Where should it stop? (652 hits)
Category: NoneRating: 0.91 on 27 reviews (Rate this item) (V)
Submitted by Indoninja (View user info) at 2006-01-26 08:32:09 EST
Where should affirmative action stop?
Below is an excerpt from Other Law School Rankings Related to Racial/Ethnic Diversity in Law School by Professor Vernellia Randall. http://academic.udayton.edu/TheWhitestLawSchools/2005TWLS/Chapter2/index.asp
In it he argues among other things that having a color blind system that looks at college grades and LSAT score as the primary means of accepting applicants is institutional racism. I am baffled by this argument. How is looking at a test score racist?
He claims that minorities are likely to perform worse on these tests, so different considerations should be applied. We will completely ignore the argument that poor white people probably do worse on these exams as well because; of course poor white people deserve no special treatment. We are going to go ahead and accept his argument that since minorities don't do as well on a test then the test should be ignored.
Where does it end?
Lets say we did start letting in minorities who have clearly lower scores then previously accepted by law schools. What happens when/if they fail? Should the grading system then be changed so they do as well as average students? When they graduate, should the bar be changed for minorities so just as many pass? When they get to court should the judge grant them leniency so they win just as many cases?
I realize not everyone has a good home growing up. I realize that everyone doesn't have an equal shot at life. I think there should be a system in place to help people who have to overcome more, however it has to have a limit. You can't keep giving people special treatment for their entire life. If changes like this went into effect would you want a minority Lawyer? What if it was more urgent, what if Med school followed this path, would you want a minority doctor?
My other problem with this is the blatant racism. The number one factor in how well you are going to do in life isn't your race, it is how much money your parents make. No matter what you call it, no matter how you sugar coat it, changing requirements on the base of race IS racism. I am confused why pro-affirmative action people do not see this. Why is it wrong to give people from the same socio-economic background the same advantages, are they afraid minorities can't compete? All giving special consideration to different races will do is drive a further wedge between those races. Why would a white person who grew up in the same school as a black person not get the same admission preference? All white people don't grow up with two stable parents, and all black people aren't brought up by crackheads or their grandmother.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The US News & World Report rankings are out, and Law professors are dashing to find out how their schools rank, so this is a good time to issue an alert:
If you are a Black, Hispanic, Asian or Indian law school applicant who has been denied admission - Listen up! You may have been discriminated against based on your race.
It is not intentional, in your face, "we don't want Blacks" in our law school, kind of discrimination. No, it is that hard to understand and even harder to eliminate institutional racism.
Institutional racism occurs where an institution adopts a policy, practice, or procedure that appears neutral on its face but has a disproportionately negative impact on a racial or ethnic minority group.
In the case of law schools, the discriminatory practice is the misuse of the Law School Admission Test (LSAT) in the admission process.FN Specifically, its estimated that at least 90% of law schools, have admission practices that presumptively deny applicants based on how they fall on a grid formulated around LSAT and Undergraduate Grade Point average (UGPA). FN It is this misuse of the LSAT that has a discriminatory impact. FN
For example, based on a LSAT cut-off of 145, over 60% of black applicants will be presumptively denied, but only 20% of white applicants will be "presumptively denied." While "presumptive" denial need not be absolute, for some schools less than .5 % of the applicants in the "presumptive deny" category are subsequently admitted.
This misuse of LSAT is devastating to all minorities, particularly Blacks and Latinos. For instance, using LSAT cuts in half the number of Black and Puerto Rican students who would be admitted based on their performance in college, such as their Undergraduate Grade Point Average (UGPA).
Disturbingly, law schools know that the LSAT is not capable of making fine distinctions among candidates. According to, Philip Shelton, the president of Law School Admission Council (LSAC), the LSAT is "Good but not that good." FN Mr. Shelton has said that if students with an LSAT of 145 and 144 "took the test a dozen more times [LSAC would ] . . .have no idea which student would end up with the higher average score". FN
According to LSAC, to be 95% certain that a single score is the true representation of an applicant's skills, you would need a 14 point spread. In plain English, an applicant who gets a score of 144 could have skills somewhere in the range of 137 to 151. FN
It is important to note that this is not an issue of ability to perform successfully in law school. Students at all range of the LSAT continuum are successful law students, law graduates and attorneys. In fact, in my own school, before we changed our admission grid, over 48% of our African American graduates in the last five years have had LSAT below 145.
