The main thing that comes to mind when talking about affirmative action is ignorance. Not many people are aware of exactly what it is and how it works. I would say that the majority of the nation simply thinks that it's just "a program to get more black people to go to college." And going by this definition, it will clearly anger people. Uneducated white people become outraged at the fact that there's a possibility that they or their kids won't get into the school they want to go to or get the scholarship that they need to attend that school because it will go to a less qualified candidate simply because they're a minority. This is of course a misconception, being that most of the people who benefit are white. This is because of the recent influx of females into collegiate academics, a trend that is actually reversing. Given the new standards for "speech proficiency", and the fact that the tests are being moved earlier and earlier into kids' schooling, boys are falling behind. In early development, girls advance faster in speech and lingual skills than boys do, and therefore males are continually being held back and failing these tests when the girls pass them just fine. This leads to learning problems and these typically go unaddressed, allowing for the boys to continue their schooling at a great disadvantage, being that speech skills directly affect the development of writing and mathematic skills. In turn, colleges are accepting more and more girls as the better candidates, and many universities are having to reach deeper into their pool to pull in less qualified males to keep up with the affirmative action program. Taking this into account, it's a good thing that affirmative action is in place. The government moved these proficiency tests forward, and unintentionally harmed the progression of young males. While it did at one point only further the gap between whites and minorities, now that the playing field is becoming more level and other problems are arising, keeping the program around will lead to positive results. Granted, the program hasn't done what it was supposed to do at the beginning, but unexpected things and an overall betterment of minority culture now and in the future can lead to the program realigning itself as a good idea, and doing it's job for once in it's existence. So hopefully in the near future, or at least when my kids are going to school, there will be a greater knowledge pool of what affirmative action actually does, and there will be less ignorant people pushing it of as, "Oh this black kid is probably under qualified and only got in because of his minority status."

I guess the most important thing that I learned from this whole deal is that things go on. We all love our university except for a few select people who I guess just don't have souls, and are all eager to rush to the defense of Penn State when it's being slathered across news headlines as the school that rapes little boys and is full of students that just love to riot. But if you pause for a second before you rush headlong into an argument with an "outsider" and start throwing around your ideas, you realize you're playing into what the media wants. There were things that weren't done that should have been, and vice versa. But looking at the big picture and all of the consequences from doing anything at all really, the one thing that I realized is that life moves on. Granted, this will stay in the news for god knows how long, but it can't be a headline every day. And when the day comes that the front page of the newspaper isn't a Penn State high-up being fired or another victim coming out and a reporter bashing the entire organization, then we're a step in the right direction. Now I'm not saying forget about all this and the victims, because that's the opposite of what should be done, I'm just trying to communicate that in some situations you're put in a position that the best thing to do is nothing at all. And I guess you can say that I learned that when faced with an ethical dilemma like that of Joe Pa, you need to do everything that you deem necessary and then some. I mean I don't understand how him or McQueery (sorry for butchering that name) didn't go to the police, but that's just me. If you think something should be done, you can't be afraid to do it, and then back it up and continue to check on the situation once it's out of your hands just to make sure something is done. I guess what I'm trying to say is that you always have to make sure you've covered your own ass. I mean passing it on to your superiors is what you're told to do, but using the "Would I be happy if this story appeared on the front page of the newspaper?" test seems like a good way to see if you think you should do more. I feel so bad that Joe Pa has to go out this way, but at the same time it's necessary. You can't keep someone so mired in controversy running your football program, and it's just a shame. From all of this, I've pretty much taken that while you should and need to be concerned with what's going on around you, and how other people's live are affected by your decisions, you need to look out for yourself and make sure that you do what's best for you without hurting the others around you.

