http://www.dailyfreepress.com/media/storage/paper87/news/2006/11/21/News/Bu.Group.Offers.White.Scholarship-2505837.shtml?sourcedomain=www.dailyfreepress.com&MIIHost=media.collegepublisher.com" target="_blank">http://media.http://www.dailyfreepress.com/media/storage/paper87/news/2006/11/21/News/Bu.Group.Offers.White.Scholarship-2505837.shtml?sourcedomain=www.dailyfreepress.com&MIIHost=media.collegepublisher.com

Quote :

"Looking to draw attention to what they call the "worst form of bigotry confronting America today," Boston University's College Republicans are circulating an application for a "Caucasian Achievement and Recognition Scholarship" that requires applicants be at least 25 percent Caucasian. "Did we do this to give a scholarship to white kids? Of course not," the scholarship reads. "Did we do it to trigger a discussion on what we believe to be the morally wrong practice of basing decisions in our schools and our jobs on racial preferences rather than merit? Absolutely." The scholarship, which is privately funded by the BUCR without the support of the university, is meant to raise awareness, group members say. BUCR member argue that racial preferences are a form of "bigotry." The group has a similar view on affirmative action. The application for the $250 scholarship, due Nov. 30, requires applicants be full-time BU undergraduate students and one-fourth Caucasian and maintain at least a 3.2 cumulative GPA. Applicants must submit two essays, one describing the applicant's ancestry and one describing "what it means to you to be a Caucasian-American today." BUCR President Joe Mroszczyk said he spoke to Dean of Students Kenneth Elmore before publicly releasing the scholarship to make sure it would be legal. Mroszczyk said BUCR members also talked to others beforehand, some of whom were initially "agitated or upset" but understood the point after members explained themselves, he said. "

11/21/2006 7:13:12 PM

this was done years ago

11/21/2006 7:29:10 PM

if you really cared about this topic you would try and solve it rather than pulling douche moves like this.

11/21/2006 8:24:23 PM

They should, there are white kids out there who can't even spell Boston.

11/21/2006 8:40:14 PM

Dental, how exactly do you go about solving it?
What you need is a court case to set a precedent...maybe a lawsuit of a particular scholarship based on race. Perhaps they're fosetering discussion of the issue through a publicity stunt in hopes to begin a movement to solve the problem.

Do you really think symbolic protests of all kinds are stupid?

11/21/2006 8:41:28 PM

I remember some college republicans did a bake sale where the food cost less if you were black or something

11/21/2006 9:08:16 PM

In NC, most schools take students by county.

Lots of poorly educated white kids with low test scores get into colleges based on the fact that they come from an uneducated area.

Am I the only one who has noticed this?

[Edited on November 21, 2006 at 9:12 PM. Reason : sss]

11/21/2006 9:12:01 PM

Science and Math does it

11/21/2006 9:26:44 PM

They should ban all white people from going to college for one year, then eliminate affirmative action (after the year).

Or they could keep affirmative action, and slowly phase it out over the next 10-20 years.

11/21/2006 10:06:29 PM

Quote :

"Am I the only one who has noticed this?"

No, it is just as outrageous.

11/21/2006 10:28:19 PM

God, damnit I can't access the news article anymore w/o a BU student account. Jorks.

11/21/2006 11:20:13 PM

Should the gov. do anything to make amends for screwing over black people?

11/21/2006 11:28:56 PM

http://www.opinionjournal.com/diary/?id=110009275

(Warning: It is the Wall Street Journal Editorial Page.)

The state of Michigan joined Washington State and California that banned racial discrimination of any kind in a referendum in the recent midterm election (i.e. no affirmative action in universities at all).

The (black) mayor of Detroit for some reason paraphrased George Wallace in describing why affirmative action should stay...good choice Kwame.

