College Republicans Say Scholarship Was Created to Spark Debate

All the media attention is focused on a $250 Caucasian Achievement and Recognition Scholarship offered by Mroszczyk and the BU chapter of the College Republicans. Applicants must have a cumulative grade point average of 3.2 or higher; they must write two essays; and, here's the kicker, they must be at least one-quarter Caucasian.

The application itself offers an explanation: "We believe that racial preferences in all their forms are perhaps the worst form of bigotry confronting America today."

http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=2674267&page=1
Original Post
I think you're missing the point. The purpose was to prove how silly using race to determine who gets a scholarship rather than achievement really is. Scholarships, jobs, promotions, whatever should be based solely on experience, merit, skill, and education. Race should not be a factor at all.
The blacks have their scholarships, among many other things that are exclusive to black americans. They even have a black history month and their own Miss Black America beauty pagent. If the caucausions started any of this type of event there would be even more outrage than this. I say if the blacks can have their own things like this, then it is only fair that the whites can also
quote:
Originally posted by Heads Up:
"We need affirmitave action for white students vs. the Asians. Asians are running away with the high scores it takes to get into medical school. The Asian kids seem to be smarter."


On the surface, it seems to be a reasonable argument to claim that "We believe that racial preferences in all their forms are perhaps the worst form of bigotry confronting America today."

Yet, consider the golf game.

For example, what's YOUR handicap?

Handicaps are a relatively recent (by comparison to the age of the game) invention of a golf "handicap" which is a method of allowing a less experienced or junior player to compete on a "level playing field" with a more accomplished or superior player.

It's considered the 'great equalizer.'

In a similar sense, the majority ethnicity (I don't like to use the word 'race' - there's only one, the human (though same say two, including the rat - it's a joke... laugh!) - has a distinct advantage over the minority ethnicity. So, how should an equality system be established to create a 'level playing field'?

Hence, the creation of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, the United Negro College Fund, and other organizations created especially and specifically to benefit the Negro.

Caucasians continue to have significant advantages over Negroes in many areas.

It is reasonable to create a system to allow everyone to play on a 'level playing field.'

Now... respecting the comment that "Asian kids seem to be smarter."

The key word is "seem."

They're not smarter than American kids, they just work harder.

A good example of that can be seen in the research performed by Stanley and Danko, and published in their book "The Millionaire Next Door."

"One of the major myths concerning wealth in this country relates to ethnic origin. Too many people think that America's affluent population is composed predominantly of direct descendants of the Mayflower voyagers. According to our research, 7.71 percent of all households in the English category have a net worth of $1 million or more. Three other ancestry groups have significantly higher concentrations of millionaires. How can it be possible that the English ancestry group does not have the highest concentration of millionaire households? The longer the time here, the less likely it will produce a disproportionately large percentage of millionaires. Why is this the case? Because we are a consumption-based society. In general, the longer the average member of an ancestry group has been in America, the more likely he or she will become fully socialized to our high-consumption lifestyle. There is another reason. First-generation Americans tend to be self-employed. Self-employment is a major positive correlate of wealth."

This book has some of the most fascinating research findings about wealth.
quote:
Originally posted by WLHandley531:
The blacks have their scholarships, among many other things that are exclusive to black americans. They even have a black history month and their own Miss Black America beauty pagent. If the caucausions started any of this type of event there would be even more outrage than this. I say if the blacks can have their own things like this, then it is only fair that the whites can also
I'm assuming this is a joke?
Shoals Lover...You'll have to show me how caucasians have significant advantages over Negroes in many areas. I don't see it.

Here's a personal example. I had to pay back student loans while my Negro counterpart got a free ride. I roomed with two black girls, who, judging by the cars they drove, the groceries they were able to buy and the abundance of clothes they had, were a lot better off than my single Mom, my older sister (also attending college on student loan dollars) and myself.

Here's another. At one time, my husband (caucasian) managed a fast food restaurant. One of his black employees asked him..."why is it you make more money than me and yet I drive a nicer car than you and have more blow money than you?" So he asked what their family payed in rent. Based on income...so nearly nonexistant. He asked how much they spent on groceries. Food stamps paid for most of it. He asked how much they paid for insurance. Medicaid cost them nothing. This employee also has the option, unlike my husband, of taking college classes and remaining debt free. So what was my husband's response to this? "Well, I'd have money too if the someone else paid all my bills."

So, tell me...WHO has the advantage and WHO has the handicap?
Posted 24 November 2006 07:54 PM Hide Post
I think you're missing the point. The purpose was to prove how silly using race to determine who gets a scholarship rather than achievement really is. Scholarships, jobs, promotions, whatever should be based solely on experience, merit, skill, and education. __Race should not be a factor at all.



