“Three years ago this week, a newly elected President Obama faced the American people and said that if he couldn’t turn the economy around in three years, he’d be looking at a one-term proposition. We’re here to collect.” That was the central focus of GOP front-runner Mitt Romney’s rousing victory speech. He delivered his remarks after enjoying a sweeping victory in the Florida Primary. “There are fewer candidates than when the race began, but the three gentlemen left are serious and able competitors,” he added. “And I congratulate them on another hard-fought contest in this campaign. Primary contests are not easy – and they’re not supposed to be.” “As this primary unfolds, our opponents in the other party have been watching,” Romney said. “They like to comfort themselves with the thought that a competitive campaign will leave us divided and weak. But I’ve got some news for them: A competitive primary does not divide us; it prepares us. And when we gather here in Tampa seven months from now for our convention, ours will be a united party with a winning ticket for America!” He added that leadership is about “taking responsibility, not making excuses.” “In another era of American crisis, Thomas Paine is reported to have said, ‘Lead, follow, or get out of the way.’ Mr. President, you were elected to lead, you chose to follow, and now it’s time for you to get out of the way!” Romney exclaimed to resounding cheers. Watch Romney’s speech below via PBS. A partial transcript follows: Below is a partial transcript of Romney’s speech: My leadership helped build businesses from scratch. My leadership helped save the Olympics from scandal and give our athletes the chance to make us all proud. My leadership cut taxes 19 times and cast over 800 vetoes. We balanced every budget, and we kept our schools first among fifty states. My leadership will end the Obama era and begin a new era of American prosperity! This campaign is about more than replacing a President. It is about saving the soul of America. President Obama and I have two very different visions of America. President Obama wants to grow government and continue to amass trillion dollar deficits. I will not just slow the growth of government, I will cut it. I will not just freeze government’s share of the total economy, I will reduce it. And, without raising taxes, I will finally balance the budget. President Obama’s view of capitalism is to send your money to his friends’ companies. My vision for free enterprise is to return entrepreneurship to the genius and creativity of the American people. On one of the most personal matters of our lives, our health care, President Obama would turn decision making over to government bureaucrats. He forced through Obamacare; I will repeal it. Like his colleagues in the faculty lounge who think they know better, President Obama demonizes and denigrates almost every sector of our economy. I will make America the most attractive place in the world for entrepreneurs, for innovators, and for job creators. And unlike the other people running for President, I know how to do that. President Obama orders religious organizations to violate their conscience; I will defend religious liberty and overturn regulations that trample on our first freedom. President Obama believes America’s role as leader in the world is a thing of the past. He is intent on shrinking our military capacity at a time when the world faces rising threats. I will insist on a military so powerful no one would ever think of challenging it. President Obama has adopted a strategy of appeasement and apology. I will stand with our friends and speak out for those seeking freedom. President Obama wants to “fundamentally transform” America. We want to restore America to the founding principles that made this country great. Our plans protect freedom and opportunity, and our blueprint is the Constitution of the United States. Together, we will build an America where “hope” is a new job with a paycheck, not a faded word on an old bumper sticker. The path I lay out is not one paved with ever increasing government checks and cradle-to-grave assurances that government will always be the solution. If this election is a bidding war for who can promise more benefits, then I’m not your President. You have that President today. But if you want to make this election about restoring American greatness, then I hope you will join us. If you believe the disappointments of the last few years are a detour, not our destiny, then I am asking for your vote. I’m asking each of you to remember how special it is to be an American. I want you to remember what it was like to be hopeful and excited about the future, not to dread each new headline. I want you to remember when you spent more time dreaming about where to send your kids to college than wondering how to make it to the next paycheck. I want you to remember when you weren’t afraid to look at your retirement savings or the price at the pump. I want you to remember when our White House reflected the best of who we are, not the worst of what Europe has become. That America is still out there. We still believe in that America. We still believe in the America that is a land of opportunity and a beacon of freedom. We believe in the America that challenges each of us to be better and bigger than ourselves. This election, let’s fight for the America we love. We believe in America. Thank you. And God bless America.

