<p>^^you said it for me.</p>
<p>Sorry pugfug90 that you couldn't get into an Ivy league school or comparable level school. :( Not all of us are that smart, don't worry the SAT's are just a big bad test that don't measure anything! I'm sorry you have such an inferiority complex! :( :( Don't worry, we don't work, it was just handed to us! You just better hope I don't become the boss of you!:D :D:D</p>
<p>;-)</p>
<p>Now I could never get into an Ivy league either (3.9 gpa, 28 act), but that was funny.</p>
<p>The thread title says "Weeky" instead of "Weekly." Just thought I'd point that out.</p>
<p>Cervantes, not everyone wants to go to an Ivy League school. The sats and the schools you attend really do not matter, but ppl on this forum inflate thier importance. The vast majority of CEOs of companies did not come from Ivy League schools and many politicians did not attend one either. </p>
<p>It is wrong to imply that bc someone did not go to an Ivy or Ivy caliber school they are inferior. The school you go to does not make you a good person, nor does it speak of your ability to be a good leader.</p>
<p>^Well, if Bush and McCain are any indication, I think your grades might be a teensy bit indicative. :D</p>
<p>Dbate, then why'd you create so many chances threads for them? Also, that's what you think! You have no proof! :D My going to Stanford makes a good person and a very good leader! :D :D</p>
<p>
[quote]
That's not change.
[/quote]
That's more of the same!</p>
<p>I know I was extremely late, but oh well.</p>
<p>Yale</a> grades portray Kerry as a lackluster student - The Boston Globe</p>
<p>I'm not impressed with grades, good or bad. Oh yeah, Kerry had lots of D's that he affectionately called them D's of distinction.</p>
<p>Yet despite his academic mediocrity, Kerry became distinguished as a great speaker.</p>
<p>Similarly, McCain was not a good academic student, but he was accomplished beyond his books.</p>
<p>Transcript:</a> Former Sen. Fred Thompson's Speech : NPR
John</a> McCain: Hidden Depths | Newsweek Politics: Conventions | Newsweek.com</p>
<p>Look at the great character of this man :)
I had a similar epiphany recently, dedicating myself so hard for a 4.0, I now realize of course that working like a horse for a 4.0 when you could chill with a 3.0 and pursue other things was more worthwhile.</p>
<p>The</a> Corner on National Review Online</p>
<p>"And since our opponents in this presidential election seem to look down on that experience, let me explain to them what the job involves.** I guess a small-town mayor is sort of like a ‘community organizer,’ except that you have actual responsibilities.""**</p>
<p>HA!</p>
<p>"Here’s how I look at the choice Americans face in this election. In politics, there are some candidates who use change to promote their careers. And then there are those, like John McCain, who use their careers to promote change."</p>
<p>Hope that makes you feel better at night! Do realize, the only reason Kerry and McCain got that far was because they were born far richer and more influential than both of us. Also, the truly elite can earn good grades and chill with friends. :D:D</p>
<p>
[quote]
I guess a small-town mayor is sort of like a ‘community organizer,’ except that you have actual responsibilities.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Treating Obama as nothing but a community organizer is ridiculous. I've heard better cheap shots elsewhere. Doesn't get the job done.</p>
<p>
[quote]
"Here’s how I look at the choice Americans face in this election. In politics, there are some candidates who use change to promote their careers. And then there are those, like John McCain, who use their careers to promote change."
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I was completely surprised that she used this. Because, the sad fact is (and everyone's thinking it) that John McCain did use "change" (that is, he used Palin) to promote his own career (that is, getting him elected to POTUS). It's dangerous ground that she shouldn't have tread on.</p>
<p>I'm not sure what your point is Cervantes, Mr. "Hope the hurricane is strong so McCain's convention is screwed". Do you want to make one?</p>
<p>Anyway, you're right. McCain could have had the cozy life, but he chose the honorable one.</p>
<p>Obama could have beat Alice Palmer in an election, but he sued her off the ballot on technicalities.</p>
<p>He could have not wasted OUR money but he did.
