almost assuredly be stayed by either state or federal courts if implemented the way you argue above.

Well, admissions, prior to 209 tended to fall along these lines, hence the reason for it the first time.
On the positive, its California. Its a states issue and frankly they are imploding on almost a goemetric rate. They deserve the politicians they elected.

My attitude is not hyperbolic. I lived in California before prop 209. I went to high school in California before prop 209. All of my friends finished high school before prop 209. I remember the bad old days when straight A students in AP classes could not get into a California college because the color of their skin was yellow. I remember the demoralizing effect that had on many white and Asian students. I went to a JC in California before prop 209 and saw a campus full of disgruntled Asian students many of whom were rejected from every CA university because the color of their skin was yellow. When I joined the navy I saw a lot of California enlisted members who joined so that they could go to college out of state because their family was too poor to send them to school out of state, and they could not get into a CA college because their color of their skin was yellow. Don't tell me I'm being hyperbolic when I'm the one that lived in CA before 1996, it really was that bad.

The original policies that allowed discrimination against Asians were never overturned by the courts it was CA prop 209 that ended anti Asian racism in the CA universities. As far as placing our faith in the court system to stop racial quotas at CA universities all I have to say is don't hold your breath. It's going to take years to go through the courts and millions of dollars. Who's going to pay for it? Also keep in mind multiple Latino advocate groups will spend millions of $ to defend SB185 in the courts. Also as a good example look at prop 8, after 3 years and millions of $ spent on both sides it's still not resolved.

The only upside that has been pointed was Frazzled reminding everybody that CA is about to financially implode upon it's own butthole, and while that will be awesomely amusing to watch from outside the state it's not good news for any of us that might be in the People's Republic of California when it happens.

Im not having a go at you mate because im totally ignorant of this affair, but I just read your post to my missus (born and raised in CA, left two years ago to live here) said that everything you posted was a huge exaggeration, half of her high school teachers were asian, and that your basically full of gak. She is latino as well btw..

Retort and ill read her it!

In his defense this is a big deal in Asian communities, or was back in the dark ages when I was there. At the time there was some concern that Asians would make up 50% of the University of California student body. Those dern over achievers...

50% wasn't that far off as Asians make up about 40% of CA college student bodies.

Here is my retort to mattyrm's girlfriend. First off is she is under 33 years old? If so she is graduated high school after prop 209 and is too young to remember the bad old days, which would not be bad at all for a Latino woman.

What specifically did I say that's full of gak? Are her pre 1996 memories of CA universities different than mine (assuming she wasn't in elementary school 15 years ago)

Are any of my statistics full of Gak?

What the does having Asian teachers have anything to do with the topic?

It's easy to say someone is full of gak just to say someone is full of gak without supporting the statement at all.

biccat wrote:

Radiation wrote:Half baked muffins.

http://ca.opengovernment.org/system/bill_documents/001/221/054/original/sb_185_bill_20110503_amended_sen_v97.html?1310498301

Do not let fear control you. Read the amendment for yourself. The parts that have been crossed out were removed and the parts in italics added.

This bill is to amend the UC system to be in line with the CSU system. Words such as require and shall have been removed and replaced with may. I live in California myself. I am there right now in fact. There is no left wing conspiracy taking place. The California college systems enroll students using various criteria. California recognizes that people come from differing backgrounds and live unique lives. We are a state that celebrates diversity. There is no racism in this policy.

Can you explain how this law is consistent with Prop 209?

There is no discrimination or preferential treatment referred to in this amendment or the original policy the bill is amending. That is what Prop 209 is concerned with.

The bill simply states that among a variety of possibilities race may be considered as part of potential students applications. There is nothing in the bill forcing universities to accept the applicant based on race. It is consistent with 209 in both wording and intent, more so then the original Section Code.

The bill simply states that among a variety of possibilities race may be considered as part of potential students applications.