Read the original:
Romney Recalls Obama‘s ’One-Term’ Proposition in FL Victory Speech: ‘We’re Here to Collect’

Tagged with:
 

Photoshop: Reader Jimmy D. Yesterday, the SEIU and left-wing USA Action launched Spanish-language radio attacks on Mitt Romney for his support of immigration enforcement measures. One of Romney’s advisers is Kris Kobach — a constitutional law professor, Kansas Secretary of State, and staunch leader in the fight against illegal alien amnesty and ACORN-style voter fraud. Eliseo Medina, the secretary-treasurer of Service Employees International Union, blasted Romney on Monday during a conference call announcing a Spanish-language radio ad the union is launching in partnership with Priorities USA Action, a super-PAC supporting President Obama. Medina, the No. 2 official at the influential union, was reacting to an answer Romney gave at a debate Monday night where he said “self-deportation” was the answer to ridding the country of illegal immigrants. “It’s basically to say, ‘Make their life miserable’” by refusing to rent to them or to provide access to heat and water,” Medina said. “Make it difficult for their kids and their schools.” Asked by The Hill how Romney’s comments could be construed to imply that illegal immigrants should be denied basic necessities, Medina pointed to Romney’s close relationship with Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach, who has endorsed Romney. Kobach has been credit with writing most of Alabama’s harsh anti-illegal immigration law, which has been challenged in the courts. “Mr. Romney has said he wants to support and he joins in supporting Kris Kobach,” Medina said. “When he says he supports those kinds of policies, he has to own all of it.” “This is a dishonest smear from President Obama’s liberal allies and a desperate attempt to distract from his abysmal record,” said Romney adviser Albert Martinez. “It will do nothing to help the millions of Hispanics who have been hit especially hard as a result of the Obama economy.” Martinez said Hispanics, like all Floridians, believe Romney is the best person to rebuild the economy and to replace Obama. Well, look now, who’s mimicking the open-borders SEIU and blurring the lines between illegal and legal immigration. Yep. Newt Gingrich: Sen. Marco Rubio scolded Newt Gingrich’s presidential campaign over a Spanish-language radio ad that accuses rival Mitt Romney of being “anti-immigrant” “This kind of language is more than just unfortunate. It’s inaccurate, inflammatory, and doesn’t belong in this campaign,” Rubio told The Miami Herald when asked about the ad. “The truth is that neither of these two men is anti-immigrant,” Rubio said. “Both are pro-legal immigration and both have positive messages that play well in the Hispanic community.” Rubio’s sharp rebuke comes a day after he subtly corrected Gingrich for comparing Romney to former Florida Gov. Charlie Crist, branded by conservatives as a turncoat who left the party before Rubio beat him in 2010. The criticisms from someone of Rubio’s stature in the Republican Party comes as polls show a near-even race, albeit with Gingrich surging. Rubio plans to stay neutral in the race. He’s a potential running mate whom both candidates would love to have on the ballot. The truth is that neither Gingrich nor Romney has a strong, consistent overall record on border security and enforcement. But at least Romney’s been traveling in the right direction…while Gingrich once again echoes left-wing language and plays the race card to get ahead. Nose plugs. Get out yer nose plugs. *** Newt and his supporters have been deriding the notion of self-deportation as some sort of alien, offensive concept. Long-time readers of this blog and of my investigative work on immigration have been familiar with it for years. It’s attrition through enforcement , it’s humane , and it works . *** Can you be more two-faced? Newt has been winning massive adoration and applause for claiming he’ll stand up for states like South Carolina and Alabama , which have been sued by the Obama DOJ over tough immigration laws. Then he joins the likes of the SEIU and slams the very “anti-immigrant” policies authored by Kris Kobach that the Obama DOJ wants to overturn. Emetic of the day. *** Update: Newt retreats. From GOP Hispanic leaders calling him out, via the Miami Herald: While we may have differences of opinion with regard to some of Governor Romney’s policies on immigration, we nonetheless stand firmly behind him because we know he is the most qualified conservative candidate to defeat President Obama and to lift up all Americans, including Hispanics. Like your attacks on the free market, attacking Mitt Romney as “anti-immigrant” only serves President Obama and his liberal allies. Mr. Speaker, our party deserves better. Sincerely, Secretary Carlos Gutierrez Senator Mel Martinez Raquel A. Rodriguez Zoraida Fonalledas Jorge Arrizurieta R. Alexander Acosta Remedios Diaz Oliver Rudy Fernandez Jeanette Prenger Jerry Natividad Sal Gomez Allen Gutierrez Hector Barreto Jose Fuentes Bertica Cabrera Morris Rafael Elias-Linero

