An American Fairy Tale

Once in last September, an American Midas went to his friend the Money Man and admitted that he’d made some bad investments.  “I need help or I will fail, but I am the force behind this country and it would be bad for this country if I were to fail.”  Money Man went to the Duly Selected and his House of Approvers.  He demanded more money; he did not need to explain why, but he made up a story anyway for the Approvers to tell the people that paid their way.  “There is a big problem with money in our country right now,” the Approvers told the people, “It is your fault and you will have to pay to solve it, but we will do what is necessary on your behalf even though you are unworthy.  We will need to borrow lots of money from the Money Making Company and you and your inheritors will have to pay back it back.”  Of course, the people not wanting to be bothered to think too hard and filled with love for the Duly Selected gasped and oohed and aahed and then went about their business of trying to survive.  The Money Making Company worked night and day hammering out shiny new money which the Approvers gave to the Money Man after the Duly Selected said it was okay.  The Money Man gave some money to the American Midas, but he gave a lot more to a Wanna-be Midas and other other Midas-in-the-Making Companies so his plan would work more smoothly.  At first, the people did not know that the American Midas was getting money from the Wanna-be-Midas, but some people began to be suspicious; they were mostly ignored. Most of the companies were still in distress but that did not matter because with luck they would eventually be okay.  The people were also still in distress but it would take longer than eventually for them to be okay. But the American Midas was saved from embarrassment and poverty and was soon raking in more shiny new money.

And that is the American way.

◊

if you don’t get the parallel yet, read the success story here and read some of the background here

Why we must all be taxed to save the wealthy.

The Wall Street Journal contains an article today about why Obama will have to renege on his promise not to raise taxes on anyone earning under $250 thousand.  Most of us knew he didn’t mean it anyway so the article came as no surprise, but this opinion piece in the Journal was a slick sell.  Note:  I added the blue emphasis and the comments in brackets.

This reflects the emergence of much larger budget deficits than anyone expected. Indeed, federal deficits may average a stunning $1 trillion annually over the next 10 years. [Tell me again, what was the deficit level when Obama took office in January?]

clip

Why has the deficit outlook changed? Two main reasons: The burst of spending in recent years and the growing likelihood of a weak economic recovery.   [I thought Obama reassured us in January that our economy was just fine and only needed a little help - like that extra $250 he sent me.]

clip

A speedy recovery is highly unlikely given the financial condition of American households, whose spending represents 70% of GDP.   [That $250 really was a big help, Obama, thanks.]

clip

Mr. Obama and his economic advisers understand this deficit outlook and undoubtedly view it as unsustainable. [Whoever spun this notion is not paying attention, cause Obama just keeps adding to the deficit.]

Can you believe this tripe?   The American Reinvestment and Recovery Act was a corporate giveaway.  Add up all the extra money Obama has been throwing at major corporations, his expansion of government and staff (Czars, not even Assistants or Directors), underlings, the insane mid-week parties and “specials,” the need for two planes to take Obama and his wife and daughters to Paris and back (cause even while the middle class dies, the girls must see Paris and shop) – you’ve gotta admit he feels our pain, otherwise he’d have parties every night and he’d be flying all over the country telling people how good he is.

Then there is need to rush through all sorts of special legislation now rather than wait until after the economy has been “fixed:”   think Serve America, Cap and Trade which will raise our home and business energy expenses, Health Reform, etc. and, of course, the need to socialize the financial institutions,  the automobile industry, and health care (which is a big priority with Obama and Pelosi (who thinks “leveling the playing field” is a great term and does not mean socialism). And finally, the appropriations bill (already passed by the House)  filled with extra goodies for all our “lifelong” non-representatives in Congress and all their ilk in the White House – all of whom ought to be sent packing.

NOTHING Obama has done has helped to strengthen the financial position of the working American (unless you include the already rich).  In fact, the administration already is laying plans to reduce benefits from Medicare, Medicaid and most like Social Security as well.

Finally,  despite my love of nature and animals, I balk at this one:  U.S. to Forgive Indonesian Debt in Exchange for Conservation Plan.   $30 Billion dollars to preserve the forests of Sumatra Island.   Of course, Obama has a special affinity for Indonesia, so it is easy to see why this was such a high priority (especially since they would not cooporate when asked for information about Obama’s passport and citizenship.  But, $30 Billion could go a long to save citizens right here in this country, if you could just get them services instead of legislation.