And you know, according to the government, it isn't supposed to be. If that were really true, then why will you find on all sorts of applications or paperwork, a place for "RACE"?
Exactly, skyryder. That should never be asked. If you are trying to fill a job with the most qualified person or if you are trying to decide who qualifies for a scholarship, grant or ANY kind of governmental aid, there is no reason to know the color of the applicant's skin. It should have no bearing on the decision.
quote:
Originally posted by Nyourface42004:
quote:
Originally posted by WLHandley531:
The blacks have their scholarships, among many other things that are exclusive to black americans. They even have a black history month and their own Miss Black America beauty pagent. If the caucausions started any of this type of event there would be even more outrage than this. I say if the blacks can have their own things like this, then it is only fair that the whites can also
I'm assuming this is a joke?

why would you assume that. what wrong with a little white pride. what wrong with having a beauty pagent where no one wonders if someone was advanced just to appease a certain population.
quote:
Originally posted by Nyourface42004:
I'm assuming this is a joke?

The joke is you know it to be true. There is no White, Native American, Asian, etc... history month. The only race that has their "own" history month is the Blacks and they complain about it because it only has 28 days in it.
......that we are all created equal......if only that statement were true...unfortunately due to nepotism, cronism, and the good ole boy system, certain organizations had to be created so that everyone would be on a level playing field. Caucasians do not have to have a white only anything because it's automatically implied. This country is white and everyone else better get in where they can.
quote:
Originally posted by konniep_1:
......that we are all created equal......if only that statement were true...unfortunately due to nepotism, cronism, and the good ole boy system, certain organizations had to be created so that everyone would be on a level playing field. Caucasians do not have to have a white only anything because it's automatically implied. This country is white and everyone else better get in where they can.


Implied how exactly? Not being sarcastic here, I just don't see it. Maybe at one time, but not now. I'm white & I've dealt with nepotism, cronyism & the good ole boy system myself, meaning someone else less qualified got the job because they knew somebody.

Dean C...you forgot about Hispanics. They, too, get their own special month.
affirmative action: Democrats telling blacks that they are incapable of getting through life on their own.

Democrat to blacks on affirmative: There is no need for you to earn anything on your own because just can't to it. In other words, there is no need for you to pass a post graduation test in high school. You don't need to study or over achieve. You need to vote democratic so that we can take care of you.
Heads, you're just having too much fun with this new forum, aren't you?

Next thing you know, your name'll be "Mutha' frum anutha' Brutha!

Then, it'll be "Yo Mama," then "Nacho Mama," then "Hoochie Mama," then "Won Hot Mama," and who knows where it'll go from there!?!
No, not necessarily.

Read the following and please share your thoughts.


We shouldn't want to have the dominant economic position we do now, because the only way we can do it with only 300 million people on a planet of six and half billion, is if there's a huge unacceptable number of poor people in the world.

The Indians have a billion people, and their economy's growing rapidly, but their per capita income's still about $600 dollars.

The Chinese are more than double that, but they still have vast swaths of poor people.

And yet, since intelligence and ability are equally distributed throughout the world, as other people get their act together, by definition, if they have more people than we do, as a nation, we won't be dominant.

The Chinese, in the next two or three days, probably, will have a trillion dollars in cash reserves. And we have a combined annual budget and trade deficit of a trillion dollars. We had to borrow money from them to pay for my tax cut. As you know, I don't think that's a very good idea. But, I think we have to be mindful of that.

There was a view that prevailed in the current government for several years, although I think its changing now, that since we had this magic moment we should use all this power to try to solve all the problems, get rid of all the bad guys... change everything. The problem is that, a humble view of human nature recognizes that there will always be problems with us, and that what we have to do is create a system in which we can solve them together.

So, I'll give you this one example:

Let's assume you support the war in Iraq and the conflict in Afghanistan and a $500 billion a year military budget.

We only spend about 20, maybe $25 billion now on foreign assistance of all kinds.

But, we KNOW HOW to help people alleviate poverty, fight AIDS, TB and malaria... we know what it would cost to put all 130 million kids in the world who don't go to school in school, in a way that would serve our foreign policy interests. If you look at Pakistan, for example, we gave them a lot of money to buy airplanes, we gave them a lot of airplanes, and we didn't give them any money to put their kids in schools, so when poor people couldn't afford the schools they sent their kids to the Madrassas, and the rest is history.

If we were to increase that by $30 billion a year... if we were to give $50 billion dollars a year in foreign assistance, or if we were to go up to seven-tenths of one percent (0.7%) of our income in foreign assistance, which is the international goal (and you can work out the numbers in an $11 trillion dollar GDP), in my opinion, that would do more than almost anything we could do to create a world with more partners and fewer adversaries... and, a world where once we're no longer dominant, we'll still be a very important... I hope we'll always be the BEST country in the world, the most important country in the world, but we will not have a dominant position.

And dominance, as you see from the current difficulties in Iraq, is a way over-rated concept, anyway.

So, I just think that we need to ask ourselves always, 'what kind of return will we get on an investment to have the kind of world we want our children and grandchildren to live in, if we are no longer dominant?'

And, in effect, we already know that the benefits of dominance are ambiguous at best.

So, that's just one example. I wish if we... $30 billion dollars more and we could pay our fair share of trying to meet the U.N. Millennium Development goals, it would change the attitude toward America, and it would create a world, I think, that would be nicer for us to live in if we can't throw our weight around.


Add Reply

Likes (0)
Post

×
×
×
×