Read the original post:
Gingrich channels open-borders SEIU; Rubio rebukes; Update:Newt retreats

Tagged with:
 

Recall what the president once said: “I believe in American exceptionalism, just as I suspect that the Brits believe in British exceptionalism and the Greeks believe in Greek exceptionalism.” Well, here’s some Greek exceptionalism for you, at London’s Daily Mail , ” Children ‘dumped in streets by Greek parents who can’t afford to look after them any more’ .” Hundreds of children have been abandoned in the crisis of economic austerity. I would rather work my fingers to the bone before abandoning my kids somewhere, and I think most people I’ve ever met would do the same. HAT TIP : ” Larwyn’s Linx, Everything Is At Stake, All Right . Added : It could happen here, or it could happen again, I should say. Thinking further, I found this about the Great Depression: The Depression had a powerful impact on family life. It forced couples to delay marriage and drove the birthrate below the replacement level for the first time in American history. The divorce rate fell, for the simple reason that many couples could not afford to maintain separate households or pay legal fees. But rates of desertion soared. By 1940, 1.5 million married women were living apart from their husbands. More than 200,000 vagrant children wandered the country as a result of the breakup of their families. I would die before I abandoned my own family. And dumping children is un-American if you ask me. And I believe it’s people who’ve been coddled their entire lives, and who sponge off others and the state, who’d be the first to dump their kids on the side of the road. In other words, progressives. And if it comes it will be the result of the Obama administration’s profligacy and recklessness . He’s driving this country into the ditch. All the more reason to get rid of these people in November.

See the original post here:
Greek Exceptionalism: Parents Dump Children They Can ‘No Longer Afford’

Tagged with:
 

The ever-vigilant crew at WeaselZippers has uncovered a jaw-dropping incident at Woodbrook Elementary School in Virginia in which third-grade students performed (and school officials claim wrote ) a song titled, “Part of the 99″ as part of a “Kid Pan Alley” performance in October. But despite the backlash, Albermale County school district is standing behind the song, claiming the children chose and wrote the lyrics themselves. The lyrics, which mirror the very same sentiments and slogans espoused by the Occupy movement, have critics up in arms. The highly politicized song, which many believe is intended to indoctrinate children, follows below: Some people have it all But they still don’t think they have enough They want more money A faster ride They’re not content Never satisfied Yes — they’re the 1 percent I used to be one of the 1 percent I worked all the time Never saw my family Couldn’t make life rhyme Then the bubble burst It really, really hurt I lost my money Lost my pride Lost my home Now I’m part of the 99 Some people have it all But they still don’t think they have enough They want more money A faster ride They’re not content Never satisfied Yes — they’re the 1 percent I used to be sad, now I’m satisfied ’Cause I really have enough Though I lost my yacht and plane Didn’t need that extra stuff Could have been much worse You don’t need to be first ’Cause I’ve got my friends Here by my side Don’t need it all I’m so happy to be part of the 99 Local CBS 19 reports: Conservative blogs are buzzing, discussing what they call “an indoctrinating sing-along” with an Occupy Message. In one blog, Weasel Zippers, writes “to have third graders sing about class warfare and rail against the one percent is evil and a violation of the trust parents put in them [schools].” “Just as I wouldn’t promote a Tea Party song in a third grade class, I think the same is true for any song of political ideology.” says Jefferson Area Tea Party Chair, Carole Thorpe. Kid Pan Alley is an organization that helps kids write and perform their own songs. Their mission is to inspire kids to be creators. Students write the songs and school officials are standing by the lyrics. “They don’t censor what the kids write. They don’t shape what the kids write. It all comes out of the kids own mouths and the kids own words,” claims Albemarle County School Board Chair, Steve Koleszar. But many question whether third-graders have the faculties or political knowledge to write such lyrics and even if they do, assert that a song like “99″ has no place in schools, period. “Does this also include religious content of lyrics? Would it include profanity? Does the school at any point say this content is inappropriate for an eight-year-old?,” presses Thorpe. Kid Pan Alley leaders have addressed the song, saying “we have taken swift action to clarify our guidelines for lyrical content.” School officials are standing by the Kid Pan Alley program and also the lyrics. “The kids choose the topic, this class chose the topic and those are their words” asserts Koleszar.

