Facebook > Email > More Pinterest Print Twitter Play

The Top 10 Percent Rule on Trial

Supreme Court case will likely hinge on the effects of Texas’s college admissions law.

By Comments

AP Photo | Susan Walsh

On Wednesday, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Fisher v University of Texas. The case concerns whether the University of Texas at Austin’s admissions program, which allows for an applicant’s race to be considered as a factor in favor of his or her acceptance, amounts to unconstitutional discrimination. And the ruling, which is expected next June, is likely to hinge on the effects of a controversial law that I consider to be one of the more elegant ideas that has ever emerged from the Lege. What’s at issue, in Fisher, is affirmative action. What’s on trial is the top 10 percent rule.

The law in question, passed in 1997, says that students who graduate in the top 10 percent of their high school classes, as a result of their GPA, are guaranteed admission to any of the state’s public colleges and universities. The law had particularly swift and dramatic effects at the state’s flagship universities, and none was more affected by the law than the University of Texas at Austin; in 2008, 81 percent of its incoming freshmen had been admitted under the top 10 percent rule. This led to outraged complaints, from students and parents, that the rule had made it all but impossible to gain admission to the state’s greatest university (hook ‘em!) any other way. It also led to the suit heard yesterday.

The plaintiff, Abigail Fisher, applied for admission to the University of Texas in 2008, and since she narrowly missed making the cut for the top 10% rule, she was among the applicants competing for the remaining spots in the incoming class. Those applicants are subjected to a more comprehensive evaluation of their academic records and personal achievements. They receive a numeric score in each category, and race is among the considerations that factors into the latter. Fisher, who is white, was not accepted, and her lawsuit argues that the university’s admissions process involves unconstitutional racial discrimination.

The case made it to the Supreme Court once before, in 2013. The Fifth Circuit had ruled in favor of the University of Texas, but Fisher’s attorneys argued that it had not subjected the plan to “strict scrutiny”; the Supreme Court agreed, and sent it back to the lower court for reconsideration. The lower court again upheld the constitutionality of the university’s admission plan, and earlier this year, the Supreme Court agreed to give the case another look. Throughout the process, Fisher has proved to be an unusually controversial plaintiff. Her first petition asserted that her “academic credentials exceeded those of many admitted minority candidates.” But the Fifth Circuit disagreed; based on her score on the “Academic Index,” the ruling notes, she would not have been admitted even if her “Personal Achievement Index” score had been perfect. Regardless of whether race should be a factor in UT Austin’s admissions process, in other words, it apparently wasn’t a factor for Fisher. The Fifth Circuit, in fact, was skeptical about whether Fisher should even have standing to sue the University of Texas in the first place.

That helps explain why so many Texas Exes were pouring salt in Fisher’s wounds on Twitter Wednesday evening, using the hashtag #StayMadAbby. Under normal circumstances, most Longhorns would sympathize with a student who dreamed of going to UT-Austin, and had to settle for LSU. But Fisher has spent years stewing over the disappointment, and seeming to argue that a black or Latino student stole her spot. And after Wednesday’s oral arguments, many Supreme Court watchers were pessimistic about the University of Texas’s chances of winning. Fisher’s seemingly baseless grievance could potentially result in a ruling that would end affirmative action at America’s public universities.

What’s surprising, if not perverse, is that Fisher does have a cause for grievance that many Texans would consider legitimate, or at least understandable. In 2008, the year she applied to UT Austin, 81 percent of seats in the incoming class were reserved for just 10 percent of the students who graduated from Texas high schools that year. Any other student who applied faced extraordinary competition for the remaining offers. The lopsided difficulty of that year’s admissions process was sufficiently dramatic, in fact, that in 2009 the Lege passed a measure allowing UT Austin specifically to cap the number of seats that could be claimed by students eligible for automatic admission. Fisher hasn’t handled the rejection well, in other words, but she’s hardly the only student who was frustrated that year. Most of this frustration, however, was directed at the top 10 percent rule—which continues to be controversial because it does, in a sense, create an unequal playing field. The difficulty of graduating in the top 10 percent of your class varies, depending on where you go to high school, and with whom.

And yet Fisher isn’t suing UT Austin over the policy that may have put her at a disadvantage. On Wednesday, her attorneys were singing its praises at the Supreme Court. The explanation has to do with the fact that UT Austin began using race as a factor in admissions after the Supreme Court ruled, in 2003’s Grutter v Bollinger, that public universities could do so under certain conditions. In that case, the University of Michigan had argued that it had a “compelling interest” in encouraging diversity at its law school, and that affirmative action should therefore be an exception to the general rule that the government can’t discriminate on the basis of race. The Supreme Court sided with Michigan, uneasily, with a number of conditions about which approaches to affirmative action would pass constitutional muster, and the asterisk that the exception would only apply for about 25 years. The Court agreed with the University of Michigan that the government has a legitimate interest in pursuing a more diverse student body, without fully endorsing their methods. It upheld the university’s policy of affirmative action conditionally, as a means to an end—-and, presumably, only until that end could be achieved.

Among the issues that appeared to be weighing on the justices’ minds Wednesday was that it’s already been twelve years since Grutter v Bollinger. Enrollment in higher education is still far from representative of society at large, but universities have become more diverse since then. And the student body at UT Austin specifically has become more diverse, thanks, in part, to the Lege. In 1996’s Hopwood v Texas, the Fifth Circuit had ruled that the University of Texas’s consideration of race in law school admissions was a form of unconstitutional discrimination. The ruling set a precedent that would last until the Grutter ruling. In the meantime, however, the Lege came up with an alternative idea to foster diversity in higher education. The top 10 percent rule is officially blind to race, or socioeconomic status, or the educational attainment of one’s parents. For obvious reasons, though, it was bound to expand opportunity in practice, and it has.

According to Fisher’s attorneys, the top 10 percent rule has been so effective that it undermines the argument that affirmative action can be considered a constitutionally acceptable form of racial discrimination. Her current petition, in fact, includes the odd argument that since minority enrollment has increased as a result of the top 10 percent rule, the university’s claim that it needs affirmative action to improve “qualitative diversity” implies that black and Hispanic students admitted under the top 10 percent rule somehow don’t count, and, they argue, that’s the racism here.

Whether the top 10 percent rule has been sufficiently effective at improving diversity is debatable, which is, presumably, why the Supreme Court is currently debating it. Several details in the case appear ominous for the university’s defense. The 2003 ruling explicitly prohibits quotas, and leaves the definition of diversity open to interpretation. It was also decided on a 5-4 vote; Anthony Kennedy was among the justices who voted against the University of Michigan then and is considered the swing vote in the current case. One of the court’s liberal justices, Elena Kagan, is recusing herself (she served as solicitor general when the Justice Department filed a brief in the case), and conservative Samuel Alito, who joined the court in 2008, evinced a keen interest in the empirical effects of the top 10 percent rule during Wednesday’s questioning.

A ruling in Fisher’s favor would be rightly understood as a defeat for affirmative action. But I wouldn’t consider it more than that. “The diversity in our classrooms is a matter of justice, prosperity and maybe even survival,” writes Michael Marder, a professor of physics at UT Austin, at TribTalk. Most Texans would agree with that, even the Republicans; the Lege is often suspicious of abstract appeals to justice, but it obviously takes an interest in the state’s future workforce. That’s why Texas has a top 10 percent rule in the first place. And as weird and contentious as Fisher’s legal argument is, it’s worth keeping in mind that even her attorneys, in emphasizing the effects of the rule, are conceding that encouraging diversity is a matter of compelling interest to the state.

Related Content

  • Rules of Blazon

    The claim you make toward the end of your piece that most Texans–“even the Republicans”–would agree that “diversity in our classrooms is a matter of justice, prosperity and maybe even survival” is, as you like to say, derisible.

    If you personally think that diversity in our classrooms is of a piece with justice, prosperity, and survival, I think that’s laudable, and I agree with you. But I doubt your fellow Republicans do.

    Sort of OT, but I wonder how the UT application rate will be affected once the Republican Death Trip Stupid Gun Law takes effect next year…

    • pwt7925

      Campus carry will make no difference at all to the application rate.

      • wessexmom

        It certainly will if there’s a big shootout on the Austin campus!

        • Indiana Pearl

          Especially when booze is available in Longhorn Stadium!

          • WUSRPH

            Are you suggesting that things are so bad that drunken UT fans will start shooting members of the other team to help the longhorns win?

      • WUSRPH

        No so sure of that. An “informed source” at UT tells me that the applications for one of the universities star level graduate programs are down by more than 20% since the word about guns. It appears “the best” do not have to settle for UT with guns. There is always somewhere else they can go that does not allow them.

        • Rules of Blazon

          Interesting. It makes sense to me (as an alum of one of them) that we’ll first see the drop-off in UT’s graduate programs.

  • WUSRPH

    The 10% rule has opened the door to thousands of students who would have otherwise had to chance to prove whether they could survive or not in a tougher educational environment. Prior to the 10% rule (now 7.5%) Rule there were literally dozens, if not hundreds, of high schools in Texas which had not had a graduate accepted at UT-Austin for many years, including in some cases “ever” had one. The University had a select list of high school programs which it milked for most of its students under some sort of belief that these schools produced more qualified applicants. Of course, virtually none of these schools were located in the Rio Grande Valley or in areas with higher minority/ethnic and low “social-economic” levels (as the sociologists like to call them). The result was the farthest thing possible from “diversity” in race, ethnicity, incomes or even geographic representation.

    • Rules of Blazon

      I consider Scalia’s comment to be yet another reason why he should not be a judge.

      • Dave Morrell

        The Scalia quote was taken out of context. Scalia was asking about a point raised in the brief of the opposing party. He never said that was his own opinion (but it wouldn’t surprise me if it was).

      • LudicrousSextus

        Yet it’s based in reality. Ask the co-discoverer of DNA – who had to sell his Nobel Prize medal to survive after being ostracized for pointing out there are indeed ‘differences’ in the intelligence level of races…

        • Rules of Blazon

          Scalia wins the race of people who shouldn’t be judges, and you win the race of gullible junk science consumers as well as the coveted Texas Monthly “Bigotry Cup.” Congrats to you both!

        • Indiana Pearl

          And who would that discoverer be? James Watson? Francis Crick?

          • BCinBCS

            Don’t forget Rosalind Franklin. (You non-biology majors google it.)

        • Seamus

          He was ostracized for “pointing out” his personal prejudices for which there is no supporting evidence. It wasn’t some sort of punishment for truth telling. It was what happens to people who lose track of the point of scientific inquiry.

  • Dave Morrell

    An observation and a question:

    1. Observation: The 10% rule would not work without the pervasive de-facto segregation that exists among Texas high schools. I’ve heard uncorroborated stories of students (though not more than a handful) zoned to affluent white schools taking advantage of inter-district transfers to go to poorer minority-majority schools to boost their class rank. Magnet programs in minority-majority high schools offer the same opportunity. The failure to improve minority-majority schools is used by some as a springboard to the coveted 10% class rank. This must give even the most ardent 10% supporters some pause.

    2. Question: It was my understanding the the 10% rule was especially popular in the Lege among those representing rural areas, which might explain how a measure possibly benefiting minority students and the expense of white students might have passed with overwhelming Republican support. Is that how it happened?

    • WUSRPH

      I think I answered your second question, below. The fact that many high schools could not get a graduate accepted by UT made the 10% rule politically popular in the Legislature as members were tired of hearing that none of their constituent’s children “qualified” to be Longhorns.

    • Erica Grieder

      on (1). Since this post went up I’ve heard from one reporter raising the point that the rule is premised on persistent racial segregation, and another (from out of state) asking if students transfer to worse high schools to improve their odds of making the top 10%. I suppose the two instincts are connected: in theory, if the top 10% created an opportunity for strategic transferring, it might follow that it also creates an incentive for the state to let failing schools languish, because their constituents are savvy enough to take advantage. But I’ve never seen any evidence to support the idea that “failure to improve minority-majority schools is used by some as a springboard.” That doesn’t mean it’s *never* happened, but considering that such a plan doesn’t make a lick of sense, I suspect it’s vanishingly rare. I mean, have you ever heard of a parent who makes an effort to send their kid to the worst school they can access? And if this kind of “springboard” incentive was compelling, it would be compelling regardless of the top 10% rule, wouldn’t it?

      • WUSRPH

        I would not say that 10% rule is “premised on persistent racial segregation” but it certainly takes into account that the majority of our schools are once more becoming racial/ethnically segregated. A system, like the prior one in which students from only 64 of the state’s 1,500 high schools dominated UT-Austin’s admissions clearly made it less likely that the university’s enrollment would be anything near to the racial/ethnic composition of the state. The rule changes that by opening the door to UT to the best in each school or community, which automatically produces a more diverse student body. This was clearly understood at the time the rule was adopted and it was one of the goals of those promoting it.