Quote :

"Michigan voters struck a blow for equality this month, when 58% of them approved an amendment to the state constitution banning racial discrimination in public universities and contracting. Almost identical measures have previously passed by similar majorities in California and Washington state. That means the original meaning of the 1964 Civil Rights Act--that racial discrimination of any kind is illegal--has won reaffirmation in three liberal states, none of which have voted for a Republican for president since 1988. Supporters now plan to carry the fight to other states. From the outraged cries of affirmative action diehards, you would think the dark night of fascism was descending with the passage of the Michigan Civil Rights Initiative. Mary Sue Coleman is president of the University of Michigan, which has already spent millions of taxpayers' dollars defending its racial preferences in courts. She addressed what Tom Bray of the Detroit News called "a howling mob of hundreds of student and faculty protestors" last week. "Diversity matters at Michigan," she declared. "It matters today, and it will matter tomorrow." Echoes of George Wallace, who in 1963 declared from the steps of Alabama's Capitol: "I say segregation now, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever." Ms. Coleman isn't the only Michigan official to employ Wallace-style rhetoric against MCRI. Detroit's Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick told a fundraiser last April that the measure would usher in an era of racial prejudice. "Bring it on!" he bellowed. "We will affirm to the world that affirmative action will be here today, it will be here tomorrow, and there will be affirmative action in the state forever." Another leader in Michigan's massive resistance is Karen Moss, the executive director of the state ACLU. "I do think it's necessary for the courts to slow this thing down and . . . interpret some of the language," she told the Washington Post. That "thing" is an amendment that simply states: "The state shall not discriminate against, or grant preferential treatment to, any individual or group on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin in the operation of public employment, public education, or public contracting." As the blog Discriminations.us notes, "What part of that language does the ACLU find vague or unclear and in need of "interpretation'?" "

Have to say I side with the 58% of voters in Michigan. One of the nasty little secrets about affirmative action is how racist the program is to some ethnic groups. The overwhelming vast majority (over 90%) of the benefit goes to African-Americans, while they only make up around 40% or so of the non-white residents of our country. I've yet to once hear this ever brought up, and why Hispanics do not is beyond me.

[Edited on November 22, 2006 at 12:22 AM. Reason : .]

11/22/2006 12:16:44 AM

Quote :

"Should the gov. do anything to make amends for screwing over black people?"

Yes. They should end slavery. They should allow the vote of all black citizens to be counted as 1 rather than 3/5. Once they get that done, they should end all these god damn Jim Crowe laws and end this ridiculous forced segregation. Think they'll get that done this century?

11/22/2006 7:47:02 AM

Quote :

"they should end all these god damn Jim Crowe laws and end this ridiculous forced segregation."

But you're okay with de facto segregation?

If the government has an opportunity to keep schools integrated, you'd support that, right?

11/22/2006 11:40:54 AM

Quote :

"But you're okay with de facto segregation?"

Been to a church lately?

11/22/2006 11:50:20 AM

I'm actually ok with de facto segregation. Do you get pissed becuase all the kids at your high school lived near you? Do you think you need a fresh perspective by busing in kids from other areas so you don't have such a uniform group of people?

To think you need to force integration based on race is ridiculous. If I live in an area with no black kids, there's no reason for us to go bus them in so I can see brown faces.

Have you ever noticed that even when you bus kids of different ethnicities in so they'll have integration that they still segregate themselvses for lunch and recess? I went to a school that was 25% black and at lunch there were maybe 15 black kids that sat with the white kids and 2 white kids that sat with the black kids at lunch. The same for the parties after school and all socialization. It wasn't that the black kids hated the white kids or vice versa, it is simply that people often get along better with like-minded people and the black kids tended to come from similar backgrounds.

Are you going to force the kids to integrate in that regard too, or do you only care so long as we pretend they've integrated?

11/22/2006 11:53:01 AM

^agreed, but only to an extent. I think the premise for forcing integration in schools is to make sure that minority students have access to the same facilities that exist at mostly white schools. In general, the white population has more money and can make larger donations to the schools where their kids go to and in turn their children can get a better education. By busting students in you are allowing those minority students to have access to the same facilities, whether they choose to take up on the offer once there is up to them.

Quote :

" One of the nasty little secrets about affirmative action is how racist the program is to some ethnic groups. The overwhelming vast majority (over 90%) of the benefit goes to African-Americans, while they only make up around 40% or so of the non-white residents of our country. I've yet to once hear this ever brought up, and why Hispanics do not is beyond me."

