Patterico's Pontifications

2/2/2009

L.A. Times Reports on UCLA Student Who Is Both Illegal and an Affirmative Action Beneficiary

Filed under: Dog Trainer,Immigration,Political Correctness — Patterico @ 7:26 am

The L.A. Times has a front-page story titled For an illegal immigrant, getting into UCLA was the easy part. It’s a perfect storm: P.C. attitudes on illegal immigration, combined with affirmative action.

She’s an illegal immigrant, so she isn’t eligible for most forms of state and federal financial aid. The University of California system, by policy, does not require applicants to disclose their citizenship status: Officials say their goal is to find the best students, not to enforce immigration law.

I wonder if they ask students to disclose whether they are California residents, to determine whether they are eligible for in-state tuition.

But the political correctness doesn’t end with her illegal immigrant status. She’s also, of course, a beneficiary (or perhaps a victim) of the lowered admission standards prompted by our old friend affirmative action:

The 18-year-old De La Cruz graduated barely in the top 20% of her San Pedro High class and is competing against students with much higher GPAs and test scores.

. . . .

UCLA officials acknowledge that some freshmen are admitted for reasons other than their grades and test scores, that some students come from dramatically different backgrounds than many of their peers but show academic promise.

. . . .

She never thought she’d get into UCLA, especially after San Diego State rejected her in February.

The average UCLA freshman boasted a 4.22 GPA in 10th and 11th grades, according to the most recent data posted by the school, and De La Cruz had a 3.365 at San Pedro High when she applied. She got a 21 out of a possible 36 on the ACT college admissions exam, ranking her in the 48th percentile in California. She scored 380 out of a possible 800 on an SAT subject test, putting her in the third percentile nationwide.

But on March 8, De La Cruz opened an e-mail from UCLA, and a congratulatory banner popped up. She screamed and asked a friend to look.

The article is mostly an article about how difficult her life is. She got a B- average for her first quarter, including a C+ in a Life Science class that other students describe to her as an “easy A.” I wish her good luck, but from the article, it sounds like she might not make it.

I bet the reporter could have reached an expert or two to opine on how this girl’s life may be ruined by her being put in a situation where she is having trouble competing academically. I bet the reporter could have found someone with a qualified daughter with high grades and test scores who didn’t get in to UCLA — who is a citizen.

But then, reporters usually go trolling for experts only when they have something they want to say themselves, but need to say it through another person. And somehow I doubt this reporter is trying to make a point about accepting unqualified students who aren’t even citizens.

Let’s hope this isn’t yet another life ruined by politically correct attitudes.

67 Comments

  1. She never thought she’d get into UCLA, especially after San Diego State rejected her in February.

    This proud Aztec alum is smiling ear to ear!

    Comment by Brother Bradley J. Fikes, C.O.R., who wishes DRJ well, here and everywhere else! (0ea407) — 2/2/2009 @ 7:33 am

  2. Irony is a foreign concept to most reporters these days.

    Comment by Dmac (2fab96) — 2/2/2009 @ 7:56 am

  3. She had a 3.365 GPA in high school, yet could only hit the 48th percentile on a standardized test? Even worse, she scored in the third percentile in another test?

    First, the grade inflation at San Pedro High School is not only astonishing, it’s probably hurting the students far more than it’s helping them.

    Second, why on earth would any top-tier university want a student who apparently struggled to be mediocre?

    Comment by Steverino (69d941) — 2/2/2009 @ 8:02 am

  4. In related news: Law abiding California tax payers have their refunds put on hold; L.A. Times clueless.

    Comment by locomotivebreath1901 (8f8651) — 2/2/2009 @ 8:06 am

  5. *380* on a SAT subject test? That’s basically a C or D. I’d think that UCLA is usually looking for 600 and up, at minimum. Some boost she got from the racially-neutral post-209 policy!

    I’m upset before I know she’s illegal. They’re ignoring prop 209 if they accept students like this at the (currently) top-ranked UC schools.

    Comment by Kevin Murphy (0b2493) — 2/2/2009 @ 8:39 am

  6. I note that 3.365 seems to be on a FIVE point scale, so that’s basically a C+ average. Again, what is she doing in a selective school?