Why then are law schools using presumptive grids?
According to some law school deans, it is the pressure to increase ranking in the US News & World Report. If so, it is an ineffective method since LSAT scores only account for 12% of a law school's ranking score.
Another asserted reason is increasing first time bar passage. Studies show that over 70-90% of all graduates pass the bar within 2-3 retakes. FN Among those examiners of color who eventually passed, between 94 and 97 percent passed after one or two attempts and 99 percent passed by the third attempt.FN Evenso, there are other more effective ways to increase bar passage without limiting opportunity to attend law school - such as teaching accepted students what they need to know to pass the bar.
Some faculty assert that reading all the files is onerous and time consuming - but we get paid good money to do a job that does not have many demands. Should faculty limit access and opportunity for racial and ethnic minorities because we are unwilling to spend time to do our job? Furthermore, as long as we invite people to apply, shouldn't they all get the same careful consideration?
Whatever the reason law schools choose to implement LSAT "presumptive deny" practices, it is completely unacceptable to have policies and practices that effectively discriminate against Blacks, Latinos, Asian, and Indians.
For one reason, minorities are seriously underrepresented in the legal profession. For instance, only 4% of the nation's lawyers are Black even though Blacks represent 13% of the population of the United States . This lack of representation has far ranging effects including limited access to power. Ever notice how many of the power brokers in the United States are lawyers?. Perhaps a more significant effect is ever growing distrust of the legal system by racial minorities, in significant part, because of the lack of lawyers and judges that look like them.
The misuse of the LSAT is not just an example of institutional racism, it is also an example of systemic racism because many different institutions contribute to the misuse of the LSAT. A change in any one of the institutions in the system could effect a positive change.
For instance: U.S. News & World Report could integrate diversity as a primary part of their ranking system which would cause schools to be as concerned about diversity as they are about increasing LSAT. U.S. News could also stop using the LSAT of the lower 25% of the class in its calculations.
Law schools (Deans and Faculty) could reject the LSAT as the primary factor and have admissions committees do full file reviews, balancing a broad range of factors important to producing ethical, competent attorneys, including the diversity of the class.
University and College Leadership could assert their commitment to diversity and social justice by enforcing their anti-discrimination policies.
The American Bar Association could refuse to accredit schools whose "presumptive deny" cut-off is inconsistent with actual or projected ability to perform, and which have the effect of discriminating.
Similarly, the American Association of Law School (AALS) could refuse to accept as members law schools who misuse the LSAT and discriminate against minorities.
State Supreme Courts could adopt the Wisconsin approach and admit to the bar any law student which graduates from a state school. Thus, reducing bar passage as an excuse for not admitting student. Furthermore, the State Supreme Court could refuse to accredit any state school that has policies and practices that have the effect of discriminating in its admission process.
National Civil Rights organizations (i.e. NACCP Legal Defense & Educational Fund, The Equal Justice Society, The Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, The Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Asian American Legal Defense Fund, Native American Rights Fund) could investigate this practice as a potential violation of civil rights. State Civil Rights organization could investigate the practice as a violation of state anti-discrimination law.
The Law School Admission Council (LSAC) could report LSAT scores to law schools in statistical significant score bands only and not individual scores which would significantly decrease the possibility of misuse.
Until these institutions take steps to eliminate institutional racism, minority applicants who have been denied admission should ask questions:
· What is the school's admission policy?
· Does the school use an LSAT based admissions grid?
· Why were you denied admission including where you fell on the grid?
· Who reviewed your filed and what factors contributed to your denial?
· If you had special circumstances (such as disadvantage or hardship, working during college, graduate education, first generation college, more than 10 years since college, military experience, international experience, etc.), how did those circumstances factor into the school's decision?
