<p>yeah. people that say "the president got him in to yale" have made an anachronistic error. however, this isn't to say that his father didn't get him in to yale - the Bushes are one the great american families, like the kennedys or the rockerfellers</p>
<p>That is simply not true. Wealthy and somewhat influential, but no more so than scores of families in Connecticut or other posh areas. Nothing like the Kennedys or Rockefellers in the time frame at issue.</p>
<p>Oh man. I'm not even going to start in this thread.</p>
<p>Do feel free to chime in the NYU politics forums though...I'll be sure to respond.</p>
<p>My ID there is the same</p>
<p>"That is simply not true. Wealthy and somewhat influential, but no more so than scores of families in Connecticut or other posh areas. Nothing like the Kennedys or Rockefellers in the time frame at issue."</p>
<p>I would disagree with that. the bush family is everybit as influential as the kennedys and rockefellers (historically speaking), if not more so.</p>
<p>ttylswt: You didn't even directly answer back any of my arguments, and made very poor attempts at straw-manning them. That's just sad.</p>
<p>"All the more reason. He has undergone 10 years of major public speaking so it is very likely that he could get lost in words."</p>
<p>Right...that's one of the saddest excuses I've ever heard. Yeah, if I've been playing piano for 10 years, and I suck more than someone who's never played because I get "lost in the notes." Have you ever heard of the phrase "Practice makes perfect"?</p>
<p>"The reason why the graduation rate is so high is because the people are smart enough to pass."</p>
<p>Right. Yet another assumption. Do you have experience at these schools? How do you know? Or are you so naively caught up in the elitist illusion of "meritocracy" that you have no idea? No, from personal experience I can tell you that the reason why the graduation rate is so high is because you get so much coddling, advisement, grade inflation (I met someone at Stanford who was sad he got a 69, but was happier later on when he learned that was an A), and so many warnings. It is incredibly hard to be kicked out of those schools. </p>
<p>"Don't belittle the people who get into elite schools by saying they are babied all the way through."</p>
<p>They are babied. Some who get in get in because of their intelligence; others because of their connections. The former progress because they're smart, the latter, because they get special treatment. And I'm not belittling them, as I know a lot of them, and this coddling is one of the reasons why they wanted to go to X elite school. </p>
<p>"But even if Yale "coddles" its students, it is still one of the top schools, and I doubt your average stupid person could get through."</p>
<p>Again, you end with an assumption. Do you go to Yale? How do you know? Show me some facts and then we can talk. </p>
<p>"In the coming years and decades, when the smoke clears and freedom has reigned once again over those who want to destroy it, you can comfort yourself with the fact that you were just an immature kid."</p>
<p>"George W. Bush is a visionary president, and the world's greatest advocate and defender of freedom and democracy. He is on par with Churchill and, more recent, Reagan."</p>
<p>Oh, god. I hate people who rely on "freedom" and "democracy" as the reason to adore Bush, but only see it as an ideal and don't really know what it means. Do you really think Democracy can survive in Iraq when the Constitution itself says that the Shar'ia (religious law of Koran) is law? All I see happening from that is a regression into the Taliban-esque or Iran-esque era of the Religious Police, executing women who go to school, executing men who don't wear beards correctly, etc. Is our treatment of prisoners at Abu Gharib and Guantanamo "democratic"? Was our exporting of torture (to former Soviet republics in former Soviet torture facilities) an expression of "freedom"? Is our arrest of people of Middle Eastern descent, without trial or even knowledge of their wrong, an expression of the "democracy" that we so dearly fought for and is supposedly enshrined in the Constitution? is our violation of the Geneva Convention - which we have signed, and thus adopted as binding law, an expression of the "good" that you claim to embrace? </p>
<p>You people are making the Commander-in-Chief the dictator in times of war. You have a narrow-minded vision of freedom, as narrow-minded as Bush's unilateral invasion of Iraq. You want to impose "American" ideals and freedom and democray on countries whose cultures are entirely different, replace that country's ideals and culture and values, and whose definition of "freedom" or "good" is different from ours. You are the immature kid in this situation, and you'll soon (hopefully) learn that there is no absolute right and wrong, the world is not black and white and that one country cannot impose itself on another, that cultural and political hegemony of this era is akin to the imperialism of the past that lead to the abuse of the human rights of the Filipinos under Spain and the US, abuse of the Native Americans and native populations in South America, abuse of the Indians under British rule, abuse of the Africans under European rule, and even abuse of the American colonists under British rule. Your defense of your "freedom" is entirely contradictory to the values of the Founding Fathers in escaping that