Factoring skin color into the decision to accept/deny an application for schooling might just be something to get worked up about all on its own. Even the offhanded "Oh, and hey, it's cool if you pull this." is enough to deserve raised eyebrows.

Radiation wrote:

biccat wrote:

Radiation wrote:Half baked muffins.

http://ca.opengovernment.org/system/bill_documents/001/221/054/original/sb_185_bill_20110503_amended_sen_v97.html?1310498301

Do not let fear control you. Read the amendment for yourself. The parts that have been crossed out were removed and the parts in italics added.

This bill is to amend the UC system to be in line with the CSU system. Words such as require and shall have been removed and replaced with may. I live in California myself. I am there right now in fact. There is no left wing conspiracy taking place. The California college systems enroll students using various criteria. California recognizes that people come from differing backgrounds and live unique lives. We are a state that celebrates diversity. There is no racism in this policy.

Can you explain how this law is consistent with Prop 209?

There is no discrimination or preferential treatment referred to in this amendment or the original policy the bill is amending. That is what Prop 209 is concerned with.

The bill simply states that among a variety of possibilities race may be considered as part of potential students applications. There is nothing in the bill forcing universities to accept the applicant based on race. It is consistent with 209 in both wording and intent, more so then the original Section Code.

It's not the Senate and Assembly are attempting to gut prop 209.

From the very words of the link you just posted.

(c) (1) Pursuant to subdivision (b), the University of California
may, and the California State University shall
may , consider race, gender, ethnicity, national origin,
geographic origin, and household income, along with other relevant
factors, in undergraduate and graduate admissions, so long as no
preference is given.

Now there are 2 ways to read what was just said. It either means the bill is completely toothless and will accomplish nothing because no preference will ever be given in the admissions process. If that's the case why pass the bill if it does absolutely nothing? The other way to read it is to ask the simple question "Define Preference" Is reaching a goal a preference? They are not going to give preference, they are going to reach goals. Goals is affirmative action speak for racial quotas, so as they discriminate against Asians they will have the moxie to save nobody is getting any preference. If I'm right the bill will bring back the bad old days of race based discrimination in the UC system. If I'm wrong than the bill will do absolutely nothing but be a waste of tax payer money that has has the future potential of being abused. Either way can anybody give me a good reason why CA needs the bill?

I love the arrogance in saying there is no racism in this policy that is going to reject the college applications of Asian students because of the color of their skin. The language change in the bill is purely cosmetic. All they did was change to wording from mandatory racism against Asians to discretionary racism against Asians at the discretion of unelected bureaucrats. It still opens the door wide open to racism against Asians in the UC admission process with no oversight or accountability to the people. Prop 209 is working just fine, there is no need to overturn it.

LOL I'm a liberal, though I still find this hilarious. I find almost any satire hilarious actually....

biccat wrote:In their defense, this is at U.C. Berkeley. Childish student politics designed to provoke outrage is probably a requirement for graduation. Ever see PCU? That's Berkeley, except there's no redemption or cool kids, just faux outrage and political correctness.

True.

No, they're charging whites more. As for the rest, while racism might be acceptable in Australia, we've actually got laws (the Constitution) that prevent racial discrimination.

Ah, yes, so they are. Hmm, so it isn't even particularly well thought out satire.

I have no idea what the point of the little dig in your last comment is about, and I really don't want to get into a discussion on as complex a subject as affirmative action with someone who'd be willing to assume so much about my point of view on the subject.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Frazzled wrote:But then again its UC Berkeley. People who want to go to Berkely need to be sent to Australia re-education facilities to begin with.

"Right. See that croc? Pull its tail. No they love it."

Are you kidding me? UC Berkeley is hands down the best way to get yourself a professorship teaching liberal arts. Can you imagine anything sweeter than getting paid a small fortune to argue pointless nonsense?

sebster wrote:Ah, yes, so they are. Hmm, so it isn't even particularly well thought out satire.

Huh? It's perfectly good satire. Under affirmative action non-white actors get non-preferential treatment, same as with the bake sale.