Probably because hispanic isn't seen as a race, bright guy. Not to mention blacks are 2/3 of the minority make up in america. Please have facts to go with what you say, because otherwise it discredits your entire point. In case you disagree with me, feel free to check the cia world fact book.

11/22/2006 12:34:20 PM

^ The Census Bureau disagrees.

Quote :

"According to the Census Bureau, 2005 American Community Survey the US population is as follows: White American, 74.7%, or about 215.3 million (the definition of White includes European Americans, North African Americans, Middle Eastern Americans (e.g. Arab Americans), Central Asian Americans, and Hispanic Americans who reported as White in the 2000 Census) Black or African American 12.1% or 34.9 million Asian American 4.3% or 12.5 million, American Indian 0.8% or 2.4 million Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander 0.1% or 0.4 million Two or more races 1.9% or 5.6 million Other 6% or 17.3 million "

100-74.7=25.3

12.1/25.3=47.8% of the minority is black.

They still get better than 90% of the benefit of affirmative action.

11/22/2006 1:11:30 PM

I totally see what you mean when you talk about black schools not getting the same parental involvement. But I think the correct move is school choice (like a lot of Europe) rather than forced busing.

11/22/2006 1:15:37 PM

^agreed, good option.

And ^^

Ethnic groups:
Definition Field Listing
white 81.7%, black 12.9%, Asian 4.2%, Amerindian and Alaska native 1%, native Hawaiian and other Pacific islander 0.2%
note: a separate listing for Hispanic is not included because the US Census Bureau considers Hispanic to mean a person of Latin American descent (including persons of Cuban, Mexican, or Puerto Rican origin) living in the US who may be of any race or ethnic group (white, black, Asian, etc.)
100-81.7=18.3

12.9/18.3 = 0.7049

meaning 70.49% of the minority population is african american. I'll trust CIA world fact book. Please link me to your source, until then...you stand corrected.

Thanks

11/22/2006 2:13:37 PM

^ http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/ACSSAFFFacts?_submenuId=factsheet_0&_sse=on

11/22/2006 2:36:50 PM

once again I'm going to have to debunk.

total minority population: 58,555,450
total black population: 37,909,341

37,909,341
---------- = 0.647409268 or 64.7%, near the 2/3 i stated initially.
58,555,450


I got this from http://www.census.gov/popest/national/asrh/NC-EST2005-srh.html

notice, census.gov

I'll trust that this is correct, but it is understandable how you were misled.

[Edited on November 22, 2006 at 3:21 PM. Reason : i was being a dick]

11/22/2006 3:17:46 PM

Quote :

"Yes. They should end slavery. They should allow the vote of all black citizens to be counted as 1 rather than 3/5. Once they get that done, they should end all these god damn Jim Crowe laws and end this ridiculous forced segregation. Think they'll get that done this century? "

Those measures don't do anything to fix the damage caused to the black society/culture. It's because blacks were left lingering around for almost a century before the gov. made any effort to help them that they are exhibiting lower scores and economic status.

11/22/2006 3:26:48 PM

School choice is bullshit. It's just another way for white people to segregate themselves from black people.

I mean, all these people move to Wake County and buy a $500,000 home and then get all pissed that their kids
have to go to school with black kids. They think they can buy their way out of integration. But they don't get it...
when the real estate agent says Wake Cty. has overall the best schools in North Carolina and is considered a model
for similar areas across the nation, the agent isn't bullshitting. The disparity between schools in places like
Charlotte and Greensboro is disturbing.

We have a good thing going here in Wake County, and the fact that people want to change that simply to promote
segregation is disgusting.

11/22/2006 4:07:05 PM

I'm curious as to what justification you see for the government to force any one group of people to associate with another?

11/22/2006 4:47:10 PM

It has none. But they're not forcing them to associate with them, they are allowing them to have the same access to the same faciliites that all of their tax dollars pay for. If they were forcing them to associate with each other a high school cafeteria wouldnt look like a damn ying yang.

