I’m pretty sure this won’t end the debate about the appropriateness of admitting college applicants with lower SAT scores than those rejected, but as reported by the San Francisco Chronicle, a new study conducted by UC Berkeley sociology professor Michael Hout finds that the overwhelming majority of underrepresented students of color at UC Berkeley were admitted because of factors other than their race/ethnicity:

Hout said grades carried the most weight in admissions, and that high grades and Advanced Placement courses were responsible for some students with lower SAT scores being admitted over students with higher SATs. His report found two areas where ethnicity appeared to make a small difference.

Eighty-nine percent of admission decisions are based on a first-round score awarded by application readers. The study found a slightly higher probability that underrepresented minorities would be among the 11 percent referred for a further review, although the actual scoring in the second review showed no link to ethnicity.

Hout also found a very small scoring advantage for Latino and Native American applicants over Asian Americans among in-state applicants, but that the difference is the “statistical equivalent of getting a B instead of A in one or two courses over the whole three or four years of high school.”

As always, both sides of the affirmative action debate will spin this study to support their own arguments. But the results just highlight a key point in the affirmative action debate that I tell my students over and over again -- there are many ways to measure who is “qualified” to be admitted, and standardized tests like the SATs are just one of those ways (and it’s not even the best way either).

Danny Graves is an Amerasian (mother is Vietnamese, father is White) reilef pitcher for the Cincinnati Reds and has been one of their best players for the past eight years. However, last week, he was abruptly released (fired) by the Reds. Their explanation was of his recent slump and ineffective performances. However, most observers argue that it was because he cursed and flipped off a fan who was heckling him after a recent performance.

To make matters worse, the San Jose Mercury News reports that the fan’s heckling also contained a racial epitath: “"Go back to Vietnam, you slant-eyed (vile epithet)!” As noted in the article, Danny’s teammates were generally shocked to hear that their teammate’s employment with the club was terminated so abruptly: “As first baseman Sean Casey put it: ‘Put him on the (disabled list). Pitch him in mopup to let him try to get it right. Don’t throw him out like garbage.’” Another article at CNNSI.com notes,

Stunned teammates sat in folding chairs in the clubhouse after learning of the move, which leaves the team without a proven closer. Several players said Graves should have been given a chance to work out his problems. “This is not his fault,” first baseman Sean Casey said. “We stink. For us to be 15-28 has nothing to do with Danny Graves. That’s the frustrating part for me.

“I know I’m a little emotional right now, but I think the Cincinnati Reds as an organization owe a lot more to Danny Graves for the eight years he stepped up every year. They owe him more than to just release him like this. I just disagree with it.”

Outfielder Ken Griffey Jr. said he’s never seen anything quite like the move. “It’s tough,” Griffey said. “He’s not a troublemaker. He’s not a guy that complained. He wants the ball. It’s just upsetting. It’s a tough way to lose a guy that’s been here and dedicated himself to the organization.”

As one of the few Asian American (as opposed to Asian) professional baseball players in the sport, it is indeed sad to see his career take such an unpleasant turn. But considering that he played for the Cincinnati Reds, it’s probably not that huge of a shock that he would be treated is such an insensitive, callous, and indeed hostile way.

For those who don’t know, the Cincinnati Reds organization was onced owned and controlled by Marge Schott, whose racial insensitivites were legendary. For example, she routinely called her Black ballplayers her “high-priced niggers” and once said that Adolf Hitler was misunderstood -- that he had “good ideas but went too far.” After a few of these embarassing incidents became public, Major League Baseball officials suspended her and ultimately forced her to sell her interest in the team.

But that’s not all -- many community activists and scholars know Cincinnati to have one of the worst race relations problems in the entire country. It’s a city in which several young Black men have been shot by White police officers in recent years. It was also where Vincent Chin’s murderers were acquitted by an all-White jury of violating Vincent’s civil rights when they bludgeoned him to death with a baseball bat.

In short and in retrospect, I suppose it was only a matter of time until the city of Cincinnati and its residents showed their true racist colors. I hope Danny Graves signs with a better team that has a few less racist redneck fans.

