Charlie Kirk: If white privilege existed...

[P1tchblack]

Pitch, your libertarian bona fides are fading fast over the last few days.  

Why? Because i think universities have obvious reason to look at things other than test scores and grades for admissions?

[Hightop77]

Pitch, your libertarian bona fides are fading fast over the last few days.  

Why? Because i think universities have obvious reason to look at things other than test scores and grades for admissions?

Don't forget your desire to reward non-whites for their lack of achievement.

[P1tchblack]

Pitch, your libertarian bona fides are fading fast over the last few days.  

Why? Because i think universities have obvious reason to look at things other than test scores and grades for admissions?

Don't forget your desire to reward non-whites for their lack of achievement.

Not sure what you're talking about.

[Hightop77]

Pitch, your libertarian bona fides are fading fast over the last few days.  

Why? Because i think universities have obvious reason to look at things other than test scores and grades for admissions?

Don't forget your desire to reward non-whites for their lack of achievement.

Not sure what you're talking about.

Don't play dumb.  You clearly said non-whites with low test scores and low grades should have places set aside for them anyway.  That is rewarding mediocrity.

[ScarletHayes]

Pitch, your libertarian bona fides are fading fast over the last few days.  

Why? Because i think universities have obvious reason to look at things other than test scores and grades for admissions?

If it's a private institution then they should be able to do whatever they want, but when you are a publicly funded university?  AA is the very definition of racial discrimination.  

Test scores and grades at a *school* are kind of important.  Imagine picking the finalists for the 100 yard dash based on things besides times.

[P1tchblack]

Pitch, your libertarian bona fides are fading fast over the last few days.  

Why? Because i think universities have obvious reason to look at things other than test scores and grades for admissions?

If it's a private institution then they should be able to do whatever they want, but when you are a publicly funded university?  AA is the very definition of racial discrimination.  

Test scores and grades at a *school* are kind of important.  Imagine picking the finalists for the 100 yard dash based on things besides times.

 maybe affirmative action is the wrong word because of the stigma tied to it. You can pick a different term or phrase to say that's test scores and high school grades should not be the only factor in University admissions.  It should be applied to all Races.

[3rdgensooner]

Pitch, your libertarian bona fides are fading fast over the last few days.  

Why? Because i think universities have obvious reason to look at things other than test scores and grades for admissions?

If it's a private institution then they should be able to do whatever they want, but when you are a publicly funded university?  AA is the very definition of racial discrimination.  

Test scores and grades at a *school* are kind of important.  Imagine picking the finalists for the 100 yard dash based on things besides times.

 maybe affirmative action is the wrong word because of the stigma tied to it. You can pick a different term or phrase to say that's test scores and high school grades should not be the only factor in University admissions.  It should be applied to all Races.

This is where the Asians get screwed big time. Was it Harvard getting sued about this? Strangely the black and Hispanic kids did way better than the Asian kids on all the intangible stuff they threw into the mix. Apparently Asian kids are robots with nothing to offer but more intelligence.

[P1tchblack]

Pitch, your libertarian bona fides are fading fast over the last few days.  

Why? Because i think universities have obvious reason to look at things other than test scores and grades for admissions?

Don't forget your desire to reward non-whites for their lack of achievement.

Not sure what you're talking about.

Don't play dumb.  You clearly said non-whites with low test scores and low grades should have places set aside for them anyway.  That is rewarding mediocrity.

If it has been proved that standardized test scores and high school GPA aren't reflective of future success, why would you only consider those two criteria?  What do you think is more important to a university: the GPA of their students or how they represent the school in the business world?

[P1tchblack]

Pitch, your libertarian bona fides are fading fast over the last few days.  

Why? Because i think universities have obvious reason to look at things other than test scores and grades for admissions?

If it's a private institution then they should be able to do whatever they want, but when you are a publicly funded university?  AA is the very definition of racial discrimination.  

Test scores and grades at a *school* are kind of important.  Imagine picking the finalists for the 100 yard dash based on things besides times.

 maybe affirmative action is the wrong word because of the stigma tied to it. You can pick a different term or phrase to say that's test scores and high school grades should not be the only factor in University admissions.  It should be applied to all Races.