11/22/2006 4:56:51 PM

imo people should have no control over which public school their child goes to. Your tax dollars pay for the well being of the public schools and the well being of the citizens who wish to use them. If you dont want your kids to be bused to a school full of black kids than pay for a private school. If you cant afford that then deal with it because your kid still gets free school. The government isnt forcing you to do anything other than taking alittle bit of your money to help those people who wish to go to public school. If people gave money on their own to schools than that would be great but most low income areas dont have that kind of financial backing to support a school or a school system for that matter. If you dont want your money to support well being of society then you should move somewhere else.

also black schools have cooler marching bands.

11/22/2006 5:16:08 PM

How is school choice a way to segregate people?

Do you think all the white people don't tell the black people where they're going to send their children? They keep it a secret at the local klansmeeting so the niggers won't choose the same school?

Black parents will choose good schools for their kids and white parents will choose those same good schools for their kids.

Or does it work some other way in "crazy liberal land"

I'm talking about the school choice methods that work wonders in Europe now and most likely explain why our children get their asses handed to them in standardized tests.

11/22/2006 5:16:08 PM

Quote :

"Black parents will choose good schools for their kids and white parents will choose those same good schools for their kids."

No, black parents will choose schools close to them, and white parents will choose schools close to them.

11/22/2006 5:24:45 PM

How do they do it in europe? Do people get to choose their own schools?

if this is the case then it might be why there is a huge amount of racial tension there. If you dont grow up with people of different cultures and economic groups then when you become an adult you will most likely wont want to be around them then either.

also I believe the reasons for poor testing in US schools goes much deeper than people not picking which school they wish to attend.

11/22/2006 5:57:08 PM

they shoulda done that decades ago.

11/22/2006 8:50:47 PM

http://oldfraser.lexi.net/publications/critical_issues/1999/school_choice/section_06.html
This is a quick link about how it is done in Sweden.

Quote :

"No, black parents will choose schools close to them, and white parents will choose schools close to them."

a) An assertion. Do you have any substantiation?
b) You think parents don't care about the quality of school their child attends? I mean, if people are willing to MOVE to avoid going to a school that isn't as good, as you pointed out before, why wouldn't they be willing to use their voucher on a school a little further away.

Apparantly it isn't parents that give a shit about what types of schools their children go to, its only Big Brother that notices the differences and wants to change them by forcing our kids to go to schools that are far away.

11/22/2006 9:37:37 PM

sounds interesting. Not sure how that would work here tho.

11/22/2006 9:44:49 PM

Quote :

"a) An assertion. Do you have any substantiation?"

Forsyth County is one that comes to mind. Almost any school system with school choice will show it.

Quote :

"b) You think parents don't care about the quality of school their child attends? I mean, if people are willing to MOVE to avoid going to a school that isn't as good, as you pointed out before, why wouldn't they be willing to use their voucher on a school a little further away."

That's what's cool about Wake County. No need for vouchers or moving because we strive to make all of our schools successful,
generally and sometimes in a specialty.

Quote :

"Apparantly it isn't parents that give a shit about what types of schools their children go to, its only Big Brother that notices the differences and wants to change them by forcing our kids to go to schools that are far away."

Before when you were talking vouchers, you said "a little further away," but now that you're talking about bussing,
you say "far away." Care to explain?

[Edited on November 22, 2006 at 9:52 PM. Reason : ?]

11/22/2006 9:51:58 PM

Well, it has been used limitedly in some U.S. cities. I am not aware of any fully comprehensive studies of how it would work here. My guess is that it would work well, but there are some people that think breaking up the government monopoly on education is fundamentally a bad thing. I think Hitler would have had a major problem with it, because schools are the way to control the masses. Other, facists and Big Brother lovers, like Bridget, feel the same way.

11/22/2006 9:52:44 PM

^Are you talking about privatizing schools? School choice is different from that.

And what does wanting to promote integration in schools have to do with fascism and Big Brother?

11/22/2006 9:58:25 PM

Yes, I'm talking about privatizing schools. It is different from what you might think of as school choice, but it is the ultimate "school choice"

Also,
promote != force

[Edited on November 23, 2006 at 10:54 AM. Reason : .]