    Comment by Kevin Murphy (0b2493) — 2/2/2009 @ 8:43 am

  7. I wish they’d said which SAT Subject test. Most of them are farces.

    Did she just take the ACT? Wikipedia says that at 21 ACT score roughly translates to ~1500 SAT (modern score w/ writing section). I have no idea how that corresponds to when most of the posters here likely took it.

    Comment by Techie (6b5d8d) — 2/2/2009 @ 8:46 am

  8. What the hell is going on at the UCLA admissions office? Isn’t Proposition 209 law in California, banning racial preferences and quotas in University of California admissions? Doesn’t the US Supreme Court decision in Gratz v. Bollinger mean anything? Or does 209 and Gratz apply only to US citizens?

    This is the result of ignoring Proposition 209, while having Proposition 187 ruled invalid. Now California is paying the price, and it’s called bankruptcy.

    And, while we’re at it, impeach Rose Bird!

    Comment by Official Internet Data Office (64247c) — 2/2/2009 @ 8:56 am

  9. Who is she sleeping with?

    Ok, Ok, I denounce myself!

    Comment by daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 2/2/2009 @ 9:09 am

  10. Actually, daley, this is more and more common in colleges and universities.

    First, “diversity” was about trying to repair past wrongs.

    The “new” narrative is that diversity—in and off itself—has value.

    Hence my concept of “the ethnocracy.”

    The sad part is that this approach can damage a student, for the reasons stated.

    And I think that the parents should be horsewhipped. These kids didn’t choose to come here—their parents took them, knowing the kids would be illegal.

    On the other hand, the way things are going, there was no downside for those parents to teach the kids that flouting laws has no consequences.

    Comment by Eric Blair (53ab22) — 2/2/2009 @ 9:19 am

  11. It is a shame that we are made to believe that a college education guaranties a better income when in truth a good education in a trade will make more. this young lady will fail even if she does graduate because she will not succeed at a job in her field but would in a trade that she has an aptitude for

    Comment by rwallis (4fe41f) — 2/2/2009 @ 9:22 am

  12. Now you know why USC alum look down on UCLA alum. You have to really work to get into USC. My daughter is a citizen, was out of state, and had a HS GPA of 4.0 on the 4.0 scale, a 1550 SAT and a 33 ACT.

    I denounce UCLA as an institution of Higher Learning. A tax wasting institution of Indoctrination, but not an institution of higher learning.

    Comment by PCD (7fe637) — 2/2/2009 @ 9:27 am

  13. This double standard infuriates me. We paid full tuition at UCLA for one of our kids who is a card-carrying registered American Indian. We were told by enrollment that there was no financial help available regardless of ethnic background and/or history. Too bad she was legal. We were not naive and filled out all necessary paperwork requests, made calls figuring the squeaky wheel gets the grease. I am not a believer in any sort of affirmative action but given their generosity toward some, why not make the effort? It’s the picking and choosing which group is worthy of lowering the standards for and giving financial breaks to that is dead wrong.

    If only she couldn’t make it in on her own merits, maybe we would’ve have a chance for a serious break! Unfortunately, our daughter made it into the instution because of her own initiative and hard work – scoring high on SATS and carrying a very competitive GPA from a college prep school. No lowering of standards on any level was required. So that’s an in your eye to the institution but nonetheless, when there is such blatant hypocrisy, it’s simply wrong and further discredits the university system in California.

    Comment by Dana (be9504) — 2/2/2009 @ 9:37 am

  14. You are right, Dana, and about far more than the university system in California. The ethnocratic approach is far more widespread.

    By the way, do you think that an “illegal alien” student from China would be getting this kind of assistance or recognition?

    Not all “minorities” are as equal as others.

    But at least, Dana, your daughter knows that she earned every bit of her experience, and no administrator or government official gave her something based on her parentage. It’s all her, as it should be.

    That isn’t much comfort, I know, but it is still true. Congratulate her for me, please. She is what diversity should be about in this nation.

    Comment by Eric Blair (53ab22) — 2/2/2009 @ 9:46 am

  15. Hmmm, she could have just printed a diploma off of her computer, it would be worth just as much as the one that UCLA is giving to her. How long, after her first position in the real world, will it be before she blames racism or profiling for her abject failure ?