First off, I'd just like to say that I think the reason that so many people are anti-illegal immigration is because their parents are. From a young age they heard about how much "illegal immigration sucks" and that it's destroying our economy in a time that "real Americans" need jobs, and they just hopped on the bandwagon blindly. In doing this, they unknowingly filter out things about illegal immigration that is good, and tend to only take in and consider the negative effects of illegal immigrants in the country. So now that that's out of me, I think illegal immigration is great for the current economy. In one of my Sapphire seminars we covered illegal immigration and were provided with a stat sheet (unlike most of Sam's arguments where the only information you have is what he decided to provide you with and you have to identify the other contributing factors on your own), and some of the benefits from illegal immigration is eye opening. Arizona lettuce farmers need 40,000 laborers to pick their lettuce during harvest season. You think there are 40,000 legal citizens in Arizona that are willing to go out into a field and pick lettuce for an entire day for an average salary of $5? Not a chance. These employees, that pick lettuce so that you can enjoy a nice salad at home made by mommy, are illegal immigrants. Also, for most jobs out there you need to supply a social security number to be employed. These people aren't real citizens, so they don't have their own SSN, but they acquire fake IDs of people who are real, and therefore pay social security tax ($7.1 billion if you're looking for a figure) to the government in which they can't even collect. In the current social security crisis, that's a huge reason why it's still afloat. In 2001, the IRS collect $305 million in taxes from people who filed with a tax ID number, which you guessed it, are illegal immigrants. Not to mention that no matter where you are in the nation (except for Delaware) you pay sales tax on almost everything you buy, if you're a citizen or not. All of this tax money is incredibly beneficial to the government that's in deep debt. Another good point is that if there weren't so many illegal immigrants around to take all of these low paying jobs that Americans don't want to labor over, the company could easily outsource the operation overseas and there will be plenty of people willing to take the job for such low wages. So for all of those people out there screaming and pounding their fists that illegal immigrants are taking Americans jobs, think about if said American would even take the job if he were offered it, and if not, just be thankful that the job is at least still within US borders and if bringing people here who pay taxes, especially those of social security.

There's no doubt in my mind that the business sector of the country is pretty much running most of the foreign policy in the United States. Whether it be the occupation of the Middle East for oil masquerading as the "War on Terror" or the illegal immigrant policy being shaped so as to benefit big business, there's no denying business' involvement in government policy. After all, politicians get a ton of their money for advertising from business and other lobbyists. When this country was established it was built upon a merchant economy, and so in its essence it will be run by that economy. A democracy in a free market society is naturally going to flow towards people pursuing what's best for them, and that always being making more money so you can spend it on superfluous things like ridiculously large houses. This being said, if everyone is trying to make more money, and I mean everybody, then of course business is going to be the center of attention. With everyone pursuing one thing, the person with the most of that one thing becomes the most powerful. Rich people run the world. Now that that's been established, it's clear that it's not that stupid House or Senate that's running the world, it's the rich folk. The "1%" as people so love to classify them these days, like they owe anything to you bums who would rather sit on the street and yell and make signs than go to work and make some money to invest and try to work your way up. Sorry that was a little off topic, but in all seriousness, this country was built upon the fact that we have a free market economy where people ultimately drive the economy. And where people have power, there will be what some of you may call "corruption". I personally don't think that business driving our foreign policy is a crime, I just wish they'd be more straight up with us about it. Some people would argue that ideals and morals should drive the policy, but morals won't buy bread or armies. Businesses only operate in ways that they think will make them a profit, so why shouldn't a government? I mean granted there are some things that reduce profits that are still important, like basic rights and charity and such, but the government should be run to make our country the most profitable. The more money we have, the less we have to borrow from China and the better we can protect our citizens from the rise of terrorism during the late 2000s. There's no reason why business shouldn't be dictating our foreign policy, it's simple economics. Also, space race is expensive, yet super bomb.

A lot of people really identify with their race and are proud of the fact that they are black, hispanic, asian, or whatever they are, and would call someone who hangs out with people of different race a "poser", but I beg to differ. Just because you are associating yourself with people of other race doesn't mean that you're a poser, it means you're surrounding yourself with people who, although have a different skin color or physical appearance, are like you personality wise. I personally have a lot of black friends back home, and although I'm white, no one who knows me would consider me a poser. They just so happen to be very similar to me, and in being around them in school I interacted with and befriended them. That being said, I feel like a lot of people's perception of "posers" comes from what they're used to in their home environments. If you went to a school of all white kids, and then come to my hometown and see me hanging out with a lot of black kids, you may think that I'm some white kid trying to be "hood" and fit in with the black kids. Whereas someone from the same high school as me would just view that as being friends with other Pennsbury kids. I feel like this effect is especially prevalent if you're a minority coming from a minority filled background. Say you're black and coming from an all black neighborhood, the likelihood that you view a white person surrounding themselves with other minorities as a poser is higher than a white person coming from an all white background. Why is this? Minorities tend to identify with their culture more than white people are proud of being white, and seeing something like that it is human nature to jump to conclusions and decide that they are trying to be black/asian/indian or whatever the race. But no matter where you come from, in reality, this doesn't make someone a poser. The simple fact that people pose this questions to themselves, or to others, is a showing of the ignorance of race and ethnicity. No matter what skin color or background people should be able to hang out with whoever they choose and do whatever they please without being questioned or called names. Many of the people who would be called "posers" fit in incredibly well with the group that they associate with and belong with that grouping of people, but because of their race, are questioned as to their motives? This is downright ludicrous, similar to the four hundred and fifty word limit that I always seem to have trouble reaching. In conclusion, people should not be judged for who they hang out with, no matter the race of them or their friends.