        • Erica Grieder

          yes, good clarification–I meant that the other reporter said the premise was persistent racial segregation. (I think the premise is actually longstanding and persistent inequities correlated with factors including but not limited to race.)

        • John Johnson

          What is the intent of the UT system with regards to its flagship university? To load it up with the “best” overall, or the best from every high school? How do med schools work? MIT? Is diversification the primary goal? Answer that question and then deciding on the applied policy to achieve same becomes clear, doesn’t it?

          • WUSRPH

            I think I answered you above….but, in a brief response….The purpose of the 10% Rule is to try to balance “the best” with the overall needs of the society—which includes producing a leadership that reflects the composition of the society. The old 64 schools get special standing system primarily met only the first goal.. The 10% rule attempts to move more towards a balance.
            Some folks—I hope not including you—seem to think that the Rule has produced some sort of a “quota system” at UT where the student body has to reflect close to the racial and ethnic composition of the State. This is FAR FROM BEING THE CASE. In fact, despite the 10th Rule, the percentage of racial and ethnic students at UT-Austin is still far below their representation in the state as a whole. (With the possible exception of Asians.).

          • John Johnson

            I don’t care what color or economic background the “best” come from. If sports teams were saddled with ethnic considerations for drafting, we would see more white guys on the field, or court, and an inferior quality of play. Take the best, without regards for race or background, and we will then be promoting excellence.

          • WUSRPH

            If you favor taking only the best you ought to be supporting the 10% Rule as that, in effect, is what the Rule does by taking the best from each community or school. There is no consideration of the race/ethnicity/background/legacy status or anything else but GRADES. Considerations of those factors comes in only AFTER the top 10% students have been accepted.

          • John Johnson

            Get rid of the 10% rule. I think it was implemented to simply make the process easier for the admissions team.

          • WUSRPH

            Actually, it was designed to take the power to make the decision on most admissions AWAY from the admissions team altogether because of the way that team (sic) had been functioning.

          • John Johnson

            Sticking with the sports analogy, the recent controversy regarding the Dallas Cowboys signing Greg Hardy comes to mind. Great player…terrible social skills. The Cowboys were willing to overlook his beating up his girlfriend -other teams weren’t. No rules prohibited their signing him. They could have opted for a player without his unsavory background, but they were willing to take a chance on his rehabilitation because he was exceptional at what they were looking for. Ms. Fisher had nothing that UT wanted, even if she was in the top 10% of some rural high school. Arbitrary factors need to make up the majority of the consideration factors with academics being the largest piece (percentage) of the pie. IMHO

          • WUSRPH

            There is no possible comparison between the two situations. The Cowboys (when did they start playing football?) are trying to build a team that wins football games. To do so, they have a select set of characteristics to consider. First of all, being skill at a particular position. If they could win with all Samoans on the team they would….If it could be done with all Alabama Red Necks, they would…..There is no need that the team in anyway reflect the composition of the society in which they operate. Nor is that one of their goals.

            The University, on the other hand, is not trying to win a football game (altho you might not always realize that from the media coverage.) Instead, it is trying to enroll students who, while meeting high academic standards, provide the other students with an example of the diversity of this nation. It is also trying to insure that the future leaders of this country reflect that diversity.

            It is hoped that this goal will be met thru the regular admissions system which, at UT-Austin, is dominated by the 10% Rule. However, if that fails to produce the desired diversity, it uses the remaining portion of spaces in the incoming class to fill the necessary needs.

            To do that, it sometimes has to go out and find special people with special characteristics (including in some cases their race or ethnicity) to fill out the student body so as to insure that diversity. in a few cases, some of their characterizes (says a SAT score) may be lower than others admitted thru the regular system. None-the-less, they would not be admitted if there were no chance of their successfully graduating. This is not “fill the slot”..It is fill the slot with a qualified person.

          • John Johnson

            I respectfully disagree with your entire take on what the principal goal of the flagship university in our state should be. If you don’t like the sports team analogy, let’s discuss the admission policies of Harvard Medical School or the Navy Seals.

          • WUSRPH

            Neither Harvard Medical School (to an extent) or the Navy Seals has a goal similar to that of the university. Harvard, however, does try to insure diversity in its medical enrollment….but, as with UT, that is not the primary goal. It is a secondary goal just as diversity is with UT.
            The Navy Seals analogy is like that of the Dallas Cowboys…They have a very specific, specialized goal that requires strict specifications for its applicants.

          • John Johnson

            Enough of this. I know your position. Mine is that the goal of our flagship university should be that exact same as the Navy SEALS… to admit the most qualified, weed out those that don’t measure up, and graduate classes that, under anyone’s microscope, are deemed the absolute best.

          • WUSRPH

            Then do not complain when this super elite run the world as a super elite with no concern for you or any of the other “little peoples”. You will has asked for it.

            Of course, it is just that kind of a situation you are always complaining about now…..but you cannot see how your views contribute to its existence and to its continuance.

          • John Johnson

            Whining about being left off of a school/team/job that offers everyone a chance to qualify, but only takes the best is not kosher? You think it is going to produce an elite class. Bullshit. NASA did not put men on the moon through “diversification”. Get off this unsustainable position.

          • WUSRPH

            You keep getting hung up on “single purpose” outfits when the purpose of education and of society and government are many, many more times complex.

            You also have some sort of a fixation on the idea of every program having some goal of advancing other races and ethnic groups. but that is not the subject today.

            Higher education has many purposes today only one of which is to produce fully qualified people….with job skills (including the ability to develop new ones) of the highest quality. It does that fairly well.

            It also has to have a goal of insuring that society, government, education, and all other areas are not dominated by a special few “experts” but, instead, that the leadership of tomorrow is prepared to live in a world made up of many different kinds of people, with many different views. This is what “diversity” is about.

            The 10% Rules serves a part of the second goal by breaking up the domination of the UT enrollment by a small group from elite backgrounds and opening its doors to students of all races and ethnicity AND from all areas of the State. (It only passed because there were more than 600 high schools who could not get a student accepted by UT.) When it fails to produce the desired diversity, it is supplemented by an additional admissions system—which is the one now under attack.

            As to whether your approach will produce a “super elite”, the fact is that it already has. You are constantly complaining about how business, government and everybody else is staked against the “little guy” and how they do not understand the needs of people like you. How do you think that happen? One way was thru an educational system that produced the elites who now run this country. It is almost funny that you fail to realize that what you want will help continue that. I want to try to insure that that elite includes more of the rest of society than it has in the past.

          • John Johnson

            We are talking about a “flagship school”; there are plenty of other ones that offer excellent educations…they just aren’t deemed the best. We need to have pinnacles; we need to have some that are deemed the unadulterated “best”. You disagree. You, I assume, are a proponent of giving trophies to everyone regardless of attained level. “We don’t need elitest “heros” making everyone else feel inferior.” That about it?

            I have been a small businessman most all my adult life. I have loved it. You have never seen me gripe about any aspect of the big business vs small business except for the money the Big’s have and use to buy votes and influence. It has no relevance here.

          • WUSRPH

            First, you insult me with that stupid stuff about a trophy just for competing….Our system does not promise egalitarian treatment, but is supposed to guarantee equal opportunity, not equal outcome. That still depends on the individual abilities, etc.

          • John Johnson

            What’s the difference? You have a tryout to see who gets a uniform before you ever start practicing as s team. You want to just give everyone a game jersey and then see if they measure up.

          • WUSRPH

            There is quite a difference. You are talking about it like it was suiting everyone up no matter what there abilities . The 10% Rule and the other UT Admissions aimed at diversity do not do that. They seek “diversity” among the best qualified students available. All of those admitted are of top quality….higher than at most of the other universities in the state….They may be a step behind the front runner, but it is a short step.

          • vietvet3

            Your patience in defending the needs of society, as one would to a small child, are admirable. You will not change the mind of your opponent today, but your words are being read by many. Thank you.

          • BCinBCS

            WUSRPH, what this disagreement between you and JJ boils down to is: Should colleges and universities graduate educated scholars or trained technicians. We had this same argument here about a year and a half ago.

            JJ is a businessman who requires and is around trained technicians. He has a job to do and technicians help him do it. What you (and I) argue is that in addition to training technicians it is the role of a universities to produce educated graduates. To accomplish this, diversity is but one requirement.

            There is a place for trained technicians and a place for broadly educated scholars. This, essentially, is the difference between what community colleges do and what universities do.

          • WUSRPH

            The battle over the purpose of higher education is probably as old as the problem Socrates with the authorities over what he was teaching (how to think) to his students in Athens. It was part and parcel of Rick Perry’s struggle to change the nature of A&M and UT to make them high class degree mills. Much of what kind of a country this will be in the future is at stake.

          • Ron Kabele

            I had a very unusual high school experience in Houston back in the 1970s. It was one of the first magnet schools, specializing in health professions. The students were selected to represent the racial makeup of the HISD. Bottom line was EVERYONE got along incredibly well, and all the social groups within the high school were completely integrated (such harmony was not common among the regular Houston high schools).

            We concluded our good fortune was because all of us were good students with specific educational goals. Not all of us were elite (I certainly wasn’t), but the entire atmosphere at the school would have been radically different had the student body been chosen primarily from high schools like Westbury and Bellaire. Further, the broader goals on which the high school was established would not have been achieved.

            Education is not akin to fielding a football team. I will be less diplomatic than others in saying that your sports analogy is shortsighted and shallow. And silly. And nonsensical.

          • John Johnson

            I went to grade school in California while my dad was in the Navy. My best friends were a black, James Day, and two Japanese kids, Dickie Hara, and Dickie Uano. We then moved to Texas to a school system that was just integrating. No problems. I have always been colorblind, as I think my friends of color would attest. I have no idea what your high school story has to do with our discussion here and I’m sorry you don’t understand the analogies. Glad you took the time to let me know how you feel. I’m devastated.

          • WUSRPH

            I think if you read what I have said you will find that I have never made diversity “the principal goal” of UT-Austin or anywhere else. It is A goal. A important goal, but not the primary goal which is, and will continue to be, to produce an educated populace. Of course, one of the attributes of being educated is an understanding of the diversity of the world in which we live.

          • Jed

            SCOTUS calls diversity a “compelling objective.”

          • Jed

            both value diversity. you know, it’s obvious to anyone reading your comments that you implicitly assume that the best candidates will be white. do you realize that about yourself?

          • John Johnson

            Horseshit. You see what you want to see. In my mind, based on National Merit Scholarships in my area, the best candidates would probably be Asian.

          • Jed

            OK. still racist.

          • John Johnson

            Goodnight.

          • WUSRPH

            Please try to understand…He is unable to see just what constitutes racism. To him it has to be KKK level for it to be racist. He does not see racial caricatures—good or bad- -and “everyone knows” statements about various groups as being “racist”. To him you have to virtually ranting and raving hate slogans to be a racist. The “subtle forms” of racism escape him entirely.

          • John Johnson

            I evaluate based on how I see things. I guess saying blacks are overall stronger and faster football players would be racist to you. That Asians are better students; and Sherpas better mountain climbers racist comments, too. You guys and this politically correct stuff is nauseating. I am much more colorblind than you two are. I want to judge based on merit; you see colors and want to handicap.

          • WUSRPH

            Sorry, JJ, but you don’t. You evaluate people based on a whole series of racial stereotypes and caricatures and “everyone knows” information—as clearly demonstrated by your blanket statements about blacks, Asians and even Sherpas.

            You like to think you don’t, but your comments again and again reveal that you live surrounded by your steretyopes of people in higher education, politicals, public employees an almost every other group. I tremble at the thought of what stereotypes you have for Jews, Italians, Poles and all the rest of humanity. You

            (BYW, the Sherpa’s WERE NOT mountain climbers until Western Europeans showed up wanting to hire them to climb mountains. It is a skill learned in the last 100 years, not a racial or ethnic characteristic.)

          • John Johnson

            This is how you liberal people think…what the goofy professors are teaching. It is ridiculous. Making the statement that the fastest people on earth are Black, and Sherpas the best mountain climbers is racist? Is it anecdotal or can it be verified? It is the truth? I think Blacks and Sherpas would confirm they feel it to be true. They are racist comments only to you PC pantywaists.