· To what extent is the school committed to diversity? In the previous years how many of your specific minority group applied (e.g. black)? How many were ultimately denied? (Remember wait list is a denial if they never take you off the list.)
· Ask yourself, is it possible that you may have been discriminated against? Don't assume that a low LSAT or a Low UGPA means that you are not qualified.
Those of us interested in a fair and equitable legal system should be very concerned! The impact of these law school policies and practices may do more to limit minority access to the legal profession than any reversal of affirmative action.
There are actions you can take to make the law school in your city or state; or your alma mater accountable:
Demand that the school has a student body that reflects, at a minimum the racial diversity of the nation, generally and the racial diversity of the region specifically.
Form a group to monitor your local or state school; or alma mater;
Ally yourself with supportive members of the law school faculty; for references contact the Society of American Law Teachers.
Protest the presumptive practice, in general, and specifically any presumptive cut-off not based on documented inability to perform well in the particular law school;
Protest any admission practice that does not provide the same full file review to all the applicants. That review should be done by entire admission committee and not just one or two admission professionals.
Don't accept attempts to increase the number of minority students who are coming to the particular school through the use of scholarships, etc (increasing the yield) without changes in presumptive deny policy and practice (decreasing opportunities).
Ask for data including the school's LSAC First Year Correlation Studies.
W.E.B. Dubois said that "the problem of the 20th century was the problem of the color line."
That color line was overt and legally enforced.
Here at the beginning of the 21st century, the problem of the color line continues - but now it is institutionally and structurally enforced. In the absence of laws, policies and practices that address institutional racism and discrimination, the problem of color line will continue for another hundred years.
Demand a change!
User Reviews
Submitted by Oxymoron (user info) at 2006-01-26 16:50:30 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
+4 for the post content
-2 for being so fucking long, I swear you had your point made in the first two paragraphs. no need to reiterate.
Submitted by Shlongy (user info) at 2006-01-26 16:38:46 EST (#)
Ranking: -1
It should have stopped before you hit "submit" for this post.
Submitted by MistressFist (user info) at 2006-01-26 16:16:23 EST (#)
Ranking: 1
There is ZERO need for affirmative action in the USA anymore. When it was first instituted, yes, but now it is just a crutch, and unfair to everyone concerned.
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2006-01-26 16:13:02 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by JonnyX (user info) at 2006-01-26 15:45:06 (#)
Ranking: -2
you want to end institutionalized racism by instituting racism? Huh?
-------------------------------
Way to sum up my point clearly.
Idiot.
Submitted by JonnyX (user info) at 2006-01-26 15:45:06 EST (#)
Ranking: -2
you want to end institutionalized racism by instituting racism? Huh?
Submitted by shitfuck (user info) at 2006-01-26 13:33:09 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
SOUP'S ON BITCHES!!!SOUP'S ON BITCHES!!!SOUP'S ON BITCHES!!!SOUP'S ON BITCHES!!!SOUP'S ON BITCHES!!!SOUP'S ON BITCHES!!!SOUP'S ON BITCHES!!!SOUP'S ON BITCHES!!!SOUP'S ON BITCHES!!!SOUP'S ON BITCHES!!!SOUP'S ON BITCHES!!!SOUP'S ON BITCHES!!!SOUP'S ON BITCHES!!!SOUP'S ON BITCHES!!!SOUP'S ON BITCHES!!!SOUP'S ON BITCHES!!!SOUP'S ON BITCHES!!!SOUP'S ON BITCHES!!!SOUP'S ON BITCHES!!!SOUP'S ON BITCHES!!!SOUP'S ON BITCHES!!!SOUP'S ON BITCHES!!!SOUP'S ON BITCHES!!!SOUP'S ON BITCHES!!!SOUP'S ON BITCHES!!!SOUP'S ON BITCHES!!!SOUP'S ON BITCHES!!!SOUP'S ON BITCHES!!!SOUP'S ON BITCHES!!!SOUP'S ON BITCHES!!!SOUP'S ON BITCHES!!!SOUP'S ON BITCHES!!!SOUP'S ON BITCHES!!!SOUP'S ON BITCHES!!!SOUP'S ON BITCHES!!!SOUP'S ON BITCHES!!!SOUP'S ON BITCHES!!!SOUP'S ON BITCHES!!!