Amaya wrote:No. They're charging white people the most $2 per muffin. Women are charge 25 cents less. Native Americans are charged $.25.

Read the OP before you start going off at the mouth.

You're right. And swapping it around totally changes the meaning and completely underwrites my point about it being inane student politics.

Or it's irrelevant piffle that doesn't mean anything. They could have charged blue eyed people more, and gingers less. It doesn't matter. That's the point of satire.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Frazzled wrote:And that means all...


Here's some more cool corporate phrases.

Quality is Job One
We promise it works this time.
We are committed to diversity as long as its our approved divserity.
14th Amendment? Who cares?
Jim Crow, its not just a name. Its a lifestyle.
We need Living Room.
Sometimes you have to destroy a village to save a village.

Or there's Citibank "Where money lives".

Which is less classic and more just damn creepy, but still.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

biccat wrote:Huh? It's perfectly good satire. Under affirmative action non-white actors get non-preferential treatment, same as with the bake sale.

Inverting it would get a stronger reaction. You want to justify giving cheaper tuition to minorities, well we're going to justify giving cheaper muffins to white kids. It gives the opportunity to justify it with all kinds of social science nonsense.

"White children are born into homes and immediately distanced from the kitchen, which remains the literal and figurative territory of the latino maids that quickly come to dominate their lives. They are denied the right to explore cooking and foor preparation that other children are lucky enough to take for granted as they single handedly raise their 27 siblings. It is for this reason that white children are entitled to, nay have the right to, cheaper muffins. It is only through providing muffins at a cheaper rate to white children that we can get an equal number of muffins to white children and break the stranglehold on muffin ownership previously claimed as assumed privilege by the minority races."

biccat wrote:

Radiation wrote:Half baked muffins.

http://ca.opengovernment.org/system/bill_documents/001/221/054/original/sb_185_bill_20110503_amended_sen_v97.html?1310498301

Do not let fear control you. Read the amendment for yourself. The parts that have been crossed out were removed and the parts in italics added.

This bill is to amend the UC system to be in line with the CSU system. Words such as require and shall have been removed and replaced with may. I live in California myself. I am there right now in fact. There is no left wing conspiracy taking place. The California college systems enroll students using various criteria. California recognizes that people come from differing backgrounds and live unique lives. We are a state that celebrates diversity. There is no racism in this policy.

Can you explain how this law is consistent with Prop 209?

Forget 209. How is the law, as vague as it is, in compliance with the 14th Amendment, put in place to insure that slavery and racial discrimination are ended once and for all? A racial spoils system is still racism.

schadenfreude wrote:

50% wasn't that far off as Asians make up about 40% of CA college student bodies.

Here is my retort to mattyrm's girlfriend. First off is she is under 33 years old? If so she is graduated high school after prop 209 and is too young to remember the bad old days, which would not be bad at all for a Latino woman.

What specifically did I say that's full of gak? Are her pre 1996 memories of CA universities different than mine (assuming she wasn't in elementary school 15 years ago)

Are any of my statistics full of Gak?

What the does having Asian teachers have anything to do with the topic?

It's easy to say someone is full of gak just to say someone is full of gak without supporting the statement at all.

Yeah she is only 26 mate, she's no doubt unaware of the situation fully.

The thing about the teachers was that no doubt they would have mentioned this issue at some point, as she had great relationships with some of them and keeps in touch with a couple, but she said if it was an issue they would have spoken at their frustration about it, and they didn't.

Im sure she is too young to recall though.. she shoots her mouth off too early with me as well.

If you want to talk about the dental status of SB 185 as "toothless" just look at Prop 209 and its Federal Funding Exemption. Prop 209 is wearing a nice and removable set of dentures for when the Feds show up with twenty dollars. The horror.

According to the 14th Amendment, and to keep this debate interactive, I will ask you to point out where SB 185 abridges, deprives, or denies anyone the right to apply for college.

I feel your pain.