          • WUSRPH

            Sorry, again, JJ but a statement that Blacks by their nature are faster or that Sherpas—because they are Shrepas—are the best mountain climbers is RACIST, even if it is praising good qualities. But saying that Blacks, by training and effort, have become fast runners and that a few have extra lung capacity because they come from high altitudes which helps them run better is not racist. Similarly, saying that Sherpas, because of a century of training and effort, have become good mountain climbers is not racist. What makes your statements racist is that you attribute those skills based solely on the basis of their race or ethnicity.

          • John Johnson

            Enough of this, WUSRPH. Your bookwormish, politically correct tendencies are coming through loud and clear. I am beginning to believe that it is you, and those like you, who prolong the ethnic divides by making the truth somehow dirty and rude and crude. That’s my take. I know yours. There is no sense in carrying this further.

          • WUSRPH

            It is the stereotypes and caricatures you cling to and proclaim as “truth” that you have observed that divide us. it is because you and others believe the horrible things you have said about Blacks (cannot repeat them here) that our society cannot shake off the sickness of racism.

          • John Johnson

            Oh, you’re referring to my comments about drugs and alcohol and immorality in the black community leading to fatherless homes, and even to motherless homes where people other than the parents are raising the children. Aren’t you? But it wasn’t anecdotal. I posted a link, like you like to do, to a “study”. Remember? To me the truth is not “racist”, it is just stating fact. You liberals only discuss such things in the dark.

          • WUSRPH

            And you comparisons of Blacks as a group to other races and groups; plus you demands that they quit whining and “get over it” along with your description of them as lazy, without ambition and just looking for a handout from the government. Yeah, those are the things.

          • John Johnson

            Well, I didn’t ever say that the black race as a whole was lazy and on the dole, but a disproportionate number of them are. I have said that. I have also stated that we have more whites doing the same thing, but it’s a lower proportion of the total. Does that clear it up for you? We’ve covered it all before.

          • WUSRPH

            And, of course, there is that telling remark by you setting forth that, if UT is considering any other thing but grades in accepting student, it had to be Race.
            (“No, I think the “other” considerations are solely race.)

          • donuthin2

            If a disproportionate number of them are, it is not a given that it is because they are black, but rather because of some external influence on their behavior. Many things that happen are not cause and affect but rather the result of some other influence. Simple correlations will frequently lead to erroneous conclusions.

          • John Johnson

            My assumption, based on what I read and respected black leaders espouse, is that the root of the problem is illegitimate children, living in fatherless homes…often in parentless homes.

          • donuthin2

            I’m sure thatis right but the root cause is not that they are black as that is coincidental. The cause is likely some external force upon the group, probably discrimination that has affected their education, self confidence, etc. We need to correct it ASAP as it will only get worse.

          • donuthin2

            Seems to me that JJ may be right. Probably not absolute, but some races may be genetically superior at some things more than other races. JJ’s supposition that one race may be faster, jump higher, more nimble, etc seems to make sense to me. Maybe it is because of the different environment under which they evolved caused them to develop differently and might actually be reflected in their genetic makeup.

            A rational, informed discussion would be interesting as I certainly have no background on the subject.

          • WUSRPH

            This is a very hard subject to discuss….So much of what makes one race appear different than others is “environmental” rather than “genetic”. As such, it is “learned” characteristics, not part of the nature of the group. This means, that put in the same situation, other races or ethnic groups would develop the same skills, etc. The danger is that some people, including some who post here, assume too much and would classify people’s intelligence, morals and behavior as being the result of “genes” (if they understood what that meant) rather than circumstances. That is where all this racial superiority crap comes from.

          • donuthin2

            It would be a very difficult subject to discuss rationally and perhaps it is best if we don’t.

          • WUSRPH

            It would certainly bring out the racists, direct and subtle. I can see the Troll lining up his misleading links already.

          • WUSRPH

            I see you made a change. Originally you said that Blacks were the fastest runners in the world. I guess even you saw how invalid that was. You also said that they are the Asians and the Sherpas were “the best”…..backed off a bit from those blanket racist stereotypes.

          • John Johnson

            What does holding all the world records mean? I backed off nothing. You are nitpicking. You are good at it.

          • WUSRPH

            You forgot to make the changes in your subsequent post…so you are still on record with your original stereotyped descriptions.

          • John Johnson

            I feel no need to. Move on.

          • donuthin2

            I have a great friend in Dallas that never finished college but was recognized for his ability to get things done. And he has done quite well for himself. He would often point out things to me that I would have never noticed but to him were subtle signs of racism. For instance, he pointed out one day that he would wager that the waitperson would bring me the ticket, which they did invariably every time we went out. I pointed out to him that it was quite obvious that the Caucasian ladies would always flirt with him rather than me when we were at a happy hour, primarily because he was black. Sometimes they weren’t so subtle.

            So where is the fairness? I get the ticket and he gets the flirts.

          • John Johnson

            One other comment on this “diversification” category you think is so important for the upper tier universities to impart upon their students. This is a liberal mindset promoted by liberal academic administrators and teaching staff. Corporate America wants the best educated young workers with the drive, skills and knowledge to make their company more successful. In lieu of this diversification stuff you rail about, I would suggest that corporate America would prefer more emphasis be placed on preparing these millenials for a competitive, dog eat dog, work environment as some recent news pieces have addressed. Having newbie employees go into states of depression after being passed over for raises and promotions others received has required some corporations to hire psychologists to teach classes on the finer points of competition and advancement in the workplace. How do you think those whiner’s at the University of Missouri are going to fare in the business world? Our university systems suck. Most have the same goofy ideas you have about what should be taught and emphasized.

          • WUSRPH

            The needs of society for an “educated populace” beyond simply technical job skills far outweighs the demand for industry for well-trained drones. After all, a well trained drone will eventually be replaced by a device Without the knowledge, insights and exposure that a real higher education provides life for that drone will be less than worthwhile and society and government will feel the loss.

          • John Johnson

            Where do you come up with this “technical” stuff? Interacting and competing and discussing and debating goes away unless admission standards are lowered for some? Would there be no minorities to be found anywhere? Of course not, so why are you going there?

          • WUSRPH

            The fact that you think students get thru top high schools and universities without learning about competition and dog-eat-dog clearly illustrates how out of touch you are with the world of education. The battles for Top 10 status and class rankings are more than deadly..

          • BCinBCS

            I second this, W. The most stress I have ever had in my life was the academic competition that I had while in college. JJ’s statement makes me wonder if he went to college and, if he did, if he was in an academically challenging major.

          • Jed

            the goal of a university is different than that of of a sports team

          • John Johnson

            Says you. The flagship university ought to be all about turning out the absolute best in diversified fields. Handicapping should never be allowed.

          • Jed

            if you want “absolute best” out of UT, admissions standards are the least of your worries.

            you’d need to about quadruple their operating budget and cut the size of the school by about 3/4, just for starters.

          • John Johnson

            Works for me.

          • Jed

            you’d also need to stop letting legislators and citizens interfere in the workings of the university.

            do you want a top university enough to stop telling it what to do?

          • Jed

            any elite school values diversity in its admissions. MIT is more diverse than UT, i would be willing to bet.

            they might even have muslims there.

          • John Johnson

            If they are only accepting the best, without handicapping, there might be some Muslims since that religion is made up of many ethnic groups. Chances are, Asians occupy more spaces per capita than any other ethnicity. That would be my guess.

          • Jed

            they value diversity. full stop. they include more than just scores under what constitutes the “best.” sorry to break it to you, but your position is both racist and not even conducive to a better school!

          • John Johnson

            Says you. I’m very comfortable with my position and my analogies.

          • Jed

            your reference to “handicapping” shows you fail to understand the concept(s) at hand. they are not “letting in weaker candidates” for x or y reason, they are valuing candidates for reasons different than what you think is important.

          • Jed

            you say you want to model UT admissions on the way the top schools do it, but do you really?

            first, all those schools do exactly what you are here complaining about. they admit candidates for all sorts of reasons beyond scores. i got into stanford because i wrote an admissions essay about pizza, for pete’s sake.

            those schools also do the things you have been known to complain about in other threads and contexts, the very sorts of things you think regent hall is right to try and stop. they let in students based on family legacy. they let in students based on connections. they let in students based on how much money their parents have donated.

            harvard, the military academies, MIT and on and on. these are the things that elite universities do.

          • John Johnson

            I believe I used MIT, Harvard Medical School and the Navy Seals as examples.

          • BCinBCS

            An application essay on pizza? Were did you go, to cooking school? 😉

      • wessexmom

        I personally do know a number of parents who transferred their kids out of much smaller elite private schools and into the public schools they were zoned to just before their senior year.

        • Erica Grieder

          Feel free to put them in touch with me. If I can’t substantiate a story, I don’t consider it substantiated.

          • WUSRPH

            That actually makes some sense…since if they are top quality students the 10% Rule would make it easier for them to get into UT than having to compete for the 2%% of the class not covered by the rule.

      • NDForever

        Scalia may have been just quoting or referring to an arguments made is a brief when he mention that maybe les qualified minorities would be better off in the long run at less prestigious (and academically tough) schools, but it is apparent, isn’t it, that the point remains a powerful one. All the machinations, contortions that adults go through to try to satisfy an non- meritorious position ( we need and must have more minority diversity in our scholastic ranks) when the market place of relative brain power says not so fast there. Marginally ‘smarter’ students from larger brain power districts getting themselves enrolled in marginally lower brain power districts just to get themselves in the top 10% must admit category for a flagship university. It’s hilarious and shows the non- serious character of politicians trying to solve an intractable problem. In the market place of ideas, better ideas win out. In the marketplace of brain power, those with more of it win out.

  • John Johnson

    Does anyone think that the 10% policy is truly equitable? As stated, it is, more than anything else, a standard by which minorities are admitted at a higher rate to UT. I continue to think that only the “best”, as determined by many factors with academics at the forefront, should be the guidelines for admittance. If that is not going to work for your kid, run for office or give lots of money to someone already there.

    • WUSRPH

      So you believe in a policy where one-half of the all the students at UT come from 64 specific high schools? A group of kids from elite family and economic backgrounds who were brought up under elite circumstances, who went to elite schools and now being crowned the best in Texas. Talk about a society run by a handful of elitists who never had a chance to find out that there is are many other people with different backgrounds, ambitions and needs living outside there gilded cocoons. Is this the group you want in all our leadership positions? Is this your view of America? From what you’ve said in the past, I doubt it…but that is what you are now advocating.

      The 10% Rule is far from perfect….but at least it opens the door “to the best” each school and community in Texas has to offer….and it gives a chance to become part of the state’s future leaders in business, labor, government, medicine and all factors in our lives to kids from all walks of life and not just to those from that select 64.

      • John Johnson

        I don’t think you read the part where I said other considerations need to be applied with academics at the top. It is not fair to the smart kid who just happens to be born to affluent parents and attending a highend school to get left out because he is in the top 8% instead of the top 7.5%, when his SAT score is exceptional and he has been involved in all sorts of school and community extra curricular endeavors. What is equitable about that. Why don’t you write him a letter and tell him that he should have been smart and born into a ranching family out around Alpine.

        • WUSRPH

          The overreaching question here is what kind of a society do we want? Are we satisfied with a system that limits the top opportunities primarily to a selected few from more privileged backgrounds—as the old admissions system did—OR do we want a system where were you come from and who your parents are does not determine your destiny?
          I will not say that the 10% percent is ideal. It is clearly not. BUT it does represent an effort to answer that question.

          I might also note,that the kid you want me to write is not excluded from going to UT. The 10% rule applies to no more than 75% of the class. The remaining 25% can be admitted on a number of considerations, only one of which is race/ethnicity. A kid with the qualifications you list has a good chance of being admitted as part of that group. If not, he is likely to get into many other good schools.

          I’d rather write a letter to a kid like that with all his chances to succeed elsewhere than have to tell the kid from out Alpine way that, no matter how hard he studied and how good his grades may be, he is not going to get into UT simply because he did not go to one of the chosen 64.

          BTW, The plaintiff in the case did not make the 10% cut and is complaining that blacks and others with lower grades than hers were accepted in the 25%. She is, in effect, opposed to your “other considerations” standard.

          • John Johnson

            “She” should not have been admitted under either form of consideration, based on what I read. As far as your “64” schools are concerned, you keep ignoring the secondary and tertiary and, and, and considerations I suggest. Get rid of the top 7.5% rule and broaden the scope for admittance. Then everyone is on equal footing and the pressure is on a panel to arbitrarily decide who is admitted. The 10% rule was enacted to take pressure off of decision makers; it is terribly unfare.