Submitted by Foolproof (user info) at 2006-01-26 13:31:31 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
I only read the first 2 paragraphs.
Here's the deal. Want to have a bright future and be a repectable citizen in society?
The shut the fuck up, tighten the belt, hunker down, and study like the rest of us did you whiny little shits.
The world owes you NOTHING, so fuck off with that race malarkey.
*from first posting.
Submitted by simple_catalyst (user info) at 2006-01-26 12:43:07 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
'E' for effort.
Submitted by loki (user info) at 2006-01-26 12:41:26 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
I would be very interested in hearing an official answer to that one from someone who knows, but in my personal experience growing up as a wild hill child in the Appalachians no, white parents seem to realize that the only way their kid is going to do better than they did is through the fancy book learnin'. What becomes a problem is when the parents don't read so good and can't.
Besides, not all the black kids she deals with are poor. I think the thing is that you tend to raise your kids the same way you were raised. If your parents helped you with your homework, you're more likely to help your own kids with theirs. Of course if you are born to a 16-year-old girl and never knew your real father, even if you break the cycle and mean well by your own kids, it doesn't mean that you necessarily realize that you even need to be involved in your kids education.
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2006-01-26 12:26:12 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by loki (user info) at 2006-01-26 12:07:16 (#)
Ranking: 2
Sam's mom is a teacher at a gifted school and will hop on a soap box about how the black parents see helping the kids with homework as something they just shouldn't have to do. Hey, they send these kids off to school for an education, if they have to do it at home it means that the teachers are not doing their jobs.
------------------
I have no experience in this area, so I am just shooting from the hip here, but don't you think that is common among white trash? Don't you think that it has more to do with the attitude of poor people then black people?
And if I am wrong, why can't we address this? Because any educational leader or politician who comes out and says this, or questions how black parents raise their kids will be cruicified. If there is some cultural difference that is hurting minorities all the affirmative action in the world won't help.
Submitted by loki (user info) at 2006-01-26 12:07:16 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
dear lord this is long
Here is the thing, back in once upon a time land schools were segregated and for a fact the black schools did not have the same equipment, books, quality of instruction et al that the white schools did.
So what do you do to try to fix the problem?
Well for one thing, you integrate the schools. Great, but what about the kids who are already too far along for that to help? Are you willing to give up on that entire generation? Well no that isn't right and considering that the #1 indicator of how well a person is going to do financially is education, something had to be done to give these kids a shot.
hence the quotas
Plus I think it would be ignorant to pretend that there wasn't such a thing as institutional racism.
Maybe there still is, I don't know but I don't think that University admissions people are sitting there saying, "oh hells no we ain't letting their kind in here".
Now though, I think the whole thing is a mess. I have a sports specialist I go to for my knees and shins, he's a nice guy and a good doctor but he's black and it would be a fat fucking lie if I said that the first time I went to him the notion that he might have been a check the box doctor didn't cross my mind.
That is not fair to him and shows a lack of respect on my part. He shouldn't have to prove himself to me, but there it is.
What do you do though? There is a disparity between white and black kid's test scores. I'm positive that a lot of that has to do with parental involvement. Sam's mom is a teacher at a gifted school and will hop on a soap box about how the black parents see helping the kids with homework as something they just shouldn't have to do. Hey, they send these kids off to school for an education, if they have to do it at home it means that the teachers are not doing their jobs.
I guess the thing to do is catch the kids young and get mentors or someone to help them with the homework if their parent's won't.
It is a keg of worms no matter what you do though.
Submitted by HighVoltage900 (user info) at 2006-01-26 10:56:35 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2006-01-26 10:52:40 (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by HighVoltage900 (user info) at 2006-01-26 10:46:35 (#)
Ranking: 2
And I don't want to sound white supremist, but I actually worry that people get so uptight about making things "Equal" for minorities that they make it unequal for me. Whenever I apply for jobs or college, I always wince as I have to put down "White" as my race cause I feel it means that they will put someone ahead of me in the name of affirmative action.