11/23/2006 10:54:29 AM

Quote :

"Also, promote != force"

1. We promote school integration by assigning people to schools so there aren't too many students getting
free or reduced price lunches at any one school.

2. You cannot call it "force" when private schools are still available.

Quote :

"Yes, I'm talking about privatizing schools. It is different from what you might think of as school choice, but it is the ultimate "school choice""

See, one thing I like about public schools is that it means, no matter what, our children will always have a place
to go to get educated. Education is so basic and so important that I can't imagine ever making someone pay for
it.

As far as "vouchers" go, you know what they do. The voucher will give poor people just enough money to go to
a crappy school. And it will give middle class people just enough of a boost to finally get their kids away from
the poor kids that they begrudgingly send their children to school with now.

You're so in love with the market, with privatization, that you can't see the social consequences of
privatizing education.

Furthermore, you've yet to prove that private is better. Aside from very expensive prep schools and the like, I've
not been wildly impressed with my privately schooled peers.

[Edited on November 23, 2006 at 11:44 AM. Reason : sss]

11/23/2006 11:25:19 AM

^ along with privatizing them they are subsidizing them. Money is removed from the equation. This however is what socialist countries do and most americans will shit a brick.

11/23/2006 2:07:34 PM

i'm going to come right out and say that i haven't taken the time to read much more of this since I last posted.

But on the issue of privatizing schools, would that not have the same affect as only having schools based on districts. I mean many black families would not be able to financially send their children to the better of the private schools. Thus, instead of paying a little in taxes for shitty schools, they'll be paying a lot out of pocket directly for shitty schools.

if this has been covered already, i apologize.

11/23/2006 10:10:33 PM

Quote :

"You're so in love with the market, with privatization, that you can't see the social consequences of privatizing education. Furthermore, you've yet to prove that private is better. Aside from very expensive prep schools and the like,"

You're so in love with the government that you can't see how shitty it works when it tries to provide a public good. These aren't "vouchers" in the sense you are thinking. They are the entire amount of state provided cash for the child. They take that to any school they choose and the school cashes the check to educate the child. It doesn't give poor people just enough money to go to a shitty school, it gives them just enough money to go to more schools than they could have chosen before.

Also, if I have to prove that private is better, why don't you have to prove that public is better. I use comparisons across countries to show that my system is better and you, as usual, hand out vague assertions instead.

Quote :

"I've not been wildly impressed with my privately schooled peers"

Anecdotal evidence FTW!

Quote :

"But on the issue of privatizing schools, would that not have the same affect as only having schools based on districts. I mean many black families would not be able to financially send their children to the better of the private schools. Thus, instead of paying a little in taxes for shitty schools, they'll be paying a lot out of pocket directly for shitty schools."

They won't be paying it out of pocket. They'll get a big check made payable to the school of their choice. Now, more investigation into the system would have to be done to see how you prevent all good schools from getting expensive and all shitty schools from being cheap. My guess is some restriction that says they cannot raise their prices under certain cirumstances. I'm not sure how it is done in those other countries, but at least we'll have a model to use.

11/24/2006 8:17:53 AM

Bosten

11/24/2006 11:04:09 AM

Pak the ca in the havad yad afta drinkin fowtie beeas at a paty

11/25/2006 3:54:29 AM

Quote :

"1. We promote school integration by assigning people to schools so there aren't too many students getting free or reduced price lunches at any one school."

wait. what does INTEGRATION have to do with REDUCED PRICE LUNCHES?

thank you for letting us know your true motives. [/your argument]

11/25/2006 10:45:50 PM

fascinating.


but i find it hilarious

11/26/2006 12:51:30 AM

11/27/2006 12:33:59 AM

Bosten?

11/27/2006 12:44:01 AM

Remember when whites were underrepresented minorities or were systematically denied their civil rights and discriminated against within most peoples' lifetimes?

11/27/2006 1:17:31 AM

^Yeah, that would be today.

11/27/2006 2:37:56 AM