          • WUSRPH

            In fact, the 10% Rule was adopted because of the arbitrary nature of the pre-existing admissions policy—a system that gave special status—-over half of the enrollment—to kids from a handful of schools.
            As to “broaden the scope for admittance”—that is just what the plaintiff in the law suit DOES NOT WANT. In fact, it is what she is specifically fighting……She got turned down because UT used “a broader scope” for determining those who would be admitted for other than qualifying under the 10% rule. It is the right of the university to make such decisions, based on other than grades, which is under attack.

          • John Johnson

            No, I think the “other” considerations are solely race.

          • WUSRPH

            Race, in fact, is only one of few factors, but you appear to be hung up on it. Actually, there are many other factors—-such as the kid with special talents in art or music who gets in, despite not having the greatest grades, because it is viewed as important that our society continue to encourage arts and music.

          • John Johnson

            Are we saying the same thing here? Leave race out of the equation entirely. Let arbitrary factors be utilized, but always keep academics at the top. If Johnny is a great artist but poor student there are plenty of liberal arts colleges out there for him.

          • WUSRPH

            N0, we definitely or not saying the same thing. Race is a factor that must be considered in diversity. It cannot be the only factor, but, if the regular system—including the 10% Rule—fails to produce a sufficient cross-section of society, race and ethnicity should b considered.
            As to Johnny the artist….exposing other students to all kinds of people and ideas including to a great artist is one of the purposes of higher education…It is not a trade school. So UT needs Johnny as much as it needs Joe the Physics whiz.
            P..S We have said far too much. I intend to stand back and let others have their say for a while.

          • Beerman

            WUSRPH and JJ,

            Enjoyed your debate, very informative and enlightening.

          • John Johnson

            Thanks…not sure I did.

          • vietvet3

            That’s because you were outreasoned at every post. Spell check says that is not a word, but I like it. I’m a UH grad.

          • John Johnson

            I’ve gotten similar comments from you in the past. I don’t care what you think. I will not lose any sleep. My mind is not changed. I have a big smile on my face. Hope you do, too.

          • Jed

            “One benefit of the 10% Rule, in fact, is that it does not automatically take into account the race or ethnic status of a student.”

            this is why it was originated. because of hopwood. (the article mentions these factors, although it’s hard to follow the sequence and connectedness of events as presented.)

          • WUSRPH

            It is actually brings in more minorities thru more geographic representation…..which was definitely was Rangel and Barrientos’ goal but it was made possible by the voters of legislators whose primary concern was geographic representation—giving their constituents” kids a chance to get into UT.

          • Jed

            yes, and one of them is the Liberal Arts College at The University of Texas at Austin. or better, the College of Fine Arts at UT …

            or do you not want us turning out the best in that field, too?

            would you care to provide a list of the fields UT should excel at, and those that they should stop trying to compete in, so that they know what to do to earn your approval?

          • John Johnson

            All of them. My retort was addressing WUSRPH’s statement that artistic Johnny was somehow going to be left out because he had low SAT or class ranking scores.

          • Jed

            but if you want the best artists, then you need to look at other things besides … geez, am i really having to type this again?

            never mind.

          • John Johnson

            Yeah…we want the best chemist, so let’s make sure he knows how to type. This kid’s a great impressionist painter, let’s make sure he has a grasp of calculus.

          • Jed

            wrong again. you don’t actually know a thing about this.

            shockingly.

  • pwt7925

    Don’t forget that the 10% rule applies to all state schools. A&M has a similar problem and faces similar demand. Not all students go to UT-Austin or A&M, but they are perceived as the cream of the crop. The UT System’s long term solution would be to foster the creation of more cachet for its other campuses; that won’t work for those with kids applying now, however. The 10% rule has been a boon for the flagship universities in Oklahoma, Kansas, Arkansas, Mississippi, Georgia and others that have been actively recruiting Texas students who can’t count on getting into UT-Austin or A&M and for whom the college experience in Arlington, Richardson, San Antonio and El Paso, among other places, has little appeal.

    • WUSRPH

      Actually, A&M has had much less of a “problem” dealing with the 10% Rule than UT-Austin. It has always been (and still is) easier to get into A&M than UT….based on the percentage of applicants accepted as it accepts more than 69% of the students who apply while only about 40% get into UT.

      • BCinBCS

        Overall, A&M does have less of a problem than UT but there are some programs, such as engineering (the M in the original A&M), that are HIGHLY competitive. Of over 10,000 applicants to the undergraduate engineering programs, A&M accepts only 40.5% (and only 29% to graduate programs). Unlike the UT campus which is limited to its 40 acres, A&M is land rich and can expand (and has) allowing for more students to be accepted.

        • WUSRPH

          It is the limited space (and desire to limit enrollment) that has created UT’s problems with the 10% Rule and with the other admission standards. Trying to enroll as many top students, plus meet diversity goals when you artificially limit the size of the student body is very, very hard. That is why the 10% Rule has been particularly hard on UT-Austin as it tends to limit the spaces for specialized enrollments, especially if they are from out-of-state.

    • Jed

      california gives a good model for this. there, the top some-low-percentage (i think it is 6%? don’t know exactly) are guaranteed admission to *some UC* school, but not necessarily the first one they would have chosen. what makes this work is that all 9 UC schools are highly regarding and any of their degrees are prestigious.

      then a much bigger group (top 25% i think) are guaranteed admission to a Cal State school. there are more of these, and they are less prestigious than the UC’s, but still comparatively strong state universities.

      with these two systems, california can accommodate a lot more students at a higher level than Texas. to your point, if somebody would rather go to Mississippi than stay in Texas and go to UNT or UH or Texas State or someplace like that, then what does that say about our universities?

      • Indiana Pearl

        A great point!

      • pwt7925

        As a parent of high school and college age children, I’ve observed that some of state flagship schools (OU, Ole Miss, Arkansas and others) have been doing a lot of recruiting in Texas and have programs that will, for qualified students, provide significant breaks in tuition and access to their honors programs. Some of them would pay in-state tuition or close to it for qualifying students. OU has had (I assume they still do, but would have to check) an honors program that for certain high achieving high school students (top grades, test scores, etc.) that provides substantial (and in some cases a full ride) scholarships and carte blanche access to the best classes and professors; it isn’t limited to Oklahoma residents, and I’ve had friends in Texas whose kids qualified. These schools seem to have recognized that top tier students who don’t get into UT or A&M want access to an honors program. If these programs exist at other Texas state schools (such as the Plan II at UT), they are doing a poor job of getting the word out.

  • WUSRPH

    Some have tried to claim that the Top 10% Rule has resulted in lower academic performance by student at UT. This charge was based on the idea that, if they came from poorer, lower performing schools, they were likely to be lower performers themselves. This highly biased argument has, however, NOT TURNED OUT TO BE TRUE. Several studies show that students admitted under the 10% Rule perform as well or better than students admitted through the other systems used to qualify students. What those making this argument—designed to undermine the 10% Rule program—forgot is that those admitted under the 10% Rule where virtually by their nature already over performers.

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3579572/

    • Indiana Pearl

      Does UT have a commitment to diversity as an adjunct to a comprehensive education? I hope so. No kid is well-educated if his/her classmates are like him/her.

      I’m still here . . .

      • WUSRPH

        That is what is at stake in the lawsuit…..As to whether that is a “commitment” by UT or one forced upon them by the Legislature with the adoption of the 10% Rule is a good question. Clearly, diversity was not that high of a goal in the days when the 64 high schools dominated the enrollment.

        • donuthin2

          Maybe the definition of diversity should be expanded to include more than skin color, but include rural diversity as well.

          • WUSRPH

            One of the advantages of the 10% Rule is that it did produce a much greater geographic representation at UT. Prior to its adoption more than 600 of Texas 1,500 high schools had either NEVER had graduate accepted by UT or not for many years. This was one of the reasons why a number of rural (often GOP) legislators voted for it altho they were not likely to be fans of the fact that it also increased the racial/ethnic diversity. They were just tired of their constituents complaining that the children could not be Longhorns.

    • Jed

      enh. it is simply true that one problem with our secondary system is that some schools are simply not up to snuff and don’t prepare their students to succeed at a school like UT. and that as a result of top 10%, some of those schools’ students wind up failing out of UT, rather than going to a school with a better support structure. i saw far more students at UT who couldn’t write a one page essay, for example, than i ever saw at UTSA.

      i think this is actually what scalia should have said. it isn’t about the race of the applicant, except inasmuch as there is a correlation between poverty, race, and underfunded schools.

      so top 10% is no more of a permanent solution than affirmative action. the real solution is obviously to eliminate the systemic barriers to success that are confronted disproportionately by the poor and minorities.

      of course, that isn’t allowed to happen either, because socialism. so we will have to continue to make do by sticking bandaids onto a fundamentally unfair and hypocritical system.

      • WUSRPH

        If you check way down at the bottom with the first comments, I think I raised the question of the quality of education being provided in some of our districts, particularly the small ones….but I said that was a subject for another day. See “The 10% Rule has opened the door…: of 7 hours ago, below.

      • WUSRPH

        The problem of the Top 10 at School X not being up to the level of the students at School Z was brought home to me by the case of a friends’ niece who was number two in her small South Texas school. She refused to go to any of the Valley schools–even though they were offering her all kinds of free stuff–because, as she put it, “I don’t want one of those “VALLEY DEGREES;” Instead, she choose—and was solicited by –Texas A&M where she enrolled as a engineering major to be. The problem was that her education at that small South Texas school—particularly in the math and sciences she would need at A&M—was not of the highest standard. She excelled in it, but at A&M she quickly discovered that while she may have been a very big fish in her small pond at home, at A&M she was a small fish surrounded by others smarter–and better educated—than she was. Fortunately, she was tough enough and smart enough to overcome it…..but it was a challenge that others were not able to meet.

        • Jed

          you point out another big part of the problem here: the steep drop off – whether perceived or otherwise – between the two state flagships and the rest of the state university system. all these pressures on UT admissions would be lessened if daddy planobucks and junior were content with junior going to UT-Tyler. i’ve said this before, so i won’t belabor the point, but consider: the last time i looked at the USNews rankings for “national universities,” virtually the entire UC system (8 of 9, except newcomer UC Merced) was ranked in the top 100, while Texas only has the two. You have to go a long, long way down the various lists to find another Texas public university. Building a credible second tier in Texas (or a larger first tier) would alleviate a lot of this. But $$$.

        • You just stated what I’ve said here before many times. Studies show and Goldman wrote in Emotional Intelligence, IQ has less to do with success than determination/drive, people skills and work ethic. Something most dems lack.

        • donuthin2

          That is absolutely the case but I would submit that those who are smart enough and tough enough to overcome their high school education will turn out to be some of the most productive and by productive, I mean more than their salaries.

      • Indiana Pearl

        I worked as a science and math tutor in the Groups program at Indiana University. Funded jointly by the state and the feds, it brought in about 300 freshmen each year from underperforming urban schools throughout the state. The summer was devoted to intensive remedial work and continued throughout freshman year with additional ancillary support in terms of academic advising and tutoring. Many of those students went on to graduate. The “cycle” can be broken.

        Does UT have any programs like that?

        • Now you’re a teacher….wow!

          • Indiana Pearl

            But I was never a nurse . . . and I’ll wager you never got a degree from Rice.

          • WUSRPH

            Now…now….he did get a certificate of attendance…

          • Indiana Pearl

            Just like I did at the Chicken Little Nursery School . . .

          • Actually you have no idea what I received, however that doesn’t stop you from spouting off. You own the blowhard title for this site.

            All talk and nothing else.

          • WUSRPH

            All I know is what a real Rice Graduate reported…..and you never challenged it…..however, I can understand how that might be difficult when he had checked with the registrar’s office.

    • The whole liberal education system is flawed and often worthless.
      Andrew Breitbart concluded after reading Camille Paglia’s book Sexual Personae, had made him realize how little he had learned in school.
      I’m amused by those who loudly proclaim, “I have a degree that means I’m smart.”
      No it means you were likely subjected to a liberal indoctrination about global warming/climate change/gun control/and Marxism.

      • WUSRPH

        Having an education (a degree) does not mean that you are educated….

        • duh…..

          • WUSRPH

            Figured you would not be able to comprehend it, but will not waste my time explaining it. Stretch your mental faculties and see if you can.

          • Indiana Pearl

            Nothing there . . . there.

          • you have no idea what duh means…..hahaha.

          • WUSRPH

            And you know what? I don’t care.

  • WUSRPH

    The Republican judge
    in one of the state’s most Republican counties Friday threw out Republican Atty.
    Gen. Ken Paxton’s attempts to get his criminal indictments dismissed. This
    should mean the trial can proceed, but Paxton is likely to appeal to a higher
    court.