    Comment by Edward Lunny (331570) — 2/2/2009 @ 9:47 am

  16. Let’s hope this isn’t yet another life ruined by politically correct attitudes.

    Why? Toss her on the pile. Maybe some day enough people will notice the growing mountain of failure and press for change. We can only hope.

    Comment by KB (5a6552) — 2/2/2009 @ 9:56 am

  17. Sweet Weeping Jaysus…

    Rejected by SDSU and admitted to UCLA?

    What woulda happened if she had applied to UC-Berkeley – a 100% academic schollie?

    Comment by The Other JD (904e65) — 2/2/2009 @ 10:18 am

  18. USC, aka the University of Spoiled Children, is an overpriced football school and every genuine Ivy League school, without exception, looks down on USC.

    Comment by Official Internet Data Office (64247c) — 2/2/2009 @ 10:26 am

  19. The article is mostly an article about how difficult her life is.

    When your argument is an Appeal to Pity, you have nothing and should just shut up and go the hell home.

    THIS idiot they keep, and fire others?

    Comment by Scott Jacobs (2899a7) — 2/2/2009 @ 10:27 am

  20. Comment by Official Internet Data Office — 2/2/2009 @ 10:26 am

    Of course, they do!
    The cheerleaders at USC are so much better looking it’s embarrassing.

    Comment by AD (b72706) — 2/2/2009 @ 10:31 am

  21. What woulda happened if she had applied to UC-Berkeley – a 100% academic schollie?

    Full Ride, plus a stipend…

    Comment by Scott Jacobs (2899a7) — 2/2/2009 @ 10:32 am

  22. I had a 3.8 GPA & a higher SAT. I couldn’t get into UCLA but I’m white & a legal resident.

    Comment by Hondo (7cfd24) — 2/2/2009 @ 10:35 am

  23. My daughter applied to UCLA law school but her suite mate (at USC) was Hispanic and, with a lower GPA and lower LSAT, was accepted to UCLA and my daughter went to Gonzaga. I don’t know how the Hispanic girl made out but my daughter passed the bar in Washington and California first try each. That was almost 20 years ago. Nothing new under the sun.

    These kids are very aware of these issues and, while they may vote for Obama, they do not respect affirmative action graduates. My older son, also a lawyer, is now the one doing the hiring of associates in his firm and has a few interesting opinions on these issues.

    Comment by Mike K (f89cb3) — 2/2/2009 @ 10:44 am

  24. I’m stumped. I cannot understand why the Times is going out of business so fast when it has such intellectually honest, unbiased stories as these.

    Comment by Robert C. J. Parry (50a453) — 2/2/2009 @ 11:19 am

  25. It is truly a mystery.

    Comment by AD (b72706) — 2/2/2009 @ 11:21 am

  26. I would guess she was admitted on the basis of her personal essay. She probably recounted her heroic struggle to enter America when she was four.

    I have recently seen 2 such students fail miserably in grad school, but there was program money and they had to give it to somebody PC or lose it. They could not handle the work, the writing, the time deadlines, nothing. I would think both these students are waiting tables by now.

    Comment by Patricia (89cb84) — 2/2/2009 @ 12:30 pm

  27. my tax money at waste……

    my heart bursts with pride at being a native Californian.

    /not

    Comment by redc1c4 (9c4f4a) — 2/2/2009 @ 12:35 pm

  28. Do the hacks at UCLA pick their Physicians based on their victimhood too?

    California should be renamed Darwinia, because only the fittest survive and California is dying.

    Comment by gus (36e9a7) — 2/2/2009 @ 12:51 pm

  29. Lucky girl! Thanks to UCLA’s biased admissions, she will be $50,000 in debt.

    Comment by Perfect Sense (0922fa) — 2/2/2009 @ 1:00 pm

  30. The voters pass a law that goes against the left-liberal orthodoxy(Prop.209) and the lefty adminstrators just ignore the law. This reminds of the era of “massive resistance” in the South in response to the Brown decision.

    Comment by icr (ff91f1) — 2/2/2009 @ 1:23 pm

  31. As I reported on the back page, the California Supreme Court has agreed to hear a case challenging the law that allows illegal immigrants to pay in-state tuition rates.