CBS News reports that its latest polls suggest that most Americans don’t feel that President Bush has the same priorities as they do:

Six in ten Americans say the president does not share their priorities, while just 34 percent say he does – the lowest numbers for Mr. Bush since the eve of his first inauguration. If there’s any solace for Mr. Bush, it’s that even fewer people, just 20 percent, say Congress shares their priorities. . .

While Mr. Bush continues to push hard for his Social Security plan, and has recently spoken out on issues like stem cell research and the fight over judicial nominees, the public is far more concerned with the war in Iraq and the economy. . .

Overall, Americans are pessimistic about the direction of the country with 60 percent saying the U.S. is on the wrong track and 34 percent saying it’s on the right track. It’s been more than two years since a majority of Americans said the country was heading in the right direction. The last time that happened was March 2003, at the onset of the war in Iraq.

So if Bush doesn’t have the same priorities that most American citizens have, then exactly whose priorities does he share? Oh yeah, I almost forgot -- it’s the neo-conservative right-wing Christian fundamentalists (along with their corporate allies) who dictate his agenda! What’s even more confusing is that most Americans, despite knowing that Bush doesn’t share their concerns, still reelected him anyway.

Absolutely incredible . . .

The Washington Post has an article that describe several recent efforts to develop TV programming aimed at the emerging Asian American population. As the article points out,

Over the past year, at least a half-dozen English-language, 24-hour cable and satellite networks targeting Asians have started or announced plans, such as Comcast-owned AZN and MTV’s three channels for Indian, Chinese and Korean immigrants. They are all clamoring to reach markets with large Asian populations. . . .

As competition intensifies, the networks have discovered that the programming of yesteryear (think amateurs croaking songs on Saturday mornings) no longer cuts it. Unlike the mammoth Latino market, Asians cannot be unified by language, so programmers are trying to lure an audience that straddles several niches. And they compete mightily to create content that will resonate across Asian subgroups and eventually into the mainstream, bringing in the viewers and advertising revenue they need to survive. . . .

In an industry with entire channels devoted to foodies and fashionistas alike, niche programming still needs to reach out and touch everyone. So shows are developed for Asians, as broad as such an audience already is, and sometimes taken even broader. With enough luck and buzz, they could be the next “Iron Chef” (Food Network) or “Queer Eye for the Straight Guy” (Bravo).

I find it interesting that on the one hand, several “mainstream” media powerhouses apparently have an interest in developing programming aimed primarily at Asian American audiences, but on the other hand, many of these same media companies are so resistant and utterly clueless about incorporating Asian Americans into their own “mainstream” TV shows, as evidenced by the continuing criticism that they receive from APA organizations about the lack of Asian American characters in primetime TV.

In other words, they want our eyeballs and our money, but don’t want to spotlight us to a general audience -- kinda like they’re ashamed of us or something. Hmmm . . .

Amnesty International has released it annual report documenting human rights abuses around the world. Salon.com reports that it contains harsh criticism against the U.S.’s military prison at Guantanamo Bay:

The annual report accused the United States of shirking its responsibility to set the bar for human rights protections and said Washington has instead created a new lexicon for abuse and torture. “Attempts to dilute the absolute ban on torture through new policies and quasi-management speak, such as ‘environmental manipulation, stress positions and sensory manipulation,’ was one of the most damaging assaults on global values.”

That’s absolutely shocking! Uhh, no it’s not. With news reports coming out almost weekly about the latest prison abuse scandals like (allegedly) desecrating the Koran, using sexual taunts against prisoners, and continuing reports of Abu Ghraib-like abuses, I am at a loss to explain why the U.S. military is being criticized . . . yeah right.

At least Amnesty International named several countries in Africa as being the worst human rights abusers around the world, so that gives the U.S. military something to aim for.

I just saw Star Wars Episode 3, Revenge of the Sith yesterday and I have to say that I liked it. As a Generation X’er, I’ve been a Star Wars fan since the original trilogy began in the late 1970s. Episodes I and II were good as well, but Episode III is among the best (like many other critics have said, it’s probably tied with Empire Strikes Back as the best of all six Star Wars movies).