  • wessexmom

    I strongly disagree with Ms. Grieder’s conclusion. A ruling in Fisher’s favor would, in fact, be more than a defeat for affirmative action. It would be a huge defeat even for a merit-based admissions standards, as measured by academic achievement and overall student performance. At the end of the day, we are still left with this fact: Ms. Fisher NEVER met the standards of any UT admissions protocols. Her sense of entitlement far exceeds her abilities.

    • UT’s admission protocols are subjective and run by pedants; therefore are flawed, hence the lawsuit.
      Even if SCOTUS decides in her favor, UT is run by liberals and they will just come up with another flawed subjective program based on feelings.

      • BCinBCS

        JBB, next you’ll be claiming that A&M “is ran by liberals”. It must be comforting to have a one-stop place to go for all of your worries and shortcomings. It’s too bad it won’t solve any of them.

        • “John Spencer Sharp is a Democratic politician from Texas, who has served since 2011 as the chancellor of the Texas A&M University System. From 1991 to 1999, he was the Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts. From 1979 to 1987, he was a member of both houses of theTexas State Legislature. From 1987 to 1991, he was one of the three members of the Texas Railroad Commission. In 1998 and 2002, he was the Democratic Party’s nomination for lieutenant governor”

  • Stinky Lebinowitz

    What’s the washout rate of those in the 10% rule as compared to the rest of those admitted who suffer through more intense scrutiny and investigation?

  • Democrats need victims to stay relevant; therefore the racist, misogynist and homophobic rant. They seek to divide and this is how they do it with quotas.
    Democrats could care less about the “small” people and only a fool would believe it.

  • I’m amused when I see the “supposedly” educated democrats talking about diversity in the UT admissions program.

    Well for starters Speaker Joe Straus couldn’t get his friends “dumb” kids into UT.

    “When the dust settled in the University of Illinois clout abuse scandal, not only were the institution’s president and regents fired, but a statewide officeholder, the house speaker, a state senator, a congressman, and two state representatives found themselves in hot water and their political careers in ruins. Texas legislators should pay attention.

    The facts in the Illinois case are similar to those coming to light at the University of Texas. Politically connected, though academically unqualified, students were given preferential treatment by the state school. These students gained entry through special, undisclosed processes by which powerful state officials made sure their pals and donors gained accessto the state’s most prestigious institution.

    Last week we learned that Bill Powers, the president of UT, regularly overruled his admissions department so students from wealthy and politically connected families would gain admission despite substandard – and in a number of cases, abysmal – academic records. Everyone knew what they were doing was wrong; they would hold special meetings to review the applicants and destroy documents along the way – specifically to limit the paper trail.”

    http://www.breitbart.com/texas/2015/02/17/op-ed-it-doesnt-end-with-bill/

    Democrats run our universities and use the pay for play system, the old Tammany Hall style of government. Why are we Texans allowing it to happen in Texas?

  • An issue that is completely ignored, is that we rate the prestige of top tier schools. UT has always wanted to be compared to and compete with the Elite & Ivy League schools, yet several studies show that for the vast majority of students that go to “elite” schools, they are not better educated than a student at any top level university.

    So bottom line is that whether you go to a TTU, TAMU, LSU, OU’s, UT’s, ASU, KSU, etc. you are getting an overall equal level of education as if you went to Stamford, Harvard, Princeton etc in reality. Yes, every university does have fields of study where they excel beyond their peers, but those who qualify for those are more likely to be the top 2% of students. The only thing graduating as an average student at an elite university will get you is an easier time with that first employer right out of college and possibly a better ability to network.

    Getting into a university should be difficult, and it should be based upon academics, and whether or not a student will be a good fit with the culture of the university. Being a legacy should not factor in at all, and yes I know because of the power that alumni hold, legacy students will always have an advantage for admissions.

    For the sake of the university admissions I hope that UT wins and this entitled brat loses because she got a top tier education, an education that she doesn’t appreciate and probably doesn’t deserve.

  • LudicrousSextus

    Most amusing! ‘…the argument that Affirmative Action is a constitutionally acceptable form of racial discrimination’

    Sounds like a chapter from Orwell – Some animals are more equal than others. A stellar example is the current ‘I spent 3 million dollars to hide my academic records’ president. We’ll just have to overlook the fact that since Carter’s creation of a Federal DoE, we’ve gone from teaching Latin and Greek in high schools to requiring remedial English in literally all colleges – where ‘typical freshmen now read at a 6th to 7th grade level’.

    Apparently destroying American public education is an acceptable price to pay for ‘forced diversity’.

  • SaguaroJack49

    Instead of just saying over & over that classroom diversity conduces to justice, prosperity & survival, explain how & why that’s so. You seem to think it’s self-evident but a great many of us don’t see it that way.

    • Rules of Blazon

      It is self-evident to me. But then, I’m a Democrat.

      You, like Ms. Grieder, are a Republican. So, better that she explains it to you. Maybe she’ll also explain (despite the complete lack of evidence) why she thinks most Republicans agree with her on this issue (I think she’s completely wrong about that, by the way – I think the overwhelming majority of Republicans do not believe classroom diversity is important at all, much less of paramount importance).

      • John Johnson

        I think classroom diversity is obtainable without “handicapping”. I think it is desirable, but should not be mandatory. How many college students have not already been in high school classrooms with mixed ethnicities? Not many. How many college classrooms would be without some sort of mandate? I’m thinking it would be very few.

        • WUSRPH

          If you would bother to look at the statistics (in one of those slanted, distorted government reports) you would find that our public schools are INCREASINGLY returning to segregated conditions. As noted above, diversity requires more than one or two “of those people” in a classroom. But you probably think that is okay….After all, it is always best if you stay with your own kind.

          • John Johnson

            You want to put me in the KKK realm, don’t you? I dare say I have closer relationships with people of color than you do, and have throughout my life. I would bet on it. I don’t really see color, I just see people. You, on the other hand, set up divisions at every turn by classifying minorities and handicapping them.

          • WUSRPH

            I won’t bother to play “let’s compare my friends to yours…I can count more Xs than you can”…..You claim you judge people on their individual merits, but at the same time you use racial/ethnic stereotypes in describing entire groups of people.

      • pwt7925

        Everyone’s mind is closed in its own way.

        • Rules of Blazon

          If a false equivalence falls in the woods and nobody hears it, does that make the fact that Republicans overwhelmingly oppose any form of diversity any less true?

    • WUSRPH

      Take a look at this NY Times story from earlier this week. It may answer most of your questions.

      http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/09/opinion/diversity-makes-you-brighter.html?_r=0

  • Indiana Pearl

    John Roberts, a graduate of the elite prep school, La Lumiere, and Harvard Law, hates affirmative action, as do most conservatives. His solution to discrimination? “Don’t discriminate.”

  • EPatrickMosman

    “does consider race and ethnicity in order to promote diversity in the

    student body.”

    What does “promote diversity’ actually mean? What is it
    supposed to accomplish? Does it mean that students of all races and
    ethnicity mingle, live together,eat together, join the same school
    student groups, study the same courses and graduate together. How has
    that worked? From the recent “black lives matter” and similar black
    groups’ demonstrations and worse at some Colleges and Universities it
    hasn’t worked at all. Or is it only a racial head count?

    Many college campuses seem to be as segregated with black only social
    societies, black housing, black studies,black graduation ceremony.demands for black professors and
    more as the Old South by choice.

    The affirmative action inmates are demanding to take over the asylum,Harvard Law School;

    http://www.powerlineblog.com/a

    Does this “promote diversity”?

    • Indiana Pearl

      If college students self-segregate by race or ethnicity, that is their choice. Before Affirmative Action, they had no choice.

      Your link is about Neil Young’s car, not Harvard Law.

  • WUSRPH

    I am very glad to see that others have joined the discussion. Please have at it…..I’m off for most of the day.

  • I fondly remember George Ballas teaching entrepreneurship at Rice University. Balas the inventor of weed eater offered his kids a choice, he would set them up in a business or send them to college all but the youngest took him up on the business.

    Balas was an entrepreneur at heart and taught many of us to chase our dreams and a sheepskin wasn’t worth the skin it was printed on unless you wanted a government job then it was worth everything.
    Style over substance.

    • BCinBCS

      You’re absolutely right JBB. We should simply get rid of all higher education and replace it with “business schools”. I’m sure that America would quickly, then, become your shining city on the hill.

      • So you prefer quanitity over quality.

        “What accounts for declining productivity in higher education? Prior research provides an array of potential explanations.[7] Most analysts point to the role of rising costs, and others focus on declining degree attainment.[8] Collectively, these explanations reinforce a widespread perception among higher education administrators and many scholars that productivity is impossible to control. According to economists Robert B. Archibald and David H. Feldman, “The problem in higher education is that productivity growth often is synonymous with lower quality.

        https://www.aei.org/publication/addressing-the-declining-productivity-of-higher-education-using-cost-effectiveness-analysis/

        • BCinBCS

          JBB, it’s obvious that you didn’t read the full report and that you didn’t understand the summary to which you linked. The article is not about quantity versus quality, it’s about how to make higher education more efficient.

          If you had read the full report, I doubt that you would have agreed with it anyway because, among the many suggestions, the American Enterprise Institute study recommends are things like doing away with private student loans, making class size smaller, replacing (cheaper) adjunct professors with (more expensive) full-time professors and increasing student services to help students manage their education better (to the point where it showed that PAYING students to use the services was better than the current system of voluntary use).

          JBB, this kind of mistake is what you get when your mind is so blindly rigid that you cannot accept any countervailing opinions. It causes you to see things when they aren’t even there.

          • And your limited thinking isn’t?

            This is so typical of the liberal mindset “if we just spent more money…..”
            We know that never works but liberals believe it with all their heart and mind.

          • BCinBCS

            There’s that rigid mind again. You misquote the AEI, a CONSERVATIVE think tank, about an article that YOU chose and you crazily state that the article which is ONLY about making education more efficient (i.e. less expensive per graduate) is of a “liberal mindset” out to “spend more money”. Where was this “liberal mindset” when you initially cited it?

            Don’t your constant mistakes embarrass you?

            Man, why don’t you take a break for a while and start blaming everything on the tooth fairy or the weather (it would make as much sense).

          • WUSRPH

            Of course, his consistent mistakes do not embarrass him. In fact, he will deny making any. HIs ideological blinders are so firmly fixed that he sees only what he wants to see. I wonder what happened to him in life that made his so intolerant? Something at Rice?

          • WUSRPH

            Actually, it is often not more money that is needed, but money better spent….

          • John Johnson

            I think actually putting the full-time tenured professors in the classroom instead of grad students doing their jobs for them might increase learning. Is this still going on?

          • BCinBCS

            Oh yea!

          • Indiana Pearl

            No. Grad students still teach freshman/sophomores. Adjuncts have replaced tenured and tenure track faculty. They are modern day slaves.

          • John Johnson

            So what are those tenured profs reportedly making, on average between $150K and $180K, doing for their money?

          • Indiana Pearl

            Depends on the discipline . . . and your salary range is way on the high side. Profs with a Ph. D. in the liberal arts might be lucky enough to earn $50k/year at a “major” institution, less at Podunk U. Business, law, hard sciences all make quite a bit more as the institution has to compete with the private sector.

            “Publish or perish” is the name of the game. To get tenure and promotions, research must be done and papers published. To do research, theynhabe to get money which means they write grant proposals all the time. They are also evaluated on teaching ability and service to the university.

          • John Johnson

            Sounds to me like our university system is as screwed up as our public school systems. How is all that stored knowledge we are paying the tenured staff for conveyed to our kids if they are writing and researching instead of teaching?

          • WUSRPH

            We have discussed this before. It is clearly better to have the top professors teaching…which they do in the upper class years and in graduate school. BUT, one of their purposes—and the purpose for their writing and researching—is to expand knowledge in their fields. That knowledge then seeps down into the materials and subjects being taught, even those taught by TAs who are often involved in its production. This tends to make what they teach more up-to-date or “cutting edge” in the field. Knowledge is not something static in a book. It is always advancing even in the most technical fields.

          • John Johnson

            I’m saying that your explanation sounds good and is exactly the propaganda being shoveled out by the universities themselves, but, in reality, is a bunch of crap.

          • WUSRPH

            Much of what we have and know today is the result of that system…….You benefit from it every day but your view is too limited for you to see it.