The piece, if of course, an opinion piece, but I doubt that the WSJ would allow such obvious fawning over Obama and glossing over fact were it not leaning slightly towards Obama anyway.

The author of this opinion/praise the master comes from Roger C. Altman of Evercore Partners:

This challenge may be the toughest one Mr. Obama faces in his first term.   Fortunately, the new president is enormously gifted.   That’s important, because it is no longer a matter of whether tax revenues must increase, but how.    (here) [bold emphasis mine]

This is Evercore Partners:

Established in 1996, Evercore Partners is a leading investment banking boutique providing advisory services to prominent multinational corporations and financial sponsors on significant mergers, acquisitions, divestitures, restructurings and other strategic corporate transactions.  Evercore also has a successful investment management business through which we also manage private equity funds, institutional assets and private wealth. We serve a diverse set of clients and investors around the world from our offices in New York, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Boston, District of Columbia, London, Mexico City and Monterrey. We also have strategic alliances that operate in Japan, Brazil and France.  (here)    [bold emphasis mine]

I am so glad this man offered his opinion.  Based on his occupation, howver, I dismiss anything he says as totally self-serving.  I suggest he spend a few weeks touring Middle-Class America and talking with the people who worked to make this country a successful manufacturing and agricultural country before the corporate/government corruption undermined it all.

Supreme Court overturns Sotomayer fire dept ruling.

Hurray for the Supreme Court. Just when I’d begun to think no part of our government had the courage to stand up for what is right even against Obama’s wishes, something like this comes along.

WASHINGTON – The Supreme Court ruled Monday that white firefighters in New Haven, Conn., were unfairly denied promotions because of their race, reversing a decision that high court nominee Sonia Sotomayor endorsed as an appeals court judge. (here)

Once again, Obama has to try to find another “follower” to submit to Congress as a candidate for the SCOTUS. Maybe he’ll get it right this time – one can always hope.

Banks too small to rescue

Nearly eleven months ago, Professor Nouriel Roubini of the State University of NY predicted the future.

Now, Roubini told Barron’s, the government is overregulating, bailing out troubled participants and intervening in every market.

“The regulators should investigate themselves for bailing out Fannie Mae (FNM.N) and Freddie Mac (FRE.N), the creditors of Bear Stearns and the financial system with new lending facilities. They have swapped U.S. Treasury bonds for toxic securities,” he told Barron’s. “It is privatizing the gains and profits, and socializing the losses as usual. This is socialism for Wall Street and the rich.”

He said that sometimes it is necessary to use public money to rescue institutions, but in a way that does not bail out the people who made the mistakes. “In each one of these episodes, the government bailed out the shareholders, the bondholders, and to some degree, management,” Roubini told Barron’s.

As for the banks that will go bankrupt, they will include community banks that finance homes, stores, downtown areas, commercial real estate and other mainstays of U.S. towns and cities, Roubini said.

“Of three dozen or so medium-sized regional banks, a good third are in distress,” he told Barron’s, saying half of the group could go bankrupt. Some big banks could wind up insolvent, he added, but said they might be deemed too big to fail. here (all bold emphasis mine)

Today we know that the government has found those banks “too big to fail” and rewarded them with a bailout that future generations will still be paying for. The rich have not been hurt by these actions, but the rest of us have. And in the news this morning there is this Federal regulator is blamed in bank failures and this Mirae Bank in L.A.’s Koreatown and MetroPacific Bank in Irvine are shut down in the Los Angeles Times.

Small banks that serve local communities are being assumed by larger banks and the costs are being assumed by taxpayers.

Wilshire, whose parent company is Wilshire Bancorp Inc., also will acquire $449 million of Mirae’s $465 million in assets, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. said. The FDIC agreed to share in any losses on those assets.

The failure is expected to cost the deposit insurance fund about $50 million.

clip

Also Friday, regulators closed two small banks in Georgia. The FDIC said the cost to the deposit-insurance fund would be about $152 million for the two combined. And a bank in Minnesota failed at a cost of about $34 million to the FDIC, state regulators said. (from the Mirae Bank story)

————

U.S. Bancorp acquired Downey and PFF in November in a deal brokered by the FDIC, which said Downey’s collapse would cost the deposit insurance fund about $1.4 billion and PFF’s failure an additional $729 million. (from the MetroPacific Bank story)

At this point, the president sized the moment to propose consolidation of his power over banks.