    Comment by aunursa (1b5bad) — 2/2/2009 @ 1:28 pm

  32. Is this an example of living in the shadows?

    Comment by George Richardson (ce69ff) — 2/2/2009 @ 1:30 pm

  33. Having just finished enjoying the biggest football spectacle of the year, I have to wonder what happens to the illegal alien UCLA football star that gets drafted by the NFL.

    Comment by John Hitchcock (fb941d) — 2/2/2009 @ 1:49 pm

  34. I would gloat at the inanity of CA university admission standards, but then I remember that Ayers was granted a professorship in my own city. Not to mention his evil twin was granted a professorship at Northwestern, but that’s a private school (but many of today’s top journos/idiots are graduates from Medill, their journo school).

    Comment by Dmac (2fab96) — 2/2/2009 @ 1:58 pm

  35. How does this impact the famous “eight-clap” cheer? At least USC was intelligent enough to adopt the monotonous “This…is the only song we know, it’s boring and it’s slow” (Conquest) in order to adapt to the abilities of its matriculators.

    Comment by Ed (f6461a) — 2/2/2009 @ 2:17 pm

  36. I think college — and school in general — should be a strict meritocracy. I have no problem with helping groups who do not have as much opportunity as others, but outside of school.

    Comment by Jim S. (68d026) — 2/2/2009 @ 2:18 pm

  37. Ed: At least USC was intelligent enough to adopt the monotonous “This…is the only song we know, it’s boring and it’s slow” (Conquest) in order to adapt to the abilities of its matriculators.

    Actually Conquest is the song the USC band plays to mark Trojan scores and victories.

    The “only song you know” alternate lyrics are to Tribute to Troy, which is the song played after USC defensive stops.

    FYI: The “Only song you know” lyrics were developed by then-Cal quarterback Mike Pawlawski and his girlfriend (now wife) for the 1991 USC-Cal football game.

    (I trust that’s more college rivalry trivia than most of you wanted to know.)

    Comment by aunursa (1b5bad) — 2/2/2009 @ 2:42 pm

  38. Me, I prefer “Hang On, Sloopy”

    Comment by John Hitchcock (fb941d) — 2/2/2009 @ 2:55 pm

  39. Conquest was donated to USC by the author (It was the theme music for Captain From Castile, a 1940s Tyrone Power movie. Strike Up the Band was similarly donated to UCLA.

    I have to wonder what happens to the illegal alien UCLA football star that gets drafted by the NFL.

    I don’t know how many of you remember Chuck Muncie, a football star at Cal (Berkeley) in the 70s. Muncie ended up at San Diego where they found he was functionally illiterate. I don’t think UCLA worries too much about what happens to the affirmative action admissions once their numbers are safely in the data base.

    There have been two affirmative action physicians in the news in recent years. One was the guy admitted by UC Davis instead of Bakke. Bakke sued and got the policy declared unconstitutional but the fellow who had gotten the AA admission went on and graduated but has had his license revoked a couple (It turns out to have been 10. Time flies) of years ago. There are two such cases that I know of. The most recent was in Orange County and was a plastic surgeon.

    Comment by Mike K (8df289) — 2/2/2009 @ 3:29 pm

  40. The guy who took Bakke’s place in medical school was the subject of a fawning piece of agitprop in The New York Times Magazine, before things went wrong for Dr. Diversity (who is no longer with us). That article was written by Nicholas Lemann, whose naivete has been almost completely forgotten, and today he serves as the dean of the Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism.

    Comment by Official Internet Data Office (cb0dac) — 2/2/2009 @ 4:25 pm

  41. My son was going to college out of state for the past two years. He’s decided to finish his education in state so he applied and was accepted. For some reason, they had him marked as an out of state student and wanted to charge us out of state tuition (we didn’t mind paying it when he was actually OUT OF STATE, however, he’s lived here all his life). To get his information switched to be qualified for in state tuition (even though he’s lived here all his life) we needed to send the school our state tax returns with him listed as a dependent for them to change him from out of state to in state.

    I’m sure if we were illegals, none of this would happen.