This is where the Asians get screwed big time. Was it Harvard getting sued about this? Strangely the black and Hispanic kids did way better than the Asian kids on all the intangible stuff they threw into the mix. Apparently Asian kids are robots with nothing to offer but more intelligence.

If you acknowledge that intelligence and grades aren't the only factors in future success, then it makes sense that Asians may not do as well once they leave school, even though they kick everyone's @ss IN school.  There are a lot of geniuses that couldn't run a successful hotdog stand despite being really smart.

[3rdgensooner]

It's been proven rather solidly that GPA and test scores are very predictive of future success in college and after. The subjective measures should be used carefully to discriminate among those of equal testing not to elevate the less capable over the more capable. 
Also remember college is a starting point for many students. There's a level of intelligence below which you just are not going to be doing many things in academics. People with lower SAT scores aren't going to be doing science research, going to medical school, or writing novels. They just aren't. We need to be taking the best from an intelligence perspective and using subjective measures to decide between equally capable students. If that means the elite institutions are 100% Asians then so be it. Diversity is bullshit.

[P1tchblack]

It's been proven rather solidly that GPA and test scores are very predictive of future success in college and after. The subjective measures should be used carefully to discriminate among those of equal testing not to elevate the less capable over the more capable. 
Also remember college is a starting point for many students. There's a level of intelligence below which you just are not going to be doing many things in academics. People with lower SAT scores aren't going to be doing science research, going to medical school, or writing novels. They just aren't. We need to be taking the best from an intelligence perspective and using subjective measures to decide between equally capable students. If that means the elite institutions are 100% Asians then so be it. Diversity is bullshit.

It's been proven rather solidly that GPA and test scores are very predictive of future success in college and after.

That's an assumption that everyone makes, but has rarely been tested.  The study that University of Michigan's Law School conducted showed that the minority students who were accepted, despite significantly lower grade/test score qualifications, performed nearly identically to, if not better than, the "standard" students when their long term career success was compared.

[3rdgensooner]

It's been proven rather solidly that GPA and test scores are very predictive of future success in college and after. The subjective measures should be used carefully to discriminate among those of equal testing not to elevate the less capable over the more capable. 
Also remember college is a starting point for many students. There's a level of intelligence below which you just are not going to be doing many things in academics. People with lower SAT scores aren't going to be doing science research, going to medical school, or writing novels. They just aren't. We need to be taking the best from an intelligence perspective and using subjective measures to decide between equally capable students. If that means the elite institutions are 100% Asians then so be it. Diversity is bullshit.

It's been proven rather solidly that GPA and test scores are very predictive of future success in college and after.

That's an assumption that everyone makes, but has rarely been tested.  The study that University of Michigan's Law School conducted showed that the minority students who were accepted, despite significantly lower grade/test score qualifications, performed nearly identically to, if not better than, the "standard" students when their long term career success was compared.

Geez some liberal pseudointellectuals "found' that did they? Color me shocked. Of course people with lower test scores are as capable and successful as those with higher scores. C'mon. They just aren't.  Why doesn't Michigan just do away with the LSAT then? Of course that's law school. Measuring how dishonest a scumbag you are would likely be the best predictor of future success for that cohort.

[P1tchblack]

It's been proven rather solidly that GPA and test scores are very predictive of future success in college and after. The subjective measures should be used carefully to discriminate among those of equal testing not to elevate the less capable over the more capable. 
Also remember college is a starting point for many students. There's a level of intelligence below which you just are not going to be doing many things in academics. People with lower SAT scores aren't going to be doing science research, going to medical school, or writing novels. They just aren't. We need to be taking the best from an intelligence perspective and using subjective measures to decide between equally capable students. If that means the elite institutions are 100% Asians then so be it. Diversity is bullshit.

It's been proven rather solidly that GPA and test scores are very predictive of future success in college and after.

That's an assumption that everyone makes, but has rarely been tested.  The study that University of Michigan's Law School conducted showed that the minority students who were accepted, despite significantly lower grade/test score qualifications, performed nearly identically to, if not better than, the "standard" students when their long term career success was compared.