A federal thrift regulator bungled its oversight of Downey Savings & Loan, allowing the Newport Beach thrift to pile on billions of dollars in high-risk mortgages and eventually collapse, according to a government report.

The regulators from the beleaguered Office of Thrift Supervision also botched their oversight of Pomona-based PFF Bank & Trust, which collapsed along with Downey last fall, according to reports issued this week by the U.S. Treasury Department’s inspector general.

The Obama administration proposed Wednesday that the OTS, which has long been criticized as weak and ineffectual, be abolished. As part of his overhaul of financial regulation, Obama recommended that savings and loans, which have been principally mortgage lenders, answer to the same regulators as full-service commercial banks that specialize in a range of loans to businesses as well as consumers.  (from the MetroPacific Bank story)

Maybe Ken Lewis should leave Paulson and Bernanke alone; they might just let him become THE Bank of America.

The history of Deutsche Bank – (railroads, oil, money and fascism)

While skimming the news at Reuters today yesterday, I found the following statement.

Lastly, in oil news, Ericsson (ERIC) Chief Executive Carl-Henric Svanberg has been named chairman of BP (BP) “in a surprise appointment that ends the oil major’s lengthy search for a new chairman,” Reuters writes.   here

It caught my attention because when I was writing my article on Deutsche Bank, I chose to focus on its connection with U.S. development, rather than Europe or Asia.  But the comment about Ericsson and BP sent me back to my notes because I’d remembered the following early history of Deutsche Bank and BP.   Everywhere you turn, there are connections.

◊

First the Persian Empire:   In 1888, Deutsche Bank was approached by Sultan Abdul Hamid II and asked to become involved in the building of the Baghdad Railroad.  (Remember that DB was heavily involved in RR building in Europe and America.)  Deutsche Bank was granted a franchise to build a railroad linking Ankara and Istanbul.  The first part of the railroad was build by the firm of  Philip Holzmann and went from Haydarpasha to Anakara.  In 1896, a line to Konya was completed.  During this year,  the concession was transferred to the Anatolian Railroad Company in 1896;  Deutsche Bank owned a majority of shares in the Anatolian R.R.

In 1903, construction continued to Mosul, Bahgdad and Basra.  When the Persian Empire fell, only 200 kilometers has been built.  The final segment was completed after the first world war by the Iraqi State (between 1936-40, from Istanbul to Baghdad).

◊

And now, oil:

In 1903, Deutsche Bank acquired Steava Romana – a Romanian oil company which had extensive deposits in the Eastern and Southern Carpathian mountains.  Emil Georg von Strauss had joined Steava Romana in 1905.  He was General directer by 1914 and in 1915 he became a member of the Board of Directors of Deutsche Bank.  DB sold Steava Romana at the end of the first World War without financial loss.

Von Strauss was also the Managing Director of the European Petroleum Union AND General Director of Deutsche-Petroleum (the oil interests of the bank).  In 1929 a merger with DB’s rival (Disconto-Gesellschaft) created the largest bank in Germany.

During the late twenties (1926-1931), Anglo-Persian Oil Company slowly acquired all of Deutsche Banks’ shares and that was the end of DB’s involvement in the oil business.

Anglo Persian Oil Company is the former name of BP (British Petroleum).

◊

And, finally,  Von Strauss:

7 However, the example of Deutsche Bank board (since 1933, supervisory board) member Emil Georg von Strauss, who was the vice-president of the Reichstag after 1933, shows that NSDAP involvement could also be found among bankers.   [bold emphasis mine] here

Von Strauss was involved with the Nazi government until his death; the image of his funeral oration (here) shows that he was highly regarded by the party.  If you read the paragraph to the left of the picture, you might recognize the names of three banks who received billions from the bank that was too big to fail last year.  (yes, I mean AIG).  I’m not saying that the current banks are all part of a Nazi conspiracy; I just think it’s odd that they survived to become three of the world’s leading banks again.

To be fair, Deutsche bank discusses its involvement with the Nazis on its history page (here), but you’ll have to form your own opinion.

◊

If it’s true that the banks slipped all unknowing into fascism and genocide because the actions were made legal in bits and pieces, then I hope someone is watching the interaction of law and money in this country now.

Don’t be fooled by all the newspeak about 2010.

Okay, I’ve been ill and I haven’t been posting; but The Washington Post had two stories today that I just couldn’t pass up.