However, that’s not to say that Revenge of the Sith was perfect. I still found much of the acting to be rather superficial and hollow, especially (and unfortunately) from two of the movie’s more high-regarded actors, Natalie Portman as Padme, Samuel L. Jackson as Mace Windu, and Ewan McGregor as Obi-Wan Kenobi.

The movie obviously was not supposed to be a hig-brow Shakespearean drama, but there were several times when I wished these three actors would have put a little more emotion into their scenes. I was also not fully impressed with Anakin Skywalker’s scene where he turned to the Dark Side -- his “conversion” felt a little too abrupt and lacking in emotional impact as well.

Nonetheless, the special effects were incredible as expected, the fight scenes were well-done, and I liked the dramatic muscial score that set the background for many of the climatic scenes. The final scenes of Padme’s giving birth, death, and funeral, interwoven with Anakin’s mechanical transformation into Darth Vader were also very well done. Overall, I would give the movie and 8 out of 10.

Let’s hope George Lucas or one of his chosen successors does another trilogy later down the line . . .

Many academics and sociologists are pro-union, as am I, although I think there is still lots of room for improvement within the labor union movement, especially in regard to refocusing its efforts on protecting workers’ rights instead of blindly supporting the status quo and giving workers excuses for being incompetent at their jobs.

Therefore, I found it interesting that, as reported by the New York Times, there is currently a power struggle developing within the AFL-CIO. The status quo is being challenged by the largest single union in the country, the Service Employees International Union:

The president of the largest union in the A.F.L.-C.I.O. yesterday called on other labor leaders to help him oust John J. Sweeney, the federation’s president, and warned that his union would quit the federation if Mr. Sweeney was re-elected. Asserting that sweeping change was needed to revive the labor movement, the union leader, Andrew L. Stern, president of the Service Employees International Union, said Mr. Sweeney was not the person to bring about bold change. . . .

Yesterday, Mr. Stern joined the leaders of four other major unions - the Teamsters, the laborers, the food and commercial workers, and the hotel, restaurant and apparel workers union, Unite Here - in endorsing a platform that calls for overhauling the A.F.L.-C.I.O. The platform proposes nearly tripling the amount that the 13-million-member federation spends on unionization efforts. . .

When Mr. Sweeney was elected head of the federation, promising bold changes to resuscitate labor, Mr. Stern vigorously backed him, but now he views Mr. Sweeney as a spent force who has failed to revive labor. Union wages and benefits are under attack, while the percentage of union workers in the private sector has fallen to 8 percent, the lowest level in a century. Yesterday’s developments show that the challenge to Mr. Sweeney has reached new heights.

I’m the first to admit that I don’t know the entire story here but at first glance, it does sound like this is a battle between the past and the future. Whatever the outcome, it does seem that something needs to be done to revive the labor union movement.

The Pacific News Service has an interesting story about the recent emergence of Washington D.C.’s Chinatown. It describes that in the past, this very small Chinatown was just another area of a neglected urban landscape, rife with crime and stagnation. However, in recent years, due to a pro-business mayoral administration and development, trendy and fashionable stores are now located right next to established Chinatown businesses:

As a popular tourist attraction, however, Chinatown still functions well. Every Chinese New Year, thousands of affluent Chinese American families from nearby Maryland and Virginia come to watch the annual parade. And on weekdays, the district’s dozen remaining Chinese restaurants are packed full with hungry office workers. . .

Affluent national retail chains like Starbucks, Ruby Tuesday, TGIF, Anne Taylor and Hooters have elbowed their way into the six square block ward, giving a flashy, plate-glass gloss to the neighborhood.

For China-born Heung Me Ie, 75, who has lived in Chinatown for 15 years and works as a caretaker in the small Kwun Yum Temple, the changes are welcome. “I think the new shops and restaurants are all good,” she says in Cantonese. “Even if they are not Chinese, they make the streets more lively.”

Time will tell if these new corporate-backed non-Asian businesses eventually squeeze the older, smaller, more established Chinese businesses out (as they have apparently already begun doing), but for now at least, it sounds like it’s a “successful” blending of new and old, Asian and non-Asian -- just like America itself.