--------------------
Start putting down other.
Nothing will be equal as long as race is a guideline.
-----
I would definitely put down in the Other catagory : English Speaking Border Collie
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2006-01-26 10:56:27 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by inion_de_trua (user info) at 2006-01-26 10:23:57 (#)
Ranking: 2
run for president, i'll vote for you. well unless you're against gay marriage and abortion, then i'll assassinate you.
---------------------------
I am not running for anything, I will be king for life.
I am for abortion, and as far as gays go they will be allowed to marry, but they will be forced into labor in the fashion industry, and only be allowed to live in trendy areas with rainbow flags everywhere. I think this will make everyone happy.
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2006-01-26 10:52:40 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by HighVoltage900 (user info) at 2006-01-26 10:46:35 (#)
Ranking: 2
And I don't want to sound white supremist, but I actually worry that people get so uptight about making things "Equal" for minorities that they make it unequal for me. Whenever I apply for jobs or college, I always wince as I have to put down "White" as my race cause I feel it means that they will put someone ahead of me in the name of affirmative action.
--------------------
Start putting down other.
Nothing will be equal as long as race is a guideline.
Submitted by HighVoltage900 (user info) at 2006-01-26 10:46:35 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
You bring up a good point about professionals. If I hire a lawyer, I could care less what color or race he/she is. If they can win me a case that's what is important. Because frankly I couldn't care less about whatever professional I have hired, I only care if they do the job I hired them for.
And I don't want to sound white supremist, but I actually worry that people get so uptight about making things "Equal" for minorities that they make it unequal for me. Whenever I apply for jobs or college, I always wince as I have to put down "White" as my race cause I feel it means that they will put someone ahead of me in the name of affirmative action.
Submitted by inion_de_trua (user info) at 2006-01-26 10:23:57 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2006-01-26 08:45:38 (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by Nellypaal (user info) at 2006-01-26 08:40:00 (#)
Ranking: 1
If you want to get somewhere in life, you work hard. Enough of handing it to certain sections of society because it seems more fair.
---------------------------
If I was in charge (only a matter of time) all public schools would have the same per student funding. If this were the case, fuck any type of special treatment. But as it is there worlds of difference between public schools, even in the same state, and it isn't fair to have kids at the shit schools compete with kids at the best schools.
----------------
this was just great. i'm actually excited you focused on law because now i'm going to show this to my friend who wants to be a lawyer and is a poor white kid and can't afford classes or lsat prep courses and things like that. he can't even take the test again and is trying to use a legal organization to apply to law schools for him because he can't afford to individually pay all the application fees associated.
that'd be a great idea for public school funding. currently in my town they're actually spending money to bus kids all over the stupid city so there's greater ethnic diversity. we have two public highschools, a tech hs, a magnet hs, and then i think four private highschools. we have at about 10 middle schools and at least 2-3 times that in elementary schools. it pisses me off that they've rewritten the district lines just to bus kids in to different schools to mix it up basically. instead of putting that money say towards more books, better equipment, new computer labs or better classrooms and teachers, they're just blowing it on the fuel it takes to run a bus an extra 20 miles out of the way to give white kids and black kids a chance to hold hands. i went to elementary/middle school before this policy was instituted, i was smack in the middle of the town between poor and rich and really it was about as racially mixed as new york city. there's no need for it.
run for president, i'll vote for you. well unless you're against gay marriage and abortion, then i'll assassinate you.
Submitted by hollygolitely (user info) at 2006-01-26 10:03:05 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Hahaha
Even with a few concerns, it's the best option that I've heard. That, combined with the reinstitution of the dunce cap, should get things straightened out in a hurry.
Anyway, I think you're great.
You've got my vote.
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2006-01-26 09:48:12 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
I meant japan.
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2006-01-26 09:47:58 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by hollygolitely (user info) at 2006-01-26 09:39:20 (#)
Ranking: 2
As far as overcrowding goes, the idea is that the competition between schools would eventually eliminate the crappy ones and we'd all be as smart as the Japanese.