The first one (here) raises the possibility that Obama’s spending is going to affect the 2010 elections.  (I certainly hope so)  Evidently, polls indicate the fewer people approve of the way Obama is handling the national economy.  The article, however, points out that the problem the Republican Party has is that Bush left the country with a $1.2 trillion debt.

I know that Obama consistently blames Bush for the economic problems he inherited, but in his first 100 odd days in office, Obama has been introducing spending legislature/plans that will leave us with a $9 trillion debt within 10 years.  Can someone explain how this is Bush’s fault?  All these new investments in electrical grids, green energy, Internet technology, service corps, tobacco industry regulation, acquisition of failing banks and car companies have not produced a remarkable surge in new jobs nor a slowly improving economy.  The ideas are great, but the timing is all wrong.  I don’t have a lot of experience in economics, but I know that in the past when I tried spending my way out of debt I failed miserably.

This is another one of those newspeak tricks:  Bush $1.3 trillion = bad vs.  Obama= $9 trillion good.  I hope you aren’t one of those people who are falling for this.  If you don’t mind accumulating all that debt in the next few years, that is between you and your wallet or you and your children (unless you happen to be one of those incredibly powerful and wealthy few who accumulate wealth and shrug off debt at my expense, in which case I have issues with you).

♦

The other article (here) suggests that the Republicans can’t win because of demographics.  It also raise the question of  “whether the GOP has a message or an agenda to combat President Obama’s popularity.”   Hold on a moment!  What does Obama’s popularity have to do with anything except to prove that he’s an American idol.  People, we are voting for those who will approve Obama’s $9 trillion deficit.  Don’t be fooled by smooth talking.  The only agenda we need to worry about is the one that opposes Obama, Pelosi, Reid, Dean, Dodd, and others of their ilk.  Show your dissaproval and vote them all out.

♦

Let me be right up front.  I don’t approve of Obama’s social agenda and I don’t approve of the quality of life he is laying down for my future grandchildren.  I am not a Republican.  I did not vote for Obama and I will not vote for his minions when they come up for reelection.  I will vote for anyone who opposes what he is doing.  The labels means nothing to me; what matters to me is what happens to my country, my way of life, and the future.  I hope Obama isn’t the way, because  every time he opens his mouth, I hear lies and misspeak and deception.  My government is corrupt; it has been for a long time – I was no fan of Bush, either – and the people of these United States have let it slip for far too long.

Read George Orwell if you never have and read him again if you already have.  Ignore the title of his book (1984); he was off by several years, but he saw how easily we can lose our way of life and we have ignored his warning for far too long.  There is a link in the tab to an on-line free version on my home page.  Ask yourself if that is what you want our future to look like.

The blatent newspeak of pro-life.

I have spent the last week pondering the duplicity of the term “pro-life.”  It is used today, almost without fail, to mean something not implied in the term itself.  It is one of the most egregious forms of “newspeak” or “doublespeak” (see my explanation in the tab on the home page if you are unfamiliar with Orwell).

The belief of Dr. George Tiller, that a woman has a right to make her own choices, came up against those who would deny women that right.  The latter group would have you believe it was “God’s” will.  “God,” as a word, means whatever the “believer” wants it to mean; and, in all its various translations and transformations worldwide, the God about which people speak is hardly ever the same God.  Unless there is a shared definition, discussion is difficult between people who do not share similar beliefs. It usually comes down to “My God” is better than “Your God!”

Dr. George Tiller was a religious man; he went to church where he served as an usher , and he died in a church at a Sunday service.  Dr. George Tiller believed in God, but he did not believe in the same God as the man who “allegedly” shot him.  Because he chose the wrong God, Dr. George Tiller had to die.

Some will tell you that Dr. Tiller died because he was a murderer.  The law that holds this country together said otherwise; but even if the charge were true, the punishment ought to have been determined by the state of Kansas.  But many anti-abortionists do not care that abortion is legal in the United States of America or that the Constitution of the United States guarantees that no religion may impose its personal beliefs on anyone else. The man who “allegedly” shot Dr. Tiller took the law into his own hands because he believes that his God wanted him too.  I don’t understand that kind of God, nor do I want to.

◊

I do want to understand how anyone who is “pro-life” believes that taking a life supports a pro-life stance and especially how anyone can even defend the person who takes a life in order to support a pro-life stance.  How does anyone dare to profess to love his God and say something like this?