Tagged with:
 

Just after Halloween, ABC’s Jimmy Kimmel aired a collection of home videos featuring parents tricking their children and telling them that all of the Halloween candy had been eaten. Today we bring you more video GOLD from Kimmel. This time, Kimmel challenged parents to trick their kids with by giving them one early Christmas present… but it had to be a lousy present. ( Slight content warning as the last child is very upset when he hears what really happened. ) (H/T Jimmy Kimmel Live)

Tagged with:
 

The attack goons of the Wisconsin Education Association Council are attempting to destroy high school teacher Kristi Lacroix, who appeared in this pro-Scott Walker advertisement last month: Greta Van Susteren interviewed Governor Walker on the developments, ” Wis. Woman Allegedly Harassed for Criticizing ‘Sour Grapes’ Recall Movement on Gov. Walker “: VAN SUSTEREN: Now Kristi LaCroix said there is even an online campaign to get her fired. Law enforcement says there’s been dangerous behavior from both sides of the recall effort. Governor Scott Walker joins us. Good evening, sir. WIS. GOV. SCOTT WALKER: Good evening, Greta. VAN SUSTEREN: Governor, do you have anything or would anyone within your close circle have anything to do with this ad or did the teacher come up with the ad herself? WALKER: Actually it’s our campaign that did the ad, but this teacher literally sat down in front of a camera like I am right now and just talked. She had no script. She just talked what was on her heart. We have another teacher starting with a similar ad today and we will have workers in the private sector and parents and grandparents. But this woman just said what was on her mind. It’s amazing to see how outrageous it is. That’s what happens when you see so much influence coming in from outside of Wisconsin. That’s not the way we do it in Wisconsin. We don’t attack people because it’s a difference of opinion. People came out to my home and attacked — not attacked but harassed not only my family but my neighbors. They have been point to go people on Facebook and pointing to folks on my kids’ Facebook site and they have said outrageous things about my family again today. Again, it’s one thing to inform a debate or another to distract or distort it. And nobody, whether they are for or against me, including those who oppose our recall, nobody should be doing things that cross the line like that. VAN SUSTEREN: Explain something to me. When you ran for office you had a certain platform. When you got into office did you carry out that platform so that it was no particular surprise to the voters, or did you change and thus all of a sudden everyone gotten enraged and said Walker went much farther than he of told us? Or explain how that worked. WALKER: No. And in fact, I talked very explicitly about the fact that I was going to balance the budget, one of the largest deficits we had of had, a $3.6 billion, and do it without raising taxes, do it without cutting core services. In fact a billion dollars more was added to the budget for Medicaid for needy families and children and seniors, and put resources more effectively like in the classroom to help the kids. We did all those things. Unlike states that raised taxes, laid off employees and did other things that damaged their states, we avoided that because we put reforms in that empowered our state and our local government to balance our budgets. These are not normal people — they’re progressives, and they don’t accept legitimate difference. They seek to demonize and destroy, nothing less — and I can attest to that first hand. More at Big Government , ” Union Radicals Harass Teacher Who Dared to Support Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker .” RELATED : ” Carl Salonen Libelous Workplace Allegations of Child Pornography and Sexual Harassment at Long Beach City College ,” and ” Roundup on Progressive Campaign of Workplace Intimidation and Harassment .” Plus, ” W. James Casper’s Demonic Band of Progressive Totalitarians .”