kind of colonialism and embracing self-determination, and is entirely hypocritical in and out of itself. You believe that only your version of democracy is right, that everyone must embrace it, and only when everything lays in ruins, or in civil war like Iraq today, will you MAYBE recognize your error or maybe you'll declare it the triumph of democracy. You are a perfect example of Lebeziatnikov in Crime and Punishment, someone who makes a mockery of their beliefs, and people like you are what allow dictatorial regimes to rise up in countries like Iran. You make a mockery out of Christianity in not accepting the beliefs and choices of other people who choose to believe in other gods. Your definition of freedom demands that all other freedoms cease to exist. One of the principles of the Christian faith, if you somehow conveniently forgot, is choice - that's why God set man before the two trees, of Life and of Knowledge of Good and Evil and let him choose, why he didn't just directly give man Life but even created the other tree.</p>
<p>I was listening to a lecture on Islam and the West at Stanford Admit Weekend and one thing the professor said really struck me. He had gone to Iran and someone had told him: "Your president and mine are very alike. They both think they are campaigning for God and their religion and both will stop at nothing to do this." I find the comparison apt, and revealing of the dismal failure of Bush as a President, one who can be compared to Ahmadinejad, someone I think even you'd deem not a good leader.</p>
<p>I'm going to stop now because arguing with people who assume everything, are selective about their use of "facts" and "news," and claim to be "news junkies" but only mindlessly spew out empty and hypocritical declarations of "freedom" and "democracy" is annoying, futile, and ****es me off.</p>
<p>I would disagree with that. the bush family is everybit as influential as the kennedys and rockefellers (historically speaking), if not more so.</p>
<p>Not even in the same ballpark at the time in question. Now, of course, without question, but that wasn't true 40 years ago.</p>
<p>regarding political legacy and influence, the bush family has been more influential. of course it wasnt true 40 years ago as bush sr was not president and george w was around 20. but in historical terms the bush family is more influential.</p>
<p>"I was listening to a lecture on Islam and the West at Stanford Admit Weekend and one thing the professor said really struck me. He had gone to Iran and someone had told him: "Your president and mine are very alike. They both think they are campaigning for God and their religion and both will stop at nothing to do this." I find the comparison apt, and revealing of the dismal failure of Bush as a President, one who can be compared to Ahmadinejad, someone I think even you'd deem not a good leader."</p>
<p>ebonytear, for someone who claims he dislikes one sided views, your post is filled with bias one sided bs. i am no huge fan of george bush, or of john kerry for that matter, but your washed out left wing bs gets tiresome to listen to. The statement above is insulting. Comparing bush to someone who has called for the the complete inhilation of a race and denied the existence of the holocaust is foolish. but it is what i can expect from left wing nuts. similar in extent to the extremism i hear from right wing nuts. extremism is extremism and is what leads to ignorance and denial of the promotion of liberty to those domestically and throughout the world, regardless if it is the far left or right.</p>
<p>Brand 182: "Regardless of the fact that Bush went to Yale, he is incredibly ignorant. Remember when he first began campaigning? I am a stickler for English mistakes."</p>
<p>Brand 182: Kerry, as well as Bush, are both idiots.</p>
<p>Brand, before you go criticizing someone else about English mistakes, why don't you check your own grammar? Kerry is only one person, not multiple. A stickler for English mistakes, Brand?</p>
<p>regarding political legacy and influence, the bush family has been more influential. of course it wasnt true 40 years ago as bush sr was not president and george w was around 20. but in historical terms the bush family is more influential.</p>
<p>Really? More important than the US Ambassador to Britain in the run-up to the war? Than the family of a President of the United States, two senators -- including one of the most important and influential in American history? I respectfully disagree.</p>
<p>Bush sr- director of the cia, president of the united states.</p>
<p>Bush jr- governor, president.</p>
<p>jeb bush- governor, promising future.</p>
<p>This doesnt incluse george bush sr's father who, i believe, was a senator.</p>
<p>I would argue numerous presidents,numerous governors, cia director and countless other political positions back up my point. but again everyone is entitled to their opinion. althought i feel i am correct, only history will decide. if you like george w bush or not, i believe his presidency is far more relavent (either good or bad is debatable) to the history of the united states than jfk. but again only time will tell.</p>
<p>LOL! How can you dare talk about making assumptions when you are assuming all that crap about Bush getting into Yale by his father bla bla bla. Look at these assumptions:</p>
<p>"Like someone pointed out before, his father would've been pi**ed if he didn't graduate."