    Comment by Karen (dda662) — 2/2/2009 @ 4:28 pm

  42. SOCAL Alum Wars. Nice.

    Comment by Obama über alles!!!!! (48dd5e) — 2/2/2009 @ 4:35 pm

  43. Patte, you hit the nail on the head that Ms. De La Cruz presented “…a perfect storm: P.C. attitudes on illegal immigration, combined with affirmative action.”

    She is only one of too, too, many people who violate our laws and bears some fault, but the brunt of the blame goes to our fraudulent government officials that continue their decades of dereliction of duty to us and our laws, and thus cause us to be fleeced daily and pay for their dereliction.

    (Another perfect storm here in California is, Ms. Suliman – the unmarried women (a;ready with 6 chilren) who just had Octuplets (8) babies, with the aid of fertility treatment. Fleeced again.)

    You missed that in that very same issue of the LA Times there was a FIRST! The LA Times admitting that “… California should be honest … Illegal immigrants … are a drain.” and that the so-called cheaper labor – thus really ain’t so cheap after all, running up over $5 Billion annually in costs.

    Here is the first few and final paragraphs from George Skelton’s Capitol Journal 2/2/09 LA Times piece “Illegal immigrants are a factor in California’s budget math”.

    “From Sacramento — Based on my e-mail, a lot of folks think the solution to California’s state budget deficit is to round up all the illegal immigrants and truck them down to Mexico.

    Wrong. Even if it were logistically possible and the deportees didn’t just climb off the truck and hitch another ride back up north, their absence from the state wouldn’t come close to saving enough tax dollars to balance a budget that has a $42-billion hole projected over the next 17 months.

    Painful cuts in education, healthcare and social service programs still would be needed. Sharp tax increases would be required.

    That said, let’s be honest: Illegal immigration does cost California taxpayers a substantial wad, undeniably into the billions. …

    Meanwhile, California should be honest about the costs. Illegal immigrants are not the sole cause of the state’s deficit. But they are a drain.”

    Here is the link to Skelton’s piece.
    http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/california/la-me-cap2-2009feb02,0,5418935.column

    Comment by Gary L. Zerman (43725e) — 2/2/2009 @ 5:26 pm

  44. News item….
    George Skelton is being admitted to a rehabilitation facility for treatment of his addiction to halucinatory substances.

    Comment by AD (b72706) — 2/2/2009 @ 5:53 pm

  45. I don’t know how many of you remember Chuck Muncie, a football star at Cal (Berkeley) in the 70s. Muncie ended up at San Diego where they found he was functionally illiterate.

    I’m sure all that cocaine didn’t help either.

    Comment by JVW (bff0a4) — 2/2/2009 @ 6:11 pm

  46. Patterico, I usually agree with you. I’m not a supporter of affirmative action. But in this case, I was moved by the girl’s pluck and determination in the face of a terrible commute and an unsupportive parent. If she isn’t in Drake Stadium to pick up a diploma in June 2012, it will be because of lack of bucks, not brains.

    Yes, another student told her the Life Sciences class was “an easy A.” But the article said the exam was graded on a curve, which, if accurate, means she was slightly above average in a class of brianiacs with 4.22 GPAs. Lots of kids struggle with the first year of college. No story there.

    I grew up wanting to go to UCLA, but there was no money for it. Instead, I got an excellent education at Long Beach State. Later, I got a master’s degree from UCLA, so I did achieve that goal. I found the students sitting next to me in class were no brighter and the course work no more demanding than at Long Beach State.

    Illegal alien? Who cares. An immigration status can be adjusted. I personally know people who entered the country illegally and became naturalized citizens, home owners and business owners.

    I’m rooting for the gal.

    Comment by Ken H. (7e36a1) — 2/2/2009 @ 6:57 pm

  47. JVW, you remember the old Bill Cosby routine, right?

    Cosby: So why do you snort cocaine?

    Cocaine head: It amplifies your personality.

    Pause.

    Cosby: What if you are a jackass?

    People have a right to hurt themselves with drugs and alcohol, sure. But it remains such a waste.

    Comment by Eric Blair (53ab22) — 2/2/2009 @ 6:58 pm

  48. Ken H., I appreciate your kind thoughts about this young woman.

    But the young woman’s entire basis is from lawbreaking.

    Why should she follow any law? After all, she is being lionized for not doing so in this case. She has learned that some laws need to be followed, and some do not. Is that a good lesson for young people?

    For example, if someone falsified their records to get into UCLA, getting in while others with actual excellent records could not be admitted… is that okay, too? I mean, if the student is really worthy? I keep thinking about what other countries do, when people sneak across their borders and try to get scholarships and admissions to colleges and universities. I mean, if we are going to be cultural relativists…

    Getting back to the point, the important thing is to ask about the most important statistic: of the students (illegal or not) who have this young lady’s test scores and GPA, how many finish college at UCLA?

    I know the answer. I think you do, too.

    I quite agree that grades and test scores do not relate to success. But that is the system we have, and what do you say to the young men and women who are following the rules, and getting less than someone who is breaking the law?

    She was admitted and being supported because of her ethnicity and background. It makes UCLA’s “diversicrats” feel good about themselves (and look good in government reports), and often the students involved pay the price.

    I well remember a fine student I knew when I used to teach in Los Angeles. His parents were illegals, and so was he. He was smart and did well. My institution did all kinds of “under the radar” games to give him scholarships and other forms of assistance.

    The problem was he wanted to go to graduate school. Still as an illegal. That didn’t work out. How did my university help him? He remains very bitter, and illegal, to this day.

    The parents are responsible. Period. Or, more accurately, they are not responsible.

    Maybe the best thing to do is to have folks who believe the way you do contribute bucks to support the children of illegals—scholarship money, tuition, etc. I’m not being snarky. There is a cost to all of this, all around. And everyone is paying for it at present. So why shouldn’t the folks who feel that this is a good thing pay extra to support it?

    I would bet that many folks would contribute to such a program, if it could be legally set up (which I doubt). Until then, we once again watch students being messed with over politics.

    Sorry to be so grumpy about this. But it is a much more common story than you might think.

    Comment by Eric Blair (53ab22) — 2/2/2009 @ 7:22 pm

  49. ______________________________

    But then, reporters usually go trolling for experts only when they have something they want to say themselves, but need to say it through another person.

    That reporter actually may have realized the bulk of Los Angeles’s (and Southern California’s) population in upcoming decades — if not also today — will be Latino, here legally or otherwise. So he figured he’d get a head start in catering to that demographic.

    Of course, between the socioeconomic nature of a large percentage of the Latino community (ie, low academic-achievement rates, low and even anti-literacy mindset, lower-income figures) and the dinosaur status of the newspaper industry (ie, the Internet and the reading habits of people weaned on the computer), he’s wasting his time.

    D’oh!!!

    Comment by Mark (411533) — 2/2/2009 @ 10:10 pm

  50. This thread is a prime example of hate speech and should be criminalized. After all, your hateful attacks on this poor latina will cause people to go out and beat up latinas.

    Comment by John Hitchcock (fb941d) — 2/2/2009 @ 10:33 pm

  51. Right on John Hitchcock…..because of this hate, I’m going to forget to pay my taxes.

    Comment by krusher (d74f22) — 2/3/2009 @ 4:10 am

  52. If her life is ruined by her experience as an affirmative action baby, that’s just justice. She should have had the sense to go to trade school.

    Comment by jack (1f4d17) — 2/3/2009 @ 6:31 am

  53. I should also say that the only bright spot about affirmative action is that we get to watch the train wrecks, which can’t be spun or explained away by white liberal PC types.

    Comment by jack (1f4d17) — 2/3/2009 @ 6:36 am

  54. Eric,
    You say the girl’s whole basis is lawbreaking. Would you like to see the Feds raid the Life Sciences class, yank her out and send her back to Mexico? I didn’t think so.

    She is doing exactly what waves of previous immigrants have done: lift themselves up by their bootstraps. We need them. They revitalize our economy and our culture.

    The girl has been here since age 4. She’s been educated in public schools. Her mother has presumably paid payroll taxes.

    Except now we doing it differently. We let them live here illegally and eventually give them amnesty or let some judge adjust their status. It’s sort of “under the radar” to use your term.

    Comment by Ken H. (d7af67) — 2/3/2009 @ 11:30 am

  55. Eric,
    You say the girl’s whole basis is lawbreaking. Would you like to see the Feds raid the Life Sciences class, yank her out and send her back to Mexico? I didn’t think so.

    She is doing exactly what waves of previous immigrants have done: lift themselves up by their bootstraps. We need them. They revitalize our economy and our culture.

    The girl has been here since age 4. She’s been educated in public schools. Her mother has presumably paid payroll taxes.

    Except now we’re doing it differently. We let them live here illegally and eventually give them amnesty or let some judge adjust their status. It’s sort of “under the radar” to use your term.

    Comment by Ken H. (d7af67) — 2/3/2009 @ 11:30 am

  56. They are a drain on our economy; they don’t revitalize it. Want to come to the US? Do so legally. Illegally here? Get shown the door. Came here with your illegal alien parents when you were two? It’s your parents’ fault and not the legal system’s. There is a legal way to immigrate and I’m all for legal immigration. But don’t come here illegally and expect me to accept it.

    Comment by John Hitchcock (fb941d) — 2/3/2009 @ 11:34 am

  57. Listen, Ken:

    The child was raised by people breaking the law. She is breaking the law. There is a system, and they chose not to follow it. It is hurting their chances, and their children’s chances, of success.

    How do you feel about an illegal who doesn’t carry car insurance, incidentally? Are they just doing what “previous waves of immigrants have done”?

    My taxes are paying for this nonsense. If you want to pay for it, great. But be sure to pay for my share, too.

    Incidentally, the “previous waves of immigrants” line is very insulting to immigrants who…well, followed the law.

    Comment by Eric Blair (1aa50b) — 2/3/2009 @ 11:40 am

  58. Better Half’s head nearly every time she reads articles like this. People who come here legally are not generally too fond of this type of mindset.

    Comment by JD (55d896) — 2/3/2009 @ 11:45 am

  59. BTW, this post and its comments perfectly exemplify your inherent racism. You may now resume bleaching your bedsheets. Si se puede!

    Comment by JD (55d896) — 2/3/2009 @ 11:49 am

  60. She is doing exactly what waves of previous immigrants have done: lift themselves up by their bootstraps.

    No, previous generations came here legally – and went through all the jumps and hoops commensurate with that experience. Please read up on some American History before you opine so ignorantly on this subject again.

    Comment by Dmac (49b16c) — 2/3/2009 @ 12:07 pm

  61. BTW – Howard Zinn doesn’t count.

    Comment by Dmac (49b16c) — 2/3/2009 @ 12:07 pm

  62. Her mother has presumably paid payroll taxes.

    Funniest line of the thread. Ignorance is indeed bliss. Next stop – puffy pink clouds and fairy dust come out of her family’s orifices as well.

    Comment by Dmac (49b16c) — 2/3/2009 @ 12:09 pm

  63. Can the feds arrest and detain SF mayor and the majority of city council for harboring fugitives since they passed an ordinance to have a safe haven for illegals? Can the feds arrest and detain all those politicians who created “illegal alien” ID cards on a count of harboring a fugitive for each illegal who obtained one of those cards?

    That would be a start.

    Comment by John Hitchcock (fb941d) — 2/3/2009 @ 12:12 pm

  64. She is doing exactly what waves of previous immigrants have done: lift themselves up by their bootstraps

    It’s amusing to think that someone who got into college because of Affirmative Action and not on her own merits as “lifting herself up by her bootstraps”.

    Comment by Steverino (69d941) — 2/3/2009 @ 12:20 pm

  65. Her bootstraps doubled as my sister’s purse straps.

    Comment by John Hitchcock (fb941d) — 2/3/2009 @ 12:23 pm

  66. ABOLISH AFERIMATIVE ATION and ILLEGAL IMAGRATION

    Comment by Krazy Kagu (e1e2c1) — 2/4/2009 @ 7:49 am

  67. [...] paper wrote a story about a college student who was both an illegal immigrant and an affirmative action beneficiary. Shockingly, the tough questions were studiously [...]

    Pingback by Patterico's Pontifications » Patterico’s Los Angeles Dog Trainer Year in Review 2009 (e4ab32) — 1/1/2010 @ 10:31 am

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.4182 secs.