Read the rest here:
Wisconsin Union Thugs Launch Campaign of Harassment and Intimidation Against Pro-Walker Teacher Kristi Lacroix

Tagged with:
 

Scholastic Inc. is a nearly century-old educational publishing company that distributes books, magazines, and other teaching materials through the schools. If you have kids (or remember from your own grade-school days), Scholastic puts out news bulletins that get sent home weekly or monthly. One of those items is Scholastic News , which bills itself as “America’s Leading News Source for kids.” Reader Edward has a daughter in fourth grade who brought home the December issue of Scholastic News — and he wasn’t too happy when he saw the publication’s coverage of the Occupy Wall Street movement. Read for yourself ( click for full-size): The news bulletin also included some quiz questions about OWS: Talk about a whitewash. The Scholastic writers have great futures ahead as MSM writers. Reader Edward wrote to Scholastic: I grew up in Soviet Union and seeing your propaganda about Occupy Wall Street brings back my memories. I do not remember seeing in any of your editions anything about Tea Party movement. I’m neither Republican or Democrat but I would rather see my kids hear about both sides. Scholastic responded: Thank you for contacting Scholastic Book Clubs. I am happy to forward on your concern about providing both Democrat and Republican views. I apologize for any inconvenience you may have encountered while trying to offer different views for your children. We truly appreciate you taking the time to share your concerns with us and I made sure that staff in our corporate headquarters will see your comments. Again, thank you. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact us at bookclubs@scholastic.com or toll-free at 1-800-SCHOLASTIC (800-724-6527). We are available Monday – Friday: 6:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m. Central Time, and on Saturday from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. We truly appreciate your support of Scholastic Book Clubs. Perhaps the next edition can provide kids with a full accounting of the Occupy-related illnesses, vandalism, rapes, deaths, and other criminal violations — and a related pop quiz on John Nolte’s Occupy arrest rap sheet. The kids deserve the whole truth. The teachers unions’ Alinsky brigade won’t give it to them. *** Mermaz tips me to this rather unbalanced piece on the Tea Party published by Scholastic last fall. *** A reader reminds me this isn’t the first time Scholastic has gone moonbatty: Not the first time that Scholastic has whitewashed or succumbed to radical environmentalist ( TreeHugger and Sierra Club ) and liberal ( Mother Jones , New York Times , Rethinking Schools, Campaign for a Commercial Free Childhood ) pressure. Earlier in the year they succeeded in shaking down Scholastic and won another liberal propaganda campaign that seeks to dictate average Americans’ lives down to the kindergarten level simply because a curriculum was not up to the standards of the environmental Left. The liberals claimed that providing children any information on coal is commercial indoctrination, worthy of an all out ideological war from nearly every single progressive group. However, the lesson packet also included general information on nuclear, hydroelectric power, wind, natural gas and solar energy. Of course now, Scholastic simply wants to focus on promoting environmental awareness child activism based on the book The Down-to-Earth-Guide to Global Warming , which was written by Al Gore’s co-producer of ‘An Inconvenient Truth’, Laurie David. Background here and here . *** Related today: Occupying the Classroom: NYU to Offer Class in Occupy Wall Street *** Previous: “Educate, collaborate, AGITATE!”: Alinsky’s teacher corps Flashback: Bill Ayers declares education “the motor-force of revolution” Obama’s classroom campaign: No junior lobbyist left behind Brainwashed in New Rochelle Obama and Ayers Pushed Radicalism On Schools A public school field trip…to the local illegal alien day labor center First graders take school field trip…to teacher’s gay wedding Roses are red. Bees are swarming. We’re all going to DIE from global warming! Anti-war educators exploit The Children in the name of peace The 3 R’s in the Age of Obama: Rappin’, revolution & radicalism Get Schooled: Nickelodeon & friends want your kids to “change the system” Nickelodeon goes moonbatty Nickelodeon is at it again

Link:
Document drop: What Scholastic is teaching your kids about the Occupiers

Tagged with:
 