I feel like it's rather hard to classify yourself in a certain level because you'll always be biased in wanting to classify yourself higher than you actually are. But from what Sam described in the lecture I would have to say that I'm at stage 5. I've come to accept that fact that people are different based on skin color and can actively talk about it with people no matter what color or race they are, but yes, I do still try to get the approval of blacks and browns. I don't know what it is, but you're just so much cooler when the black kid likes you. Maybe it's some desire to try to bring some of the black culture into my own, or maybe it's just an interest in something that isn't anything I've experienced before, but whatever it is, I want the black people to like me. I, like many people probably, would love to classify myself as stage 6 and think that I'm super accepting of race and I'm some awesome white dude that everyone should be friends with, but being realistic, reaching a level like that is incredibly hard, and I feel like it requires much more than just a mindset. To reach stage 6, in my mind, you need to experience things, not just think about them. Going to a poverty stricken area in Uganda, spending time in the Amazon amongst natives, living with Native Americans on reservations, all things that you can think in your mind how hard it must be to live in those situations and face racing hatred, but to completely understand them, as you must as a stage 6, you need to live them. Being white, I can't speak to this with any credibility, but I also feel like people of color have a better chance of reaching stage 6 of acceptance, being that they have most likely experienced racial discrimination at some point in their lives, and growing up in a society where it's always prevalent and being on the minority side of things they spend their lives contemplating the differences. This goes back to the experience thing, which I think is the most important aspect of almost anything that life entails. One thing that I want to touch on is how surprised I was by the number of stage 2 people that were in the class. Maybe because I come from a neighborhood that's pretty diverse, but I feel like race has been an issue in my life for a while, and I've spent a lot of time with my black friends talking about it. I guess if you come from a mostly white neighborhood or school Penn State is your first experience with diversification, but even the diversity here is barely anything compared to what I experienced at home.

When women go out and get dressed up, I feel like they do it more for themselves and other girls than they do for guys. Granted, there's probably a small part that's for the guys, but mostly it's for them. When girls go out dressing up is like a competition. Although they may not admit it, each one is trying to look better than either their friends, or just other girls in general. No girl wants to be the forgettable one in the group. Whether a girl is particularly attention seeking or not, she doesn't want to be left out or not memorable when she goes out. Also, when you feel like you look good you're more confident so obviously most people want to dress in a way that makes them feel comfortable. Girls are also more competitive with one another and it seems as though dressing up to go out is a friendly competition of sorts, and nobody wants to lose. Whether it seems shallow or not, most people know that physical appearance is important. Guys and girls are more likely to interact with those they are physically attracted to before personality comes into play so if a girl is dressed like she doesn't care a guy might not be as attracted to her and would deter his attention to someone else who is more appearance conscious. Although this may not be the most admirable way to judge a person, it's probably the most widely used, and it's not like girls aren't willing to meet the expectations they think guys have. Even though they may think guys are shallow for thinking this way, they will still dress up just to keep up with the other girls who succumb to these pressures. And let's be honest, girls do the same thing with guys. Girls really can't complain that they have to dress up when they go out because they do nothing to change it. Also many girls seem to like the whole process of getting ready. They invite one another over before going out to "get ready" together. Doing hair, putting on makeup, picking clothes and shoes; these are all common ways that girls bond with one another. Parties are not the place to have deep conversations and therefore are not really places to get to know a person. Physical attraction is basically the only thing to judge a person by when you're at a party with tons of strangers. If a girl doesn't look intriguing then she probably isn't going to be the first person a guy wants to strike up a conversation with, so therefore she will get dressed up like the men want her to so that she can attract the attention of the opposite sex, a problem that women have faced since the dawn of time.

