Dude, he's a closet racist. You're not going to get much more out of him.

Pointing out that AA lets people into places where they have lower total credentials than basically anybody else in the student body (legacy admits excluded), which is a fact, makes one racist. When they aren't arguing that this is a fact, liberals point out how it's important due to other injustices. Cute things, those liberals.

Hey, you were getting props for intellectual honesty here; no need to turn this into another thing about What AA Proponents (Liberals) Do. I dare say I have argued with you about affirmative action more than any other person on this board, and I only ever called you bigoted with respect to the horrible things you said about the Lebanese. Anyway, I'm staying out of this debate. As I said before, I'm just putting this out there.

Hey, you were getting props for intellectual honesty here; no need to turn this into another thing about What AA Proponents (Liberals) Do. I dare say I have argued with you about affirmative action more than any other person on this board, and I only ever called you bigoted with respect to the horrible things you said about the Lebanese. Anyway, I'm staying out of this debate. As I said before, I'm just putting this out there.

I said nothing about the Lebanese per se... I said something about those who wish for a global caliphate.

Anyway, I said nothing remotely racist and then, not unexpectedly, get called one for daring to bring up the DEFINITION of AA. Funny, the other side does that occasionally as well, about other topics using different names

GoDumb

I just assumed you were a racist because you said the “even amongst non-URM peers who have similar numbers” statement. I assumed that since “soft factors” are so highly subjective that one would accept the idea that similar numbers makes one equal.

Being racist doesn't mean you hate others, use racial slurs, or anything silly like that. I just assumed based on some of your statements that you think URMs are inferior, even with similar numbers, to nonURMs - and there is nothing they can really do about it but cure AIDS.

I just assumed you were a racist because you said the “even amongst non-URM peers who have similar numbers” statement. I assumed that since “soft factors” are so highly subjective that one would accept the idea that similar numbers makes one equal.

Being racist doesn't mean you hate others, use racial slurs, or anything silly like that. I just assumed based on some of your statements that you think URMs are inferior, even with similar numbers, to nonURMs - and there is nothing they can really do about it but cure AIDS.

but I am dumb.

URM is not a "credential". Non-URMs are less likely, again by definition, to be admitted for reasons that do NOT affect their ability to succeed in the eyes of the adcomm.

Turning your statement around, you are saying that the "soft factor" of being a URM is no different than most other "soft factors" that can help admission to law school. Like, I don't know, a Master's degree or PhD.

But in your world those things are identical. Yeah, you're dumb.

I never said being a URM is credential nor do I think URM status is identical to having a MA or a PhD. Being a URM is a life experience, which does not equate to having a MA or PhD.

I just did not like the “even amongst non-URM peers who have similar numbers” statement. That’s really where it ends. It’s was just a matter of syntax.