"Yale might not be your "ordinary" college, but when it comes the elite schools, admission is what's hard."
"Once you're in, they make a point of coddling you (or at least Yale does, & tries to use this as their selling point, as H doesn't really do this) and making sure you graduate.</p>
<p>"Again, you end with an assumption. Do you go to Yale? How do you know? Show me some facts and then we can talk." (this isnt really an assumption but it goes along with the preceding quote)</p>
<p>I should probably stop here and point out something. Do YOU go to Yale? You seem to think you can "assume" whatever you want to about Yale yet when I do, you ask me how I could know. Yes it is true that you go to Stanford, but Stanford still isnt Yale and you cant just "assume" the two are exactly alike. Ok now to other stuff you said.</p>
<p>"Right. Yet another assumption. Do you have experience at these schools? How do you know? Or are you so naively caught up in the elitist illusion of "meritocracy" that you have no idea? No, from personal experience I can tell you that the reason why the graduation rate is so high is because you get so much coddling, advisement, grade inflation (I met someone at Stanford who was sad he got a 69, but was happier later on when he learned that was an A), and so many warnings. It is incredibly hard to be kicked out of those schools."</p>
<p>"Show me some facts and then we can talk."</p>
<p>The fact of the matter is, and you can look at admissions statistics for "facts", the people who are accepted are still top notch students for their particular time period, legacy or not. You cant just shun off their prior high school record.</p>
<p>"Yeah, if I've been playing piano for 10 years, and I suck more than someone who's never played because I get "lost in the notes." Have you ever heard of the phrase "Practice makes perfect"?"</p>
<p>Ok I think you might have mixed yourself up here because you are contradicting yourself. I think you mean to be sarcastic about the lost in the notes part but still if you have practiced for that long wouldnt you be better than the person who just started? I guess you just made an error or something, which coincidentally is the same kind of error i was talking about, when people just do something like public speaking or arguing so much it is just all mumble jumbled in their brain and they make mistakes. </p>
<p>"All I see happening from that is a regression into the Taliban-esque or Iran-esque era of the Religious Police, executing women who go to school, executing men who don't wear beards correctly, etc."</p>
<p>Yes, you "assume" that would happen.</p>
<p>"Is our treatment of prisoners at Abu Gharib and Guantanamo "democratic"?"</p>
<p>I would just like to point out something here and that you cannot look at something like Abu Gharib and say it represents America. That was an isolated incident, and just about all of our soldiers are honorable men and women; however im not sure, i just "assume" they would be. As far as Guantanamo goes, that really is kind of a joke if you think of it, considering there is no torture at Guantanamo. I guess you must be "assuming" that what the terrorists there are saying is right, even though in the Al Qaeda handbook it says to claim you were tortured. Look everyone you ask who has been there and talked about the conditions there have said the same thing. I never knew that reading Harry Potter to a detainee was torture or that allowing prisoners to throw feces and semen at their guards was torture either, maybe for the guards. Speaking of the guards I remember there being a report of a guard who was kicked out because he struck back at a detainee after the detainee assaulted him. </p>
<p>"Is our arrest of people of Middle Eastern descent, without trial or even knowledge of their wrong, an expression of the "democracy" that we so dearly fought for and is supposedly enshrined in the Constitution? is our violation of the Geneva Convention - which we have signed, and thus adopted as binding law, an expression of the "good" that you claim to embrace?"</p>
<p>I guess this is another joke too. Wow you should really consider becoming a comedian. The fact the you alluded to the terror suspects as "people of Middle Eastern descent" is wrong. I have seen numerous interviews with military officials that indicate that the military is almost 100% sure that the people it arrests are indeed terrorists. Also the Geneva Convention doesnt even apply to these people because they arent in uniform. </p>
<p>"I was listening to a lecture on Islam and the West at Stanford Admit Weekend and one thing the professor said really struck me. He had gone to Iran and someone had told him: "Your president and mine are very alike. They both think they are campaigning for God and their religion and both will stop at nothing to do this." I find the comparison apt, and revealing of the dismal failure of Bush as a President, one who can be compared to Ahmadinejad, someone I think even you'd deem not a good leader."</p>
<p>I would just like to point out that you are "assuming" that this is all one big religious crusade when it really isnt. This is about stopping people like you from getting blown up. Its about safety, and just because the President is a Christian <em>gasp</em> doesnt mean he is a crazy zealot like Ahmadinejad. Bush and Ahmadinejad are nothing alike. Ahmadinejad wants to wipe Israel off the map and bring rise to Islam, not even to mention he said the Holocaust was a myth. Bush just wants to make us safe. </p>