          • John Johnson

            Horseshit. More of your perceived “worldly view” derived from the books you have read in a cocoon…yet you call my view “limited”. An independent businessman since 27, dealing in consumables, heavy equipment, aquaculture, and innovative technology on an international basis and my view of value for the dollar and what is wrong with our educational system and needs improvement is lacking? I find humor in your posting this. You continue to post with an air of superiority, as if your being an employee in the government sector affords you a special perspective. I hate to bust your bubble.

          • WUSRPH

            Yep…lacking is the correct word. You are so embedded in what you do and so unwilling to consider any other ideas that you cannot even realize where most of the “innovative technology” you say you deal in came from. The same is true of virtually every other field of knowledge and endeavor from literature to medicine and philosophy (look up the word some day) to the watch on your wrist. RESEARCH….including the most basic research….a majority of it in institutions of higher education conducted by the very professors you so insult. You and Hall would kill that golden goose thru you inability to see beyond your own little, tiny island of existence.

          • John Johnson

            I have never said the system did not yield results, just that it could be so much better and is going south. Furthermore, please share with us how asking questions, uncovering flaws and correcting them is snuffing a “golden goose”. You’re an educated man. You standing behind that goofy statement?

          • WUSRPH

            I, unlike you, have looked into what he would do to replace our admittedly flawed system. What he proposes is the goose killer. His questions and attacks are only part of his tactics to achieve that goal.

          • John Johnson

            So there is no middle ground; no alternate, modified proposals; no one admitting there are flaws in both the system and what Hall’s pushes? You say “Hall sucks” and go on watching the system deteriorate. That’s really sharp.

          • WUSRPH

            I have a number of ideas about how to improve both higher and public lower education…and have made a few…But the subject here is the 10% Rule and the need for diversity in public education. I will lay out those ideas when the time calls for it. But you are right, Hall sucks…What he would do to higher education is turn it into some sort of super degree mill and limit research, among other things, to ideas that have immediate profit potential. That may be a good idea to fatten the bottom line on a business profit and loss statement, but it strikes at the heart of what education is all about. The link below will give you some background on the proposals he and Gov. Perry were making. You will like a few, but only because they put the emphasis on output above all.

            (The link includes UT’s responses….The original “7 Breakthrough Solutions” Report produced by the Texas Public Policy Foundation does not appear to be readily available on the net.)

            http://7solutionsresponse.org/index.php?unit=home

          • BCinBCS

            JJ, what W said is exactly the case. Those professors who do not do research, generally, teach what they learned many years ago and from the textbook. This is fine for basic level courses (years one and two) and is why teaching assistants (TA’s) tend to teach those classes. It does upperclassmen no good to be taught information that is dated. The easiest way for a professor to stay current – and bring in research dollars and increase prestige for the university, etc. – is to do research.

            The real fly in the ointment is just how much time should be devoted to research and how much to teaching. Most schools require a certain teaching load but that does not prevent a professor from “phoning in” his lectures due to inadequate preparation because his/her emphasis is on research. This “phoning in” is also apparent in the availability of the instructor for questions and for office hours (office hours = when an instructor is available for any problems that a student may have).

            One other problem with research is that most professors are hired for their ability to get grants and to do the research – not for their teaching ability. This is a BIG problem. On the other hand, an exceptional instructor who does not publish enough is quickly eliminated.

          • John Johnson

            Oh, I understand all this, and, as I believe you have suggested, the system is broken and out of balance.

          • Indiana Pearl

            You’re paying a very small percentage these days.

          • John Johnson

            Do you spit out the first thing that hits your brain without a once-over? How about 529’s for three grandchildren? Know what the projected costs are for places like A&M and Auburn in the next 10 to 20 years? Quit defending the indefensible.

          • WUSRPH

            As a long time professor at UT explained to me many years ago (long before the diversity issues, etc.) if you really want to learn do no go to a major large university for the first two years. The enrollment is so large (and this was back in the 60s) and the faculty so stretched that all they are trying to do during the freshman/sophomore year is trim the herd down to a teachable level. As such, he said, go somewhere else for the first two years and then transfer in for the last two when the real learning begins. I was fortunate to go to a top level but smaller school (at the time my class of 1,400 was the largest in the school’s history). I had exactly one TA instructor in four years for a required math course for non-science/engineering liberal arts students.

          • John Johnson

            Then why is it that you defend a broken state system so vociferously? Remember your defense of the UT system back when I was applauding Hall’s raising questions? The discussion morphed on to this very subject…rising tuition costs, tenured profs participation in actual teaching, and whether the state, in the form of knowledge being imparted on our young students, was getting its monies worth.

          • WUSRPH

            I think you have overlooked my more than frequent comments about the need to reform the system of education—both higher and lower. In fact, I mentioned the problems that higher ed has to deal with as a result of our screwed up public lower education system in several posts on this thread.
            Hall’s questions had a little validity, but the problem is that he and others (and perhaps even you) want to measure the benefits of education by some output measurement. As I have said before many times, producing skilled workers with the knowledge to do their jobs is only one of the purposes of “education”. Producing a mind capable of independent thinking and judgment that understands the world in which the person will live, etc. is the more important purpose. The difference, as I told the Troll earlier to his total lack of comprehension, is between producing a person with an “education” symbolized by a degree or certificate and producing an “educated” person. The system we have today does this in many cases, but in far two many. Many reforms and changes are necessary to make it do a better job. But turning higher education institutions into a super efficient degree mill is not one of them.
            How to reform higher education is not the issue here today. Maybe it will be some day….Then we can discuss it more fully.

          • John Johnson

            Geeez..you keep saying that the goal of higher education is to turn out a more “well rounded” graduate. I’m tired of hearing it. At the costs being charged, the fact that adjuncts are teaching out of text books that can be read in dorm rooms, and the fact that the racial interaction you deem so important that can be garnered working along side each other on a freight dock or a warehouse during the summer months, I’m trying to figure out where the value for the dollar is. Go get’m Wallace Hall. The system stinks.

          • WUSRPH

            You obviously have no idea what your hero Mr. Hall advocates…..Much of it is just what you disapprove of.
            I suggest you might want to take a minute or two to try to find out what he and his group propose as a replacement for the existing system of higher education before you continue to worship at his altar.

          • John Johnson

            Heck, I don’t have to advocate for everything Hall professes anymore than I do all thatTed Cruz pushes. I just like the fact they are poking the status quo right in the chops. You admit there are problems yet defend the all the aspects that produce them.

          • BCinBCS

            JJ, I’m sure that you have heard of the Thomas Frank book “What’s the Matter With Kansas?” and the discussion that it has spawned. What you are advocating by supporting politicians like Hall and Cruz because you like SOME of what they advocate is what leads to the horrible results that are exactly the thesis of the book. I suggest that you get a copy (free at the library) and learn of the consequences when you support such politicians.

          • John Johnson
          • Lt Guv Dan Patrick chaired the education committee and released a report that grad students teach 80% of classes and professors about 20%.

  • WUSRPH

    Those few with a legitimate interest is exploring whether diversity in the enrollment is good or bad might be interested in this recent article from the NY Times that reports that the results show that it improves the education for all the students, no matter what race, etc.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/09/opinion/diversity-makes-you-brighter.html?_r=0

    • John Johnson

      Are you suggesting that college campuses would be all white unless the 10% rule was in place? It would seem so. Are there many high schools this day and age that are not integrated? Colleges? Work places? This NYT’s piece and your arguments for handicapping so college classrooms are integrated seem to suggest we would not find qualified ethnicities in flagship university classrooms without some sort of “help”. It is ridiculous.

      • WUSRPH

        It wasn’t the 10% Rule that desegregated our college campuses. It was the federal courts. But even then the student body at UT, for example, was still overwhelmingly white until such things as the 10% Rule. I can get you the statistics from UT that demonstrate that, but you would not believe them anyway…After all, they come from some slanged “government” report, don’t they?

        • John Johnson

          So “overwhelmingly white” is what’s undesirable, even though there would always be minorities present and on campus based on the same criteria used to evaluate the whites? How do the numbers need to balance out to make you and others happy? What percentage against the whites? How many Blacks, Hispanics, Asians and Native Americans need to be in a classroom to broaden the white students’ education?

          • WUSRPH

            Diversity is not served by a system that makes Blacks and racial and ethnic minorities into a kind of unique object on a campus. (“You won’t believe it, Moma, there is actually a Black girl in my class!”) Prior to the 10% Rule UT had NEVER had an enrollment in which Anglos made up less than 60% IN ITS HISTORY…..That did not then, nor would it now, reflect anything like the real world in which UT graduates will live (that is unless they retreat black to Plano and hide behind the walls of gated communities.) We are not talking quotas. We are talking about a fair representation….which UT still does not have of Blacks who constitute less than 5% of the enrollment. Hispanics are a little better. Thanks to the 10 Rule they now represent about 18% of the total enrollment…just a little ahead of Asians.

          • John Johnson

            Hahaha. I read your NYT op/Ed link about how having minority students in the classroom produced better students. They did not say that the percentages had to be X or Y, but you do. Go figure. I repeat…I encourage admitting the highest performers based on several categories; you want to determine campus mix by color. Where do you want the beta percentage number to come from? Texas’racial mix, California’s, Alabama’s, or some area in South Africa?It is looney, liberal thinking at its worst.

      • BCinBCS

        JJ, when I went to college in the late 60’s and early 70’s at one of the state’s flag-ship universities, you could count the number of blacks, Hispanics and Asians on your fingers

        I live in a university town and can assure you that diversification has made a HUGE difference.

        Why do you want to abandon a system that, overall, has worked so well?

        • John Johnson

          I see your point, but when, where and how does it end? Using anything other than merit to determine admittance is simply wrong in my estimation. It cheats otherwise qualified kids from being enrolled. Which is the lessor of the two evils?

          • BCinBCS

            Well, it might cheat qualified kids from enrolling at the University of Texas but it won’t stop them from attending Texas A&M or Texas Tech or Baylor or Rice or the University of Houston or… And that is a small price for them to pay for the good that the ensuing diversity does at ALL colleges and universities and for the nation.

            “Where and how does it end?”
            When it’s no longer necessary. (And don’t try to tell me that blacks and Hispanics are at that point now.)

          • John Johnson

            I can’t say for sure, but I am fairly certain that if I was a young black guy I would want to go where I was equally qualified to go – not where I was given special compensation.

          • Indiana Pearl

            Ask Clarence Thomas.

          • BCinBCS

            Does “handicapping” promote a feeling of equality?

            I don’t know…does the student that gets in on legacy feel equality, does the football player who reads at an eighth grade level feel equality? I suspect that each are simply happy to have been chosen to attend.

          • WUSRPH

            That old everyone is best when they “stick with their own” again.

          • John Johnson

            Your comprehension skills have really gone south.

          • It doesn’t end. By accusing someone of racism, whether falsely or not it gives the dems a political advantage. Until the silent majority learns to stand up to these types of allegations they will continue.

          • John Johnson

            I’m doing my part. I’m fed up with it and will express same, regardless of what they may, and surely will, call me.

    • Indiana Pearl

      The question is: what advances a “liberal” education? If one wants to get a job credential, go to a trade school. If one wants to be truly educated in the “liberal arts and sciences,” with a comprehensive sampling of philosophy, literature, social and hard sciences, students must be introduced to the real world – black folks, brown folks, yellow folks, white folks.

      We all benefit from affirmative action and we aren’t even remotely close to a racially equitable society.

    • BCinBCS

      Interesting review.

      Despite his claim that Thomas Frank is an extreme liberal, when it came down to an analysis of the thesis of the book he wrote:
      “The estimated 70 million evangelical Americans are sick of being called wing nuts or Jesus freaks. And the socially conservative are sick of being derided as Neanderthals. The Republicans saw this and catered to it. WHATEVER THE EFFECTS OF THEIR ECONOMIC POLICY, they treated the concerns of Midwesterners and evangelicals with respect.” [Capitalization is mine.]

      I contend, as does Thomas Frank and the reviewer, Josh Chafetz, that the economic consequences associated with socially conservative politicians are tragic. The same thing will happen when you and other social conservatives support politicians like Hall and Cruz.

      Open your mind. Read the book.

      • WUSRPH

        The failure to treat all people with respect creates most of our nation’s problems, if not those of the world as a whole. But you have to admit that it is hard to remember that when you are dealing with someone like the Troll who respects no one and nothing but himself.

        Franks is dead right that too often Democrats and the alleged “intellectuals” have looked down upon those whose views they find regretful or uninformed. This has hurt them, as it should have. The problem is that those they offend often do not take a minute to examine the positions being offered by those who seem to take them more seriously. If they did, they would realize that, despite their bad attitude, it is usually the Democratic Party that best represents their interests.