“George Tiller was a mass murderer and we cannot stop saying that,” [Randall] Terry said. “He was an evil man — his hands were covered with blood.”  (here) [bold emphasis mine]

Or this?

“The man who shot him was responsible,” Terry said. A few minutes later, though, he made it pretty clear what he really thought. “The whole point of this story should be, in part, what did George Tiller do that was so horrifying that it drove this man to that extremity?” (here)  [bold emphasis mine]

Dr. George Tiller deserved to die, because the man who shot him did not believe in abortion and because people like Randall Terry stood up and declared that George Tiller was an evil man and a mass murderer.  In fact, Dr. Tiller was responsible for his own death!

Randall Terry and others of his ilk stir up the horror that drives a man to murder and than defend it with the same extreme philosophy that made that murder possible.  What kind of man is this?  What kind of Christian is this?   Does his God whisper praise in his ear for murdering a fellow man?  Isn’t judgement the provenance of God?

It is Randall Terry and others of his ilk who believe that no woman should be able to have an abortion, who believe that the fetus growing in the womb of that woman is a separate and equal human being and must be saved.  It is Randall Terry and others of his ilk who do not honor nor respect that woman’s right to make decisions for herself, who believe that they have a right to impose their religious values on everyone else – believe my way or die.

No abortion, Terry says, let the fetus live – until birth when the newborn child can be abandoned.  Does he urge his followers to adopt those children he has saved by driving his followers to killing, to  destroying abortion facilities, to threatening and shooting anyone who works in those facilities?    Does he feel responsible for the children lost in the web of foster homes, unwanted, unloved, and eventually cast out at 18 to fend for themselves?  Where are all Terry’s good Christian followers when God’s suffering children need them?

Hypocrites.  Hypocrites, every one of them.  They are, as their Bible so rightly puts it, whited sepulchres, filled with sanctimonious pride, certain of their chosen status and thus able to pronounce judgement on others.  “Tiller deserved to die,” God told Terry and others of his ilk.  The commandment of their God that “Thou shalt not kill” does not apply to the righteous.

◊

The term pro-life is a deception; in truth, it only mean anti-abortion.  Terry’s followers do not rally for the lives of rapists and murderers sentenced to death?  Does Terry ever speak at anti-war rallies because he is pro-life?

Pro-life means that you are “for life.” When used by people who will kill or applaud the killing of those who provide safe abortions to women, the term becomes twisted and hollow, a misdirection of language and thought – a prime example of newspeak,

Randall Terry and others of his ilk are anti-abortion; that is their primary mission.  All women must have babies, wanted or not, conceived by rape or  by a single careless moment when a bad choice was made.   God wants you to have that baby.  He told Randall Terry and others of his ilk that this was so.  I think it was one of the lost commandments.

You want to have babies, Terry, go have them.  Just don’t delude yourself into thinking that you have a right to make others have them too.

◊

Read the New Testament again, Randall Terry.  The words of your God speak down through all those 2000 years:  “He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone…”

That God is kinder, more tolerant, and less violent than your God.  Yours is the one of the Spanish Inquisition.

Obama needs the BBC for “nuanced and thoughtful” message.

Does Obama think poorly of the media in the U.S.?  In a BBC interview in which he spoke of his upcoming trip to Saudi Arabia and Egypt before attending ceremonies commemorating D-Day on 6 June, Obama told reporter Justin Webb that

he chose to speak to the BBC now because his team want to reach the parts of the world the BBC reaches – with a message that is nuanced and thoughtful.

Nuanced and thoughtful?  Well that might be beyond the reach of the MSM in the U.S., but I wouldn’t think the president nor his staff would want to be pointing that out to the rest of the world.  Maybe, the president’s men and women don’t think we Americans pay much attention to European media so he could say whatever he liked and we wouldn’t notice nor feel embarrassed.  Personally, I think he was absolutely right – except that the U.S. media probably could reach anywhere the BBC could if they wanted to.  I just don’t know about the thoughtful part.  Nuanced does not strike me as a MSM trait.

The purpose of the meeting was to make clear that the U.S. will no longer try to impose its values on other countries, but will instead try to “set a good example.”   Closing the detention center at Guantanamo Bay, for instance, is one way to set a good example.   I wonder how long it will be before other countries begin closing their “detention centers.”

Obama did grant that our values are not all that bad.  In fact, other countries could easily adopt many of them because as the president acknowledged

… the rule of law, democracy and freedoms of speech and religion were “universal values”.

clip

“The danger, I think, is when the United States, or any country, thinks that we can simply impose these values on another country with a different history and a different culture,” he said.

You can watch and listen to the president make his point to Webb and read what Webb has said, but the full interview has not yet been released. (here)

Undoubtedly, more nuanced and thoughtful insights will be found in the full interview.

“We are not bigots,” prop 8 supporters say. “We just want everyone to believe what we believe.”

from The LA Times

In Fresno, about 3,000 demonstrators — the same number who turned out the day before on the other side — were told not to accept being called bigots because they support traditional marriage.

“We know we’ve been called hate-mongers. That’s not what we are,” said Jim Franklin, pastor of Cornerstone Church, just after the rally.

“We are people who believe in our values.”

The one thing I have always noticed about people who cling to their Bibles, as our president might put it, is that everyone has a different interpretation of the “good book.”   If God is on their side (which ever side needs him at the moment, he is always on their side), doesn’t he want them to go after those Mormons who believe in polygamy?   Doesn’t he want them to save all those traditional marriages that are falling apart?    I don’t recall him telling Adam and Eve that they could divorce. Start an anti-divorce measure for god’s sake.

Where is their crusade against adultery?  against coveting (desiring in your heart, ie, not the deed but the thought) another’s goods or wife or husband.   Why do they not gather in the thousands to protest the slaying of a man who performed abortions by one of their own.  Did their god not say to them “Thou shalt not kill?.”

The God of the New Testament preached Love, Hope and Charity and asked you to follow in his footsteps. He was tolerant, he treated all equally. he wanted to build his kingdom according to his plan, not the “values” of men. Who can look into their heart and say they follow the word of God faithfully, constantly, and honestly?

“It’s the will of God to protect marriage. . . . We will be victorious because God goes before us.”

Our forefathers, those stuffy old pilgrims, believed that the only way to tell if god had “Saved” you was that you became rich. The hung Quackers, drove out those who disagreed with them, killed the natives who lived in that land, and they did it all for “religious” freedom.   I guess not much has changed.

If a gay or lesbian couple wants to get married, let them.  Whatever God’s plan is I doubt that he has shared it all with you.  Let him sort it out.

You should tend to the mote in your own eye.

University of Chicago at Urbana-Champaigne admissions policy allows use of “clout”

The University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign evidently has two entrance tracks one for the general public and one for students who have “clout.”  Clout, in this instance, means anyone who knows someone who can pull strings to get you into the University even if you are a substandard student.  No doubt we can point fingers at other Universities who have a similar process; otherwise, how did George Walker Bush get into college?

Today’s Tribune story (here) has documentation rather than pure speculation.

In one case, a relative of Antoin “Tony” Rezko, the now-convicted influence peddler for former Gov. Rod Blagojevich, got admitted after U. of I. President B. Joseph White wrote an e-mail stating that the governor “has expressed his support, and would like to see admitted” Rezko’s relative and another applicant.

White’s message to the university chancellor was passed on to admissions officials on the same day they entered a rejection decision for the Rezko relative. “He’s actually pretty low,” replied an admissions officer, referring to the applicant’s ACT score and other credentials. “Let me know when the denial letter can go out.”

Instead, the relative was admitted.

Over 800 students in the past 4 years were granted acceptance despite having substandard grades and test scores, thereby eliminating qualified candidates enrolling in the prestigious university.

Some students do not do well on traditional tests and many do not do well in traditional classrooms, so there must be a way to provide quality education for these students.  It must not, however, be at he expense of students who have done well according to the standards they were told to achieve in order to further their education. The end result of the current system hurts students, the University, and the public who is denied the educated and moral leaders we so desperately need.

Patronage has become such an entrenched part of the admissions process that there’s even a name for the applicants with heavy-hitting sponsors: “Category I.”

clip

The system has affected the quality of the student body, records show. In 2006, the Law School’s admissions dean argued that admitting a Category I applicant would require the admission of two additional students to offset the impact it would have on the school’s ranking.

“There is no track record of success and when [the applicant] is faced with the rigor of our program there is absolutely no reason to expect anything other than failure,” wrote Paul Pless, the law admissions dean.               [bold emphasis mine]

Kudos to The Tribune for pursuing this story.