Geez some liberal pseudointellectuals "found' that did they? Color me shocked. Of course people with lower test scores are as capable and successful as those with higher scores. C'mon. They just aren't.  Why doesn't Michigan just do away with the LSAT then? Of course that's law school. Measuring how dishonest a scumbag you are would likely be the best predictor of future success for that cohort.

UofM did their own internal study for their own information.  It's not like they had an ulterior motive.  It's not like the people that were selected were mentally retarded, they just didn't have standardized test scores or gpa that is normally required.  It can't be that surprising that the people that have the noses buried in books, 24/7, may not have the skills required to be successful at all jobs.

[3rdgensooner]

It's been proven rather solidly that GPA and test scores are very predictive of future success in college and after. The subjective measures should be used carefully to discriminate among those of equal testing not to elevate the less capable over the more capable. 
Also remember college is a starting point for many students. There's a level of intelligence below which you just are not going to be doing many things in academics. People with lower SAT scores aren't going to be doing science research, going to medical school, or writing novels. They just aren't. We need to be taking the best from an intelligence perspective and using subjective measures to decide between equally capable students. If that means the elite institutions are 100% Asians then so be it. Diversity is bullshit.

It's been proven rather solidly that GPA and test scores are very predictive of future success in college and after.

That's an assumption that everyone makes, but has rarely been tested.  The study that University of Michigan's Law School conducted showed that the minority students who were accepted, despite significantly lower grade/test score qualifications, performed nearly identically to, if not better than, the "standard" students when their long term career success was compared.

Geez some liberal pseudointellectuals "found' that did they? Color me shocked. Of course people with lower test scores are as capable and successful as those with higher scores. C'mon. They just aren't.  Why doesn't Michigan just do away with the LSAT then? Of course that's law school. Measuring how dishonest a scumbag you are would likely be the best predictor of future success for that cohort.

UofM did their own internal study for their own information.  It's not like they had an ulterior motive.  It's not like the people that were selected were mentally retarded, they just didn't have standardized test scores or gpa that is normally required.  It can't be that surprising that the people that have the noses buried in books, 24/7, may not have the skills required to be successful at all jobs.

BS. Liberal "academics" In pseudosciences do biased studies all the time. Read a sociology journal some time. It's a real eye opener. I doubt law is much different given it's a lefty field. Can you cite the study showing reading a lot decreases certain job skills? The fact is they like subjective measures because they can manipulate them to have their desired outcome. In this case "diversity". The notion the less intelligent will do as well as the more intelligent is false regardless of a "study" by lawyers.

[Hightop77]

It's been proven rather solidly that GPA and test scores are very predictive of future success in college and after. The subjective measures should be used carefully to discriminate among those of equal testing not to elevate the less capable over the more capable. 
Also remember college is a starting point for many students. There's a level of intelligence below which you just are not going to be doing many things in academics. People with lower SAT scores aren't going to be doing science research, going to medical school, or writing novels. They just aren't. We need to be taking the best from an intelligence perspective and using subjective measures to decide between equally capable students. If that means the elite institutions are 100% Asians then so be it. Diversity is bullshit.

It's been proven rather solidly that GPA and test scores are very predictive of future success in college and after.

That's an assumption that everyone makes, but has rarely been tested.  The study that University of Michigan's Law School conducted showed that the minority students who were accepted, despite significantly lower grade/test score qualifications, performed nearly identically to, if not better than, the "standard" students when their long term career success was compared.

Geez some liberal pseudointellectuals "found' that did they? Color me shocked. Of course people with lower test scores are as capable and successful as those with higher scores. C'mon. They just aren't.  Why doesn't Michigan just do away with the LSAT then? Of course that's law school. Measuring how dishonest a scumbag you are would likely be the best predictor of future success for that cohort.

UofM did their own internal study for their own information.  It's not like they had an ulterior motive.  It's not like the people that were selected were mentally retarded, they just didn't have standardized test scores or gpa that is normally required.  It can't be that surprising that the people that have the noses buried in books, 24/7, may not have the skills required to be successful at all jobs.

So if academics are meaningless to success then why does UM charge so much for tuition for preparing people for careers?  If you want to be a brain surgeon just hang out a shingle and see how successful you can be without going to medical school.  Forget all those standardized tests, GPA's and certifications.