------------------
That could be one outcome, but I think it is more likely they make up tests to decide if you can go to the "better" school since it can only have so many, the people who don't make it in will still be stuck in a shit school. Maybe we should just bus our kids to china.
Submitted by hollygolitely (user info) at 2006-01-26 09:39:20 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Good point about the hick towns.
As far as overcrowding goes, the idea is that the competition between schools would eventually eliminate the crappy ones and we'd all be as smart as the Japanese.
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2006-01-26 09:29:52 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by hollygolitely (user info) at 2006-01-26 09:22:50 (#)
Ranking: 2
What do you think about the programs where the funds allotted to the student follow them to whichever school they choose?
Personally, I would love to see that happen.
------------------
In theory I like it.
It just wouldn't work. In rural areas, it just isn't feasible to bus kids around that much. In cities you would still have waiting lists because the "good" schools would be overcrowded.
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2006-01-26 09:27:44 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
I hate to say this analogy, but it is tough to say you are lowering the bar when one group has been pole-vaulting, and one has been high jumping.
I think texas started a program where if you were in the top 25% of your class you could get into any state school. I think that is a great program, no matter how bad your school is if you do better then those around you, you get an opportunity to move on.
Submitted by hollygolitely (user info) at 2006-01-26 09:22:50 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2006-01-26 08:45:38 (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by Nellypaal (user info) at 2006-01-26 08:40:00 (#)
Ranking: 1
If you want to get somewhere in life, you work hard. Enough of handing it to certain sections of society because it seems more fair.
---------------------------
If I was in charge (only a matter of time) all public schools would have the same per student funding. If this were the case, fuck any type of special treatment. But as it is there worlds of difference between public schools, even in the same state, and it isn't fair to have kids at the shit schools compete with kids at the best schools.
--------------------------
What do you think about the programs where the funds allotted to the student follow them to whichever school they choose?
Personally, I would love to see that happen.
Submitted by Nellypaal (user info) at 2006-01-26 09:03:55 EST (#)
Ranking: 1
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2006-01-26 08:45:38 (#)
Ranking: 0
it isn't fair to have kids at the shit schools compete with kids at the best schools.
-------
I went to a decidedly average state school but happen to believe that parents deserve to have something to show for forking out tens of thousands of pounds on a private education.
If a bright kid at a shit school manages to drag himself above the rest of his class and succeed, then he deserves to go on to further education, but no more than a rich kid who has been expensively schooled. What would be of most benefit is some kind of scheme which recognises the potential of gifted students from deprived backgrounds and removes them from their inner-city pit before they get dragged down.
Grants/scholarships for those who can't afford it, but no lowering of the bar for those who simply aren't gifted enough but are under-represented in universities.
Further education isn't a right to all and should, I feel, remain an elitist institution. For the best.
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2006-01-26 08:45:38 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by Nellypaal (user info) at 2006-01-26 08:40:00 (#)
Ranking: 1
If you want to get somewhere in life, you work hard. Enough of handing it to certain sections of society because it seems more fair.
---------------------------
If I was in charge (only a matter of time) all public schools would have the same per student funding. If this were the case, fuck any type of special treatment. But as it is there worlds of difference between public schools, even in the same state, and it isn't fair to have kids at the shit schools compete with kids at the best schools.
Submitted by Nellypaal (user info) at 2006-01-26 08:40:00 EST (#)
Ranking: 1
The first part was spot on but then it all got a little too much...
I really couldn't agree with you more on this issue of positive discrimination.
In their rush to appear PC, all manner of organisations (schools, the police, political parties etc.) are moving the goalposts just to level out the ethnic/gender/class mixture.
What they so often fail to realise is that the old-fashioned system of judging people solely on ABILITY is a tried and trusted method of determining who is most suited to go to university/be a copper/be a Tory MP.
It's bloody ridiculous and it pisses me off.
If you want to get somewhere in life, you work hard. Enough of handing it to certain sections of society because it seems more fair.
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2006-01-26 08:32:31 EST (#)
Ranking: -2
I fucked up the first post.