Some activists take their causes to the extreme. Case in point: A principal at Ansford Academy  (pictured above with students) in Castle Cary, England decided that the best way to teach students how to lower their “carbon footprint” and save the planet would be to simply turn off the classroom radiators…while temperatures dipped to a not-so-balmy 34°F outside. Needless to say some faculty and parents — whose children were shivering in gloves, coats and boots and who could barely even grip their pencils — blasted Head Teacher Robert Benzie’s “barbaric” idea. One teacher calling it “beyond stupid” and “absolutely ridiculous.” The Sun adds: “I’ve never worked in such cold. I’m all for saving the planet but this was barbaric. “Nobody could work properly and kids could not even grip a pen through their gloves.” The mum of a 12-year-old at Ansford Academy in Castle Cary, Somerset, said: “She was shaking when she came home. I was absolutely furious.” A dad added: “Turning the heating off in December is just mental. “I can’t believe the kids learnt anything. I’m very angry with the school.” But the 52-year-old Benzie defended the “successful” endeavor on Friday — which, according to The Sun, was the town’s coldest recorded day of winter so far — vowing to stage regular “eco-days” in the future. To justify his actions, Benzie said the idea was actually “thought up by a small number of pupils from our student eco-group,” adding, “we cut the heat to see if we can lower our carbon footprint. We let pupils wear as many jumpers as they liked.” “Everyone seemed happy enough although it did get pretty chilly. We sent letters to parents telling them of the plan. We had only one complaint and that was from a member of staff. But in the end they just got on with it.” “I’d like it to be a regular event,” Benzie said. “We have too much heating — sometimes I have to turn it down as it can make students fall asleep.” Clearly, Mr. Benzie intends for all 640 of his students to remain wide, wide awake.

Originally posted here:
British Principal Cuts Off Classrooms’ Heat Amid Near-Freezing Temperatures to Lower Carbon Footprint

I was going to update you on Mitt Romney , but Jon and Liz are talking about mitts too much below. Instead, check out this new ad from Rick Perry ‘s campaign, as seen on THE BLAZE front page. He’s beating a Christian (though he inclusively calls it ‘religion’) drum pretty hard here. “You don’t need to be in the pew every Sunday to know that there’s something wrong in this country when gays can serve openly in the military, when our kids can’t openly celebrate Christmas or pray in school. As president, I’ll end Obama’s war on religion,” he says. Watch via Daily Intel:

See the article here:
Moving on from Mitt(ens) to Perry

Tagged with:
 