Obama</a>, Biden's Son Linked By Earmarks, Washington Post: Candidate Got Funding For Nursing Program Represented By VP Pick's Son, A Lobbyist - CBS News
The</a> Campaign Spot on National Review Online</p>
<p>McCain-Palin 2008</p>
<p>phuriku, LOL</p>
<p>My point is, those men were not self-made. They didn't need good grades or fancy resumes because they were born richer and more influential than the vast majority of America. Obama, Biden, and yes even Palin were self-made retard. Seems conservatives are devoid of logic.</p>
<p>The sats and the schools you attend really do not matter, but ppl on this forum inflate thier importance. The vast majority of CEOs of companies did not come from Ivy League schools and many politicians did not attend one either.</p>
<p>Dbate, then might I ask, why are you so interested in applying to Yale then? If the prestige, connections and supposedly superior academics it provides play any role at all in your decision to apply, then you are a hypocrite.</p>
<p>^I second that. Dbate is all over those Yale threads.</p>
<p>Cervantes, are you trying to make a point? Biden is not anymore special than McCain just because McCain had a rich daddy. There are other rich politicians like Pelosi that aren't highly revered by the people, and being "self-made" has nothing to do with it. Looking at their characters today, Biden is a gaffe-prone partisan Washington buffoon, while McCain is someone that has reached across the aisle and called out his own party. That matters more to me than their rise to the top.</p>
<p>McCain stopped reaching across the aisle when his first presidential bid went awry. Those who are not too partisan to see clearly have realized that. Biden, on the other hand, has and continues to serve well and thoughtfully. That matters more to me than how a candidate used to be.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I have no sympathy for ivy leaguers. The intellectual types aren't exactly symbols of workers. It's really funny that you argue that Obama's worked to where he is. Lawyers, they've toiled so hard to where they are. I think it's rich.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>And I think you're presumptuous.</p>
<p>It's one thing to claim general perception for support ("symbols of workers"--whatever that is). It's another to hold something like an Ivy League education against a person, concluding that these "intellectual types" are automatically privileged. You're grasping at anything here, and that's obvious: you'll take to the achievements of the opponent candidate and somehow, by some twisted form of logic (otherwise known as stereotyping), turn them into negative traits. Believe it or not, presuming that a person is privileged (and thus did not work hard) for going to an Ivy or comparable school is really blind. It's the exact opposite, as other members said: he had diversities that he faced, and he was still able to come out on top with his Ivy education. I don't care whether you're for or against Obama; trying to argue against that, as any means to make his accomplishments appear less impressive, is just unbelievable.</p>
<p>I don't usually post in these discussions, but that petty, insubstantial, myopic claim just struck me.</p>
<p>Good luck finding more evidence to support your weak, unfounded claims. Next time, though, try to get something actually convincing. Maybe then I can start to take them seriously.</p>
<p>One doesn't have to go to these great schools and become what Obama has become. </p>
<p>I don't have anything against Ivy-Leaguers per se, I have something against the many of them that turned out to be intellectuals. His book quotes, his speeches come off as oratory. I won't bow down to that kind of language, and I won't try to accept the fact that he's "above his pay grade", as potentially president, on an issue he said he would sign first, and make an issue against Sarah Palin.</p>
<p>You don't have to be smart and be deluded in your own utopian vision of fixing a broken America that needs to be changed.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I don't have anything against Ivy-Leaguers per se, I have something against the many of them that turned out to be intellectuals. His book quotes, his speeches come off as oratory. I won't bow down to that kind of language, and I won't try to accept the fact that he's "above his pay grade", as potentially president, on an issue he said he would sign first, and make an issue against Sarah Palin.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>What are you trying to say here?</p>
<p>
[quote]
You don't have to be smart and be deluded in your own utopian vision of fixing a broken America that needs to be changed.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>You do have to have some modicum of intelligence to write something that allows your audience to follow you, however.</p>