I actually laughed when I first watched this video. Then I watched it again to make sure that I understood the question correctly. The fact that anyone would ask if race affects a person's desire to use illicit drugs astounds me. I personally don't, but it's not like if one day I woke up and was black, or Hispanic, or Asian, I'd all of a sudden be like, "Oh yeah, I would love to do some coke today, who cares I'm [enter race]." To me, the use of drugs has absolutely nothing due to race. It’s not like one skin color has a higher propensity to use drugs than another skin color, or that it’s deemed okay for one race to use a drug and one not to. The only possible thing that I could imagine that would affect my view of drug usage is my socioeconomic status. Being from a middle class family and working on an undergraduate degree and hopefully a master’s after that, using drugs just isn’t on my radar in the slightest. On the other hand, if I was from a lower socioeconomic class, I may view things differently. If I didn’t think that I had a chance to get a better education, didn’t have a chance to get a good, high-paying job, I may not see the bad side of drugs as that much of a set back. In the situation that I’m in now, not only do the side effects of drugs on my brain and my health scare me, but just the thought that I could be prevented from getting a job simply because a few months earlier I had taken some sort of pill or smoked something and it turned up on a drug test is terrifying. The fact that I don’t use drugs is mostly because I’m aware of the side effects and afraid of what they might do to me, but it’s also largely because I don’t want some stupid thing that I did on some random Friday night to come back and bite me two months later and prevent me from furthering my career and possibly ruining all that I’ve been working for over the past few years. But if I had this idea that I would “never get out of the hood”, or some other things that you hear about kids coming from those classes, I would be more likely to use drugs. I wouldn’t see them as a possible career blocker, and would probably just use them to get the temporary high that people so desperately seek. I feel like the usage of illicit drugs is much more of a reflection on your state of mind, which mostly comes from the environment in which you grow up in, than it is an issue of race.

I have never been a huge fan of donating hard earned money to other countries, but that's mostly due to the fact that I've known that most, if not all, of the cash that is sent to countries in need ends up in the capital and never actually is seen by the people of the country that need it the most. This on the other hand, is a different story. The fact that Sam has an established connection with these entrepreneurs is reassuring, and now I'm all on board for helping them do their thing. I thought what Figaro is doing is really cool, since it was really a connection between two completely different worlds. When people think of slums the typical entrepreneur that comes to mind is someone who manufactures clothing or has some sort of agricultural business, but a pastry chef all the way down there in that run-down facility is something I never even considered. The simple fact that she can produce quality products in that environment is a testament to her willpower and talent, and something like getting her a bigger mixer so that it will be easier for her to make pastries is definitely something that can be accomplished with only a little thought. I'm also a fan of the fact that she wants to pay for the machine herself through micro-financing and not have it simply handed to her. Clorene was also quite interesting, being that one of the things that Sam was stressing that she needed was tags. I'm not sure as to whether he wanted just blank tags to be sent down to her and she can imprint her own logo on them in Haiti, or whether he wanted them to be mass produced in the US and then shipped. Either way, I feel like we could jump skip over that entire process of "tagging" the shirts with the purchase of a screen printing machine that he mentioned. Not only would providing this machine for her via micro-financing allow her to produce better quality designs on the shirts that down wear down with a few washes, she could use it to print her logo and informations about the shirt, like size and fabrics used, on the inside where the tag would have been. It would be similar to the iron on logo that was present in the video, but it would finally be her own design so that she could receive some recognition for the hard work that she puts in. While I was watching though, I was wondering why she was using random tags on the clothing that she manufactured. It wasn't providing her with any marketing value, and probably wasn't even the correct information on it, so was she just doing it because she thought that all shirts should have tags? Either way, I feel like the screen printing machine could kill two birds with one stone and we could completely leapfrog the whole tag business.

The “N” word is in my opinion one of the most interesting words used today. The controversy that surrounds it is unreal, and people are actually physically harmed or killed over it every year. Now I understand that that’s because it’s offensive, but it’s just a single word. Not many words command the power that the “N” word does. But why can only black people use it? It started out as a racial slur against black slaves mean “ignorant” and was used by slavers and people who looked down upon blacks (from what I understand). In an attempt to rescind the power of the word that the whites wielded against them in racial hatred, the slaves began to use it amongst themselves when speaking to and of each other. Not that they were being racist against one another, but it was used as more of an endearing term. Not often do you hear an African American calling another a “nigga” and meaning it offensively. Often used in greetings or telling stories it’s used simply as a replacement for “him”, therefore acting like just another slang pronoun. My question is if it’s used so readily among the black community, and it’s been so long since slavery, why hasn’t it spread to white people like most other slang terms. Everyone is so afraid to use it nowadays, even when it’s in a song and your singing the lyrics. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve sang every single word of a track, not skipping a single swear or offensive line, but when it comes to the “N” word, I balk. Not that I want to use it, but it just makes me curious as to why the black community clings to this word and is wroth when anyone white uses it, whether it be offensive or meant as a term of endearment as they use it. But what also interests me is the fact that sometimes Latinos can pull it off. There have been many times when I’ve overheard someone Hispanic or Latino drop the “N” word, right in front of, or to, a black person, and they just act like it’s normal. What gives that person the right to use this word, when if it was a white guy who just used it, he would get beat up right then and there? The word comes from a terrible beginning, and I at no means condone the use of it in any context, but it’s so interesting as to who is “allowed” to use the word without any consequences, and why in the world it is okay for them to use it. Maybe it’s just a way to cling to their past, and letting white people use it would cut them off from their heritage.