(AP) Lanya Olmstead was born in Florida to a mother who immigrated from Taiwan and an American father of Norwegian ancestry. Ethnically, she considers herself half Taiwanese and half Norwegian. But when applying to Harvard, Olmstead checked only one box for her race: white. “I didn’t want to put ‘Asian’ down,” Olmstead says, “because my mom told me there’s discrimination against Asians in the application process.” For years, many Asian-Americans have been convinced that it’s harder for them to gain admission to the nation’s top colleges. Studies show that Asian-Americans meet these colleges’ admissions standards far out of proportion to their 6 percent representation in the U.S. population, and that they often need test scores hundreds of points higher than applicants from other ethnic groups to have an equal chance of admission. Critics say these numbers, along with the fact that some top colleges with race-blind admissions have double the Asian percentage of Ivy League schools, prove the existence of discrimination. The way it works, the critics believe, is that Asian-Americans are evaluated not as individuals, but against the thousands of other ultra-achieving Asians who are stereotyped as boring academic robots. Now, an unknown number of students are responding to this concern by declining to identify themselves as Asian on their applications. For those with only one Asian parent, whose names don’t give away their heritage, that decision can be relatively easy. Harder are the questions that it raises: What’s behind the admissions difficulties? What, exactly, is an Asian-American — and is being one a choice? Olmstead is a freshman at Harvard and a member of HAPA, the Half-Asian People’s Association. In high school she had a perfect 4.0 grade-point average and scored 2150 out of a possible 2400 on the SAT, which she calls “pretty low.” College applications ask for parent information, so Olmstead knows that admissions officers could figure out a student’s background that way. She did write in the word “multiracial” on her own application. Still, she would advise students with one Asian parent to “check whatever race is not Asian.” “Not to really generalize, but a lot of Asians, they have perfect SATs, perfect GPAs, … so it’s hard to let them all in,” Olmstead says. Amalia Halikias is a Yale freshman whose mother was born in America to Chinese immigrants; her father is a Greek immigrant. She also checked only the “white” box on her application. “As someone who was applying with relatively strong scores, I didn’t want to be grouped into that stereotype,” Halikias says. “I didn’t want to be written off as one of the 1.4 billion Asians that were applying.” Her mother was “extremely encouraging” of that decision, Halikias says, even though she places a high value on preserving their Chinese heritage. “Asian-American is more a scale or a gradient than a discrete combination . I think it’s a choice,” Halikias says. But leaving the Asian box blank felt wrong to Jodi Balfe, a Harvard freshman who was born in Korea and came here at age 3 with her Korean mother and white American father. She checked the box against the advice of her high school guidance counselor, teachers and friends. “I felt very uncomfortable with the idea of trying to hide half of my ethnic background,” Balfe says. “It’s been a major influence on how I developed as a person. It felt like selling out, like selling too much of my soul.” “I thought admission wouldn’t be worth it. It would be like only half of me was accepted.” Other students, however, feel no conflict between a strong Asian identity and their response to what they believe is injustice. “If you know you’re going to be discriminated against, it’s absolutely justifiable to not check the Asian box,” says Halikias. Immigration from Asian countries was heavily restricted until laws were changed in 1965. When the gates finally opened, many Asian arrivals were well-educated, endured hardships to secure more opportunities for their families, and were determined to seize the American dream through effort and education. These immigrants, and their descendants, often demanded that children work as hard as humanly possible to achieve. Parental respect is paramount in Asian culture, so many children have obeyed — and excelled. “Chinese parents can order their kids to get straight As. Western parents can only ask their kids to try their best,” wrote Amy Chua, only half tongue-in-cheek, in her recent best-selling book “Battle Hymn of the Tiger Mother.” “Chinese parents can say, ‘You’re lazy. All your classmates are getting ahead of you,’” Chua wrote. “By contrast, Western parents have to struggle with their own conflicted feelings about achievement, and try to persuade themselves that they’re not disappointed about how their kids turned out.” Of course, not all Asian-Americans fit this stereotype. They are not always obedient hard workers who get top marks. Some embrace American rather than Asian culture. Their economic status, ancestral countries and customs vary, and their forebears may have been rich or poor. But compared with American society in general, Asian-Americans have developed a much stronger emphasis on intense academic preparation as a path to a handful of the very best schools. “The whole Tiger Mom stereotype is grounded in truth,” says Tao Tao Holmes, a Yale sophomore with a Chinese-born mother and white American father. She did not check “Asian” on her application. “My math scores aren’t high enough for the Asian box,” she says. “I say it jokingly, but there is the underlying sentiment of, if I had emphasized myself as Asian, I would have (been expected to) excel more in stereotypically Asian-dominated subjects.” “I was definitely held to a different standard (by my mom), and to different standards than my friends,” Holmes says. She sees the same rigorous academic focus among many other students with immigrant parents, even non-Asian ones. Does Holmes think children of American parents are generally spoiled and lazy by comparison? “That’s essentially what I’m trying to say.” Asian students have higher average SAT scores than any other