        Of course, anyone who thinks that the likes of Karl Rove actually respects the views of those he has manipulated into backing candidates who do not really represent their needs is more naïve than it is possible to be.

        • BCinBCS

          [Josh Chafetz] is dead right that too often Democrats and the alleged “intellectuals” have looked down upon those whose views they find regretful or uninformed.

          FIFY

          • WUSRPH

            Not sure what FIFY means…but if I misstated the author….I should correct it….Assumed you were quoting from Franks…..Whomever said it was right.

          • BCinBCS

            FIFY = Fixed It For You

            JJ linked to a NY Times article that was written by Josh Chafetz blasting Thomas Frank’s book “What’s the Matter With Kansas” stating that Frank was an ultra-liberal with economic policies that were beyond socialist who, along with democrats, insults and ridicules the socially conservative people of Kansas (and elsewhere.) He went on to write that Frank’s thesis stating this social conservatism leads to conservative economic policies that are mortally hurting Kansas residents (and others) is true. I quoted part of the review showing where Chafetz indicated Frank’s correctness. Sorry for the confusion.

            BTW, I requested this once before but am not sure that you read it so I’m asking again that you PM me by e-mail at bruuceomniwin(at)gmail.com Be sure to change (at) to @. I think that we were fellow Exporters at BHS.

          • WUSRPH

            I tried to PM you 3 times. All came back. Do not know what the problem is. Give me an E, Give me an X…
            It was a horrible cheer. but what do you expect from a team named the Exporters. Ship ’em out…ship ’em all the way out.

          • BCinBCS

            The problem is that sometimes I don’t know how to spell. The address should be:
            bruceomniwin(at)gmail.com
            I apologize for the mistake.

  • How amusing, liberals say blacks are inferior so they must be “given” special treatment at the expense of others with diluting the quality of edu. Wait that isn’t amusing that is socialism.

    • John Johnson

      I don’t know if “diluting” is the right word. Others here would tell us that sitting next to a minority student in a lecture hall or lab class will make us better educated, as if we had never seen or interacted with a person of color before. i am scratching my head trying to figure out how this is going to put a man on Mars, or discover a cure for Alzheimer’s. I just don’t get it. Participating in Black Lives Matter on campus protests would seem to be an important part of the learning process for many here, because we just don’t “understand”. What I don’t understand is why they are not protesting black on black violence…just cops on blacks, or white’s racist actions toward blacks. The inverse gets nary a mention. Go figure. I’m tired of it. I get called a racist because I feel this way. I can live with it. I treat everyone the same, but I do profile people everyday and in every way as we all do. It is natural. Many here think outlawing it makes it go away. Surely, that is not being taught at UT? Is it?

      • BCinBCS

        Why are blacks having BLM protests? I can’t believe that you are asking that question. The penalty for each of the crimes committed by the blacks who lost lives and spawned the movement, in EVERY case, was not the death penalty. Yea, I know, they were punks…but the penalty for being a punk is not death.

        You state: “I treat everyone the same…” If that is really the case, then the BLM protests are not meant for you but for the MANY, MANY to whom that does not apply (and that includes the many enrolled in college).

        • “Why are blacks having BLM protests? ”

          Are you serious?
          “The Democracy Alliance was created in 2005 by a handful of major donors, including billionaire financier George Soros and Taco Bell heir Rob McKay to build a permanent infrastructure to advance liberal ideas and causes.”
          Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2015/11/major-donors-consider-funding-black-lives-matter-215814#ixzz3uDkNp0Z5

          Straight our of rules for radicals, stir up unrest but offer no solutions.

          • Indiana Pearl

            Same process as the Kochs funding the so-called “grass roots” Tea Party movement . . . what a farce!

          • The Koch bros can’t play the same game as dems?

          • Indiana Pearl

            You too.

          • I am you can see me here laughing at you daily.

          • WUSRPH

            The way events are shaped that you see as the result of some conspiracy only you can see in your mind is staggering.

          • yeah I know its called facts.

        • John Johnson

          Go back and read again. I did not question their protesting cops killing some blacks that were obviously not justified. I question their railing against random drive by campus taunts that university administration cannot control and blacks shooting blacks in massive numbers. You must have missed that.

          • BCinBCS

            JJ, you are quick to use any excuse to invalidate the legitimate objections that groups may have.

            American Muslims object to the hatred and guilt by association that WASP’s show them and you dismiss their complaints because they are not protesting against radical Muslim extremism (despite the fact that they do). Blacks object to being shot down in the streets by police officers and you dismiss their complaints because they are not protesting against black on black crime (despite the fact that they do). Jeesh!

          • John Johnson

            The Muslims take to the streets in their homeland at the drop of a hat; black baby’s and young black kids get shot in drive-by’s and as retribution in inner cities and if they are doing any protesting against their own, I have missed it. Did Obama send Sharpton to Chicago as his emissary to quell the craziness? Missed that, too. Pull off the blinders, BCinBCS, and maybe then we can carry on a meaningful back and forth. If you deny this as fact, then we have no starting point.

          • BCinBCS

            I’m not denying anything but I AM objecting to you dismissing legitimate concerns when the protesters do not meet your purity test.

          • John Johnson

            First of all, I am not denying anything. I have watched the same videos you have. Several have been atrociously unwarranted shootings by police officers; others like Ferguson were justified. The blacks burned and looted their own community. I find that stupid. The U of Missouri protests and the way they were handled also hacks me off. I would be the first to true bill an officer if I was on a grand jury in many of these cases, and I would true bill our black president for not chastising the mobs and pointing out to them how divisive their destructive actions are. He gets on the airwaves before the Massachusetts officer is off his black buddy’s porch, but goes and plays golf while areas of his hometown continue to produce more dead bodies than we are losing in the Middle East. This is not registering with you?

          • BCinBCS

            Yes, JJ it is registering with me and I find it deplorable but, even so, I could ask you: “What are you doing to help the situation?” Merely complaining and demanding that these groups complete your list of actions before they have the right to demand change. I know, I know, it’s not your problem…let the proper authorities take care of it – like the government.

          • John Johnson

            What am I doing??? I am an old fart. I raised my two kids to be color blind. They are the epitome of color blind. My daughter’s two best friends are Muslim immigrants she went to high school with. I love both of them. I went to their Muslim weddings. My son coached at UTPA. He has all sorts of Hispanic friends that he continues to communicate with after a move to Alabama. My wife and I have black friends from high school we continue to communicate with and new ones we have met at our church. I should also mention the ones I dealt with in business who have retired who I still keep up with on Facebook. I see things from the middle when it comes to race issues. It is difficult for you liberals to understand how this works. When you can start to judge crazy actions as just that, without race considerations, you will be where I am.

          • BCinBCS

            I commend you on what you DID. What I asked was what are you DOING.
            (Also: Having friends of many races does not mean that you don’t have a racist attitude.)

          • John Johnson

            What am I doing? Taking care of four parents between the ages of 96 and 88, tending to wife who has Parkinson’s, and driving my grandson to and from school. Other than that, not much. As for your diagnoses, I guess I am a racist. Don’t tell my friends of color; I don’t want them to know it.

          • BCinBCS

            I’m sorry about your wife and I understand the burdens that older parents place on their adult children.

            JJ, I don’t expect you to march in the streets in support of blacks and Muslims but I don’t think that you should be campaigning against them in blogs (and in your mind, for that matter). Don’t you see that wrong is wrong no matter why or to whom it it perpetrated and that a litmus test before it can corrected is inappropriate?

            BTW, as we discussed previously, university professors do the bulk of research in this country, including research on diseases like your wife’s Parkinson’s. With the decline of private sector research labs such as Bell Lab and HP lab, the effort and costs have shifted to our schools of higher learning funded principally by the federal government. It’s a system that works but, like all large systems/institutions, must be periodically improved.

          • John Johnson

            We disagree on what the blacks are doing and what the Muslims aren’t doing. With regards to Parkinson’s and many other maladies, cutting edge stuff is coming out of places like Mayo Clinic. Dr. Kendall Lee, head of Neurosurgery as well as a research development team there in Rochester, MN is involved in fine tuning Deep Brain Stimulation surgery to aid in curbing the effects of Parkinson’s, Tourette’s, Alzheimer’s and spinal cord related paralysis.

    • WUSRPH

      You are the only person using the word “inferior” to describe members of a racial group. Your inference is that the disadvantages faced by some is the result of their race. I, on the other hand, see obstacles that have been placed in their way, which can be overcome. Sometimes that requires action by the government. Sometimes it does not. But your view forever condemns people to a lesser status.

      • BCinBCS

        Nicely said.

      • There’s where we differ, you think only the government can fix problems caused by big government.

        Here’s an example of liberal logic;

        “But neither Obama, nor the radio host, admitted that Obama’s pro-immigration policies are causing the problem he is complaining about.
        Instead, Obama argued that his big-government policies can be solved by even bigger government.
        In just 2013, for example, his pro-immigration and pro-amnesty policies — combined with the 1965 immigration law — added roughly 2.1 million foreign workers to the economy, even as 4.4 million American 18-year-old Americans began looking for jobs. During that year, wages flatlined, joblessness rose, company profits spiked and the Stock Market boomed.
        When considered over the long term, Obama and the 1965 immigration-expansion law delivered 3 million extra workers into the 2013 labor-market, to compete against the 3.5 million 18-year-old children of Americans born in 1968.

        http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/10/07/obama-bigger-govt-will-solve-problems-created-big-govt/

        First we create problems that only the government can solve….Chicago, Detroit, Baltimore, New Orleans come to mind.

  • Speaking of the definition of insanity, the voters in Ft Bend elect the mayor of Houston which is predominantly in Harris County. Many City of Houston workers fleeing Houston’s regressive taxes move to Ft Bend to escape an oppressive democrat mayor. They then drive their government issued city car into Houston to vote for the democrat running for mayor? Hahaha

  • Indiana Pearl
    • “heterogeneous archipelago”
      hahaha

    • John Johnson

      Yep…white kids join white fraternities and sororities. The blacks that are asked to join and accept are labeled Uncle Toms; the blacks huddle together with motherly white kids and professors and protest the administration’s failure to turn the campus inside out searching for the bathroom stall poets and random people driving by and yelling the N word. In classrooms an adjunct prof lectures from a book without being able to expand the conversation, and the guys drawing the big dollars go on sabbaticals and write papers on, and promote ideas fed to them by special interests who offer monetary gifts and grant money. What a great system we’ve got.

      • WUSRPH

        Another example of your view that all of us are “best when we stay with our own” and your contempt for Blacks who you see as somehow controlled by “motherly white kids and professors”. Sorry, to inform you but they can–and do–think for themselves.

        • John Johnson

          You must not be tuning into current events. Try and start with the recent videos of the University of Missouri BLM insurrection. Furthermore, your “best if we stay with our own” has never been promoted by me, and your even suggesting so is low rent and projects the type of outrageous personal affronts that you rail against on a regular basis.

      • Indiana Pearl

        You have a muddled view of academia.

  • If we looked at Baltimore. Chicago, New Orleans, Philadelphia, and for
    goodness sakes Detroit, who couldn’t admit the liberal agenda has failed.

    I’m not sure which bothers me the most is the liberal’s self smugness that blacks are inferior and need their help or the blacks that believe they are inferior.

    America is about freedom and liberty, once you take the dem’s handout you owe them.

  • Some want parity, even demand it. We’ve reached it, it is called mediocrity.

    In the College Bowl System CBS we have a potential of 120 teams and 40 bowl games…

    “With two weeks left in the season, there are only 71 bowl-eligible teams — those with at least six wins. The possibility remains that some bowls may have to take sub-.500 teams to fill out the bowl landscape now largely left unregulated by the NCAA.”

    http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/writer/dennis-dodd/25385705/with-40-bowls-spots-expected-open-ncaa-to-decide-how-to-fill-slots

    What does this teach us, pedants will waste every dollar we give them usually with poor results.

    • WUSRPH

      Again, as with “inferior”, you are the only person using the word “parity”. No one on this thread has argued for quotas or some sort of equality of results. We, unlike you, believe that individuals are different with different levels of abilities. Some are good at this. Some are good at that. But we also believe that it is to be best interests of our society that there be as few barriers to a person developing their abilities as much as possible. Removing some of them requires government action. We do not expect “equal outcomes”. But we do demand “equal opportunities” to achieve what you can.

      • “But we do demand “equal opportunities” to achieve what you can.”
        Bs when Homeland Security and TSA was formed Congresswoman Shelia Jackson Lee demanded and got her constituents interviews at IAH a week before the general public. Dems break every rule to push their agenda. Dems will use any and every means to buy votes.
        Pull your head out of the sand.

        • WUSRPH

          As usual, your entry has NOTHING to do with the subject under discussion….It is only another of your continual attacks on Democrats. Read what is being discussed sometime. You might even have an original thought on the subject. Ha-Ha-Hah.

          • You really believe dems politicians are for equal opportunity?
            They could care less about the so called small people, what they do is buy votes with tax dollars and you can’t or won’t admit it.

          • BCinBCS

            JBB, I think that I’ve finally figured you out.

            I could never imagine how someone who is so monolithic and so consistently wrong wouldn’t be embarrassed into silence (or, at least, into modification of his beliefs) but I have come to realize that you are like the drug addict who, despite the overwhelming downside to using addictive drugs, just cannot stop. It’s apparent that you can’t control yourself. (Your psychology is very interesting to me – you are definitely an outlier on the Bell curve.)

          • You outed me…my goal as stated here many times is to prove liberals have no impulse control, you’ve just proved it again.

          • Indiana Pearl

            You mean “bipolar”?

          • I’m sure some libs are bipolar….however you want it.

          • Indiana Pearl

            My diagnosis of Booksie is “bipolar in an extended manic phase.”

  • Indiana Pearl

    Mr. W, give it up on this topic. You cannot educate the uneducable.

    • WUSRPH

      I knew that about JJ before we started. I was hoping to reach others who might be more interested in something but repeating their own fixed thoughts. Of course, in doing so, I repeated myself too often…..

      • No you continue to force your beliefs on others…..here’s a new tack try listening. Who knows you might learn something.

        • John Johnson

          It is the condescending liberals who have gone through adult life living in a covey with like minded, self proclaimed “intellectuals” and garnering their “knowledge” from books…obviously believing everything they read.

          • Indiana Pearl

            No. Garner knowledge from ALL sources. Conservatives hate science and analysis. They let other people do their thinking for them.

          • Conservatives run businesses and scientists and analysts work for them.

          • Indiana Pearl

            Talk to Corey Ventner.

          • Sure set up a meeting.

          • Indiana Pearl

            Are you kidding? If Ted Cruz won’t be seen with you, Ventner won’t either.

          • Again a flawed premise, don’t you ever get tired of being wrong?

      • Indiana Pearl

        Concepts of justice fall on deaf ears in conservative America.

  • I was wondering what the liberals had their panties in a wad about over the UT admissions, and I see it now. Liberals are upset on Justice Scalia’s remarks….

    Justice Scalia was speaking about the mismatch theory some support.

    “There are those who contend that it does not benefit African-Americans to get them into the University of Texas where they do not do well, as opposed to having them go to a less advanced school, a slower track school where they do well.”
    http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/brent-baker/2015/12/13/chuck-todd-smears-scalia-i-couldnt-help-think-al-campanis

    I agree it would not be fair to take a David Clyde out of high school and start him on a major league team.
    “But the can’t-miss prospect who was 18-0 with an 0.18 ERA as a Westchester senior went just 18-33 as a major leaguer. He threw his last major league pitch on Aug. 7, 1979, as a 24-year-old Cleveland Indian, 37 days shy of qualifying for MLB’s pension plan”

    http://sportsday.dallasnews.com/texas-rangers/rangersheadlines/2013/06/22/townsend-40-years-after-memorable-debut-ex-ranger-david-clyde-reflects-on-a-career-cut-short

    The Texas Rangers exploited David Clyde and it wasn’t in his best interests but it was in theirs, making millions off him.

    UT and the left has an agenda and it isn’t the interests of minorities. Its pandering for votes with tax payers’ money.

    I’m hearing from many professors, that administrators are telling them to pass everyone, period.

    So why do dems want to setup minorities for failure? Maybe the low information voters should ask Hillary that question. They might learn something.

    • Indiana Pearl

      Hahaha! “Professors”?

      • You think professor are funny, I’ve met some interesting professors. One of my favorites wore a bow tie and black horn rimmed glasses like Orville Redenbacher. He had the personality of a rock.

        • Indiana Pearl

          “You think professor are funny.” Wha?

          • “Orville was no professor and neither are you.”
            No one said Orville was a professor but some how you heard that. Do you hear voices often?

        • Indiana Pearl

          Booksie, yew is so funny. Orville Redenbacher wasn’t a professor. I lived in Indiana for over forty years. Orville was no professor and neither are you.

          https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orville_Redenbacher

          • Thats what I like about you, despite being full of hate I like it that you’re not afraid to say something stupid.

  • How many different ways can democrats buy votes? How about a chillern’s allowance? You think that is new?

    “The child-stipend idea has its origins in early British feminism and in the pro-natal, labor-market goals of postwar European countries.”

    http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/12/americas-need-for-a-family-allowance/420123/

    This was suggested by Sen Daniel Moynihan in the 60’s.

    It wasn’t adopted so liberals went with plan B “lets kill the babies.”

    Wouldn’t it have been easier for their fathers to have taken care of them?

    Well JBB sometimes you just have to understand a baby is a mistake…

  • Can someone explain why certain commenters are allowed to derail intelligent discussion with off topic and offensive posts, and who regularly engage in ad hominem attacks? I see this regularly on a variety of different articles by the same commenters. I do not understand why TM or any news outlet allows this, other than they refuse to pay for someone to police comments in each of their sections.

    • Does this bother you?
      “WUSRPH • 32 minutes ago
      The Republican judge in one of the state’s most Republican counties Friday threw out Republican Atty. Gen. Ken Paxton’s attempts to get his criminal indictments dismissed. This should mean the trial can proceed, but Paxton is likely to appeal to a higher court.”
      It doesn’t bother me, it just shows some can’t stay on topic.

      • I’m referring to the chronic abusers not the occasional off topic comment. Plus I’ve never seen WUSRPH use an ad hominem attack on another poster.

        • Indiana Pearl

          Oh, he has occasionally done so.

          • I’m sure he has, I just don’t remember seeing one as I am on here rather infrequently; but I think we are all guilty of that from time to time, it is not a regular habit for the majority of commenters here.

          • Indiana Pearl

            There are very few women who post here. They have been attacked with sexist, vulgar comments by one or two male commenters and are driven away. I have been called “an old hag” several times by one male commenter who is at least as old as I am and weighs twice as much as I do. Several women have been threatened with physical harm – yet TM does little to address this bad behavior.

            Several nice gentlemen suggest that I “stifle myself.” Most of these nice gentlemen fail to admonish the most egregious offender.

            If I am bullied, I will fight back.

          • John Johnson

            “If you wrestle with pigs…”.

          • I have and it seems they love it.

          • Indiana Pearl

            Pigs are smarter than dogs.

          • I’ve wrestled with pigs and slept with some dogs they both seem to love it….

          • Indiana Pearl

            They tell you that because they know you’re crazy and carry a gun.

          • You think there is something wrong with that? 🙂

          • John Johnson

            Now this is more like it. I love me some back and forth like this. Would have been good stuff for a Cheers episode.

          • Indiana Pearl

            Butbutbut they were all liberals and drank BOOZE!

          • naw…just the crazy ones.

          • Indiana Pearl

            I KNOW there’s something wrong with that! Stop with the rhetorical questions. You ain’t Socrates . . .

          • and you ain’t Minnie Pearl…..

          • Indiana Pearl

            Out of sympathy for your long-suffering wife, I will make not further comment.

          • Trust me you in no way speak for her.

          • Oh I have been the receiver of misogynistic bullying on here as well, but that is not the reason I am on here infrequently it is more due to time constraints.

          • Indiana Pearl

            I understand that.

          • WUSRPH

            Please slap my hand when I do.

    • Indiana Pearl

      Welcome to BurkaBlog, where up is down and down is up. No adult supervision . . .

      • Indiana Pearl

        You can e-mail the editor, Brian Sweany, as many of us have. Believe it or not, some improvement has occurred, but it’s a constant challenge:

        [email protected]

  • WUSRPH

    Off the topic a bit. There was good news out of France yesterday. The Trump-like rightist party that had done so well in last week’s regional elections COLLAPSED when the voters had to make a final decision that could have given it real power. One hopes that, as the polls show here, that Trump and company also have a limited level of support that is not enough to carry him/them into power. Donald, like Le Pen, may be unable to go all the way.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/french-conservative-front-national-collapses-in-runoff-elections_566ddefae4b0e292150e44e0

    • WUSRPH Indiana Pearl • an hour ago
      Please slap my hand when I do.
      hahaha you can’t this stuff up….

      • WUSRPH

        I was, as anyone who can read knows, referring to those rare occasions which I slip and act like you in attacking anyone and everyone……

        • wha….?
          and thats why I come here the entertainment….

          • WUSRPH

            It also helps if you use a “function word” where it fits into sentence. (Like the preposition “for”) ..That way what you say might someday start to make sense.

          • I would miss you. You’ve probably have never noticed that I’ve never spoken an ill word about anyone here without being attacked first. So why don’t we do this, have a discussion about issues.
            That is the purpose of this blog.

          • Indiana Pearl

            You have a convenient memory.

          • You must not be remembering that right.

          • Indiana Pearl

            Show us the beef. You make thousands of unsubstantiated statements each week.

            Aracept is your friend . . .

          • gin is not your friend.

          • Indiana Pearl

            You should try it sometime – a waterglass with your breakfast when you get up at 3:00 a.m. Perhaps then you’d make more sense.

          • Early to be early to rise…..you’re making fun of my work ethic?…..hahaha

          • Indiana Pearl

            Bipolar mania . . .

          • Had it all your life? Maybe its your diet. You and Rosemary might cut down on the gin….

          • WUSRPH

            You have this problem identifying when you have attacked someone. You cannot, as you do, constantly say that all Democrats are liars, thieves, crooks and much worse and not expect people who read it who are Democrats to feel that you have not attacked them. Maybe you did not attack them by name as an individual, but you certainly attacked all they believe in…..and that is an attack on them.

          • I’ve never said that you ass*u*me*d that. I’m sure among the plethora of dead people who vote dem every year there is at least one honest voter.

          • BCinBCS
          • Indiana Pearl

            The Gooney Squad will discount this report because it’s from the “slanted” NYT.

          • BCinBCS

            Well, Pearl, the Times is merely reporting the data. The data, itself, comes from another source. Maybe they’ll take that into consideration.

          • Indiana Pearl

            Probably not . . . they won’t even get that far.

          • data…hahaha

            “Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital.”
            ― Aaron Levenstein

            I love it when the NY Times misrepresents data….and the low information says but I saw it in the NooYorkTimes so it has to be true. On The Opinion Pages no less….

          • Wasn’t Clinton impeached for lying under oath…..huh?

          • Indiana Pearl

            “for” the entertainment . . .

      • Indiana Pearl

        “Slap your hand” when you do what?

  • John Johnson

    OK, who squealed on me?

    • WUSRPH

      Now, now. I am certain that “ladies” at the old Red Baron were not that bad.

      • John Johnson

        Hahaha. Mark yourself up one. I laughed out loud…and you’re right…they weren’t.

    • Indiana Pearl

      Moi.

  • UT’s reign of corruption:

    “University of Texas athletics employees systematically abused their access to Longhorns football tickets for years, resulting in preferential treatment for favored donors, secret arrangements with ticket brokers and untold financial losses for the university,an audit obtained by the American-Statesman reveals.”

    http://pushjunction.com/l/21386

    We know certain perfessors were given preferential treatments with low interest loans from a slush fund.

    We know the VP of Admissions resigned and left Dodge, quickly.

    We’re asked to believe the UT admissions policies were geared to help “the little people.”

    Fool me one shame on me….

  • donuthin2

    338 comments at this point. But it is a quick read if you disregard the pointless posts and responses of and to JBB.

    • You said it the pointless responses to my posts, plus yours of course.

  • Indiana Pearl

    Contact the editor, Brian Sweany:

    [email protected]

    • You have him on speed dial?
      I’m gonna report you, write you up, tell mama on you.

      • Indiana Pearl

        Haven’t e-mailed – not phoned – since Lilly and I were threatened.

        Get over yourself.

        • You troll for people to email him frequently.

          • Indiana Pearl

            If someone hates the fact that you’ve attempted to highjack the blog, I’ll call it out.

          • There is no conspiracy to hijack the blog except the kook’s minds.

  • Kelly Sanders

    commonality and equality start first in the home, then carries over into the church then the schools. So many low income families are diversified due to their family origins. Neither race, disability income or religion should be used for acceptance purposes. If a person desires further education they should be allowed to apply and be entered upon their willingness to learn not their ability or inability to pass high school mnemonics, new math race, religion or political orientation.