<p>"ttylswt: You didn't even directly answer back any of my arguments, and made very poor attempts at straw-manning them. That's just sad."</p>
<p>Finally I would just like to point out that your comment makes no sense whatsoever. I went through and carefully explained to you everything in a way so that you would understand what I was getting at.</p>
<p>if you like george w bush or not, i believe his presidency is far more relavent (either good or bad is debatable) to the history of the united states than jfk. but again only time will tell.</p>
<p>Totally agree with you on that. I happen to be a Security Mom for Bush, life-long conservative and a major supporter of our current president, although I disagree with him majorly on certain issues. That said, I guess my point all along was that there were lots of families similarly situated at the time that W was admitted to Yale. That W certainly got "hooked" in but that it wasn't uncommon and wouldn't have raised eyebrows in his circle. Personally, I think ole Teddy Kennedy was a much more glaring example of an unqualified person being hooked into an elite school. But that's just my opinion.</p>
<p>Jackaroo:</p>
<p>Looks like you got me. The sentence
"Kerry, as well as Bush, are both idiots" is incorrect.</p>
<p>Thank you for that correction. Bush is still an idiot and can't speak English. But you did get me once, so bravo.</p>
<p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bush_family%5B/url%5D">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bush_family</a></p>
<p>POLITICAL CONNECTIONS ANYONE?</p>
<p>How about bill clinton? and hilary clinton?
They didn't have any "powerful connections" when they got into yale, did they?</p>
<p>Bill Clinton did not have or need political connections, he came from quite a poor family. I still feel Bill Clinton is truly one of the most intelligent presidents in history, although i deff did not agree with many of his policies. Hillary Clinton is another matter. I also think she is extremely intelligent, however she did come from a wealthy and powerful family, ironically who were devout and active republicans, who likely had countless political connections. In regards to if they were used to tap her into yale law, i do not know.</p>
<p>Bill and Hilary Clinton are both very intelligent people... this thread is not discussing how to get into Yale, it's discussing how George Bush did.</p>
<p>Ok, I can't help but join the fray.</p>
<p>"I would just like to point out something here and that you cannot look at something like Abu Gharib and say it represents America."</p>
<p>Unfortunately what youre stating does not matter; the fundamentalist Islamists who hate us propagate incidents like Abu Ghraib and make it seem like it is representative of us. Diplomacy is two-sided.</p>
<p>"That was an isolated incident, and just about all of our soldiers are honorable men and women; however im not sure, i just "assume" they would be."</p>
<p>I think you need to check up on the news. These just scratch the surface. The problem lies not in people, but policy, which originates from the highest level of command.</p>
<p><a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4523825.stm%5B/url%5D">http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4523825.stm</a>
<a href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12319090/%5B/url%5D">http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12319090/</a>
<a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A14936-2004Dec20.html%5B/url%5D">http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A14936-2004Dec20.html</a>
<a href="http://www.truthout.org/cgi-bin/artman/exec/view.cgi/9/4486%5B/url%5D">http://www.truthout.org/cgi-bin/artman/exec/view.cgi/9/4486</a></p>
<p>If you've kept up with the news, you mightve heard about the secret CIA prison system in Europe and throughout the rest of the world. What is disturbing is the fact that we don't know anything about what is going on inside those prisons. Some of the countries have little protection for prisoners and that allows for the potential for abuse.</p>
<p>"As far as Guantanamo goes, that really is kind of a joke if you think of it, considering there is no torture at Guantanamo."</p>
<p><a href="http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/06/01/us.gitmo/%5B/url%5D">http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/06/01/us.gitmo/</a>
<a href="http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGAMR510072006%5B/url%5D">http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGAMR510072006</a></p>
<p>In addition to my earlier posts.</p>
<p>"I guess you must be "assuming" that what the terrorists there are saying is right, even though in the Al Qaeda handbook it says to claim you were tortured."</p>
<p>As mentioned earlier, abuse has already been established.</p>
<p>"Look everyone you ask who has been there and talked about the conditions there have said the same thing. I never knew that reading Harry Potter to a detainee was torture or that allowing prisoners to throw feces and semen at their guards was torture either, maybe for the guards. Speaking of the guards I remember there being a report of a guard who was