group, including whites. A study by Princeton sociologist Thomas Espenshade examined applicants to top colleges from 1997, when the maximum SAT score was 1600 (today it’s 2400). Espenshade found that Asian-Americans needed a 1550 SAT to have an equal chance of getting into an elite college as white students with a 1410 or black students with an 1100. Top schools that don’t ask about race in admissions process have very high percentages of Asian students. The California Institute of Technology, a private school that chooses not to consider race, is about one-third Asian. (Thirteen percent of California residents have Asian heritage.) The University of California-Berkeley, which is forbidden by state law to consider race in admissions, is more than 40 percent Asian — up from about 20 percent before the law was passed. Steven Hsu, a physics professor at the University of Oregon and a vocal critic of current admissions policies, says there is a clear statistical case that discrimination exists. “The actual dynamics of how it happens are really quite subtle,” he says, mentioning factors like horse-trading among admissions officers for their favorite candidates. Also, “when Asians are the largest group on campus, I can easily imagine a fund-raiser saying, ‘This is jarring to our alumni,’” Hsu says. Noting that most Ivy League schools have roughly the same percentage of Asians, he wonders if “that’s the maximum number where diversity is still good, and it’s not, ‘we’re being overwhelmed by the yellow horde.’” Yale, Harvard, Princeton and the University of Pennsylvania declined to make admissions officers available for interviews for this story. Kara Miller helped review applications for Yale as an admissions office reader, and participated in meetings where admissions decisions were made. She says it often felt like Asians were held to a higher standard. “Asian kids know that when you look at the average SAT for the school, they need to add 50 or 100 to it. If you’re Asian, that’s what you’ll need to get in,” says Miller, now an English professor at the University of Massachusetts-Dartmouth. Highly selective colleges do use much more than SAT scores and grades to evaluate applicants. Other important factors include extracurricular activities, community service, leadership, maturity, engagement in learning, and overcoming adversity. Admissions preferences are sometimes given to the children of alumni, the wealthy and celebrities, which is an overwhelmingly white group. Recruited athletes get breaks. Since the top colleges say diversity is crucial to a world-class education, African-Americans, Latinos, Native Americans, and Hawaiian/Pacific Islanders also may get in despite lower scores than other applicants. A college like Yale “could fill their entire freshman class twice over with qualified Asian students or white students or valedictorians,” says Rosita Fernandez-Rojo, a former college admissions officer who is now director of college counseling at Rye Country Day School outside of New York City. But applicants are not ranked by results of a qualifications test, she says — “it’s a selection process.” “People are always looking for reasons they didn’t get in,” she continues. “You can’t always know what those reasons are. Sometimes during the admissions process they say, ‘There’s nothing wrong with that kid. We just don’t have room.’” In the end, elite colleges often don’t have room for Asian students with outstanding scores and grades. That’s one reason why Harvard freshman Heather Pickerell, born in Hong Kong to a Taiwanese mother and American father, refused to check any race box on her application. “I figured it might help my chances of getting in,” she says. “But I figured if Harvard wouldn’t take me for refusing to list my ethnicity, then maybe I shouldn’t go there.” She considers drawing lines between different ethnic groups a form of racism — and says her ethnic identity depends on where she is. “In America, I identify more as Asian, having grown up there, and actually being Asian, and having grown up in an Asian family,” she says. “But when I’m back in Hong Kong I feel more American, because everyone there is more Asian than I am.” Holmes, the Yale sophomore with the Chinese-born mother, also has problems fitting herself into the Asian box — “it doesn’t make sense to me.” “I feel like an American,” she says, “…an Asian person who grew up in America.” Susanna Koetter, a Yale junior with an American father and Korean mother, was adamant about identifying her Asian side on her application. Yet she calls herself “not fully Asian-American. I’m mixed Asian-American. When I go to Korea, I’m like, blatantly white.” And yet, asked whether she would have considered leaving the Asian box blank, she says: “That would be messed up. I’m not white.” “Identity is very malleable,” says Jasmine Zhuang, a Yale junior whose parents were both born in Taiwan. She didn’t check the box, even though her last name is a giveaway and her essay was about Asian-American identity. “Looking back I don’t agree with what I did,” Zhuang says. “It was more like a symbolic action for me, to rebel against the higher standard placed on Asian-American applicants.” “There’s no way someone’s race can automatically tell you something about them, or represent who they are to an admissions committee,” Zhuang says. “Using race by itself is extremely dangerous.” Hsu, the physics professor, says that if the current admissions policies continue, it will become more common for Asian students to avoid identifying themselves as such, and schools will have to react. “They’ll have to decide: A half-Asian kid, what is that? I don’t think they really know.” The lines are already blurred at Yale, where almost 26,000 students applied for the current freshman class, according to the school’s web site. About 1,300 students were admitted. Twenty percent of them marked the Asian-American box on their applications; 15 percent of freshmen marked two or more ethnicities. Ten percent of Yale’s freshmen class did not check a single box.

Read the original post:
College Application Strategy for Some Asians — Don‘t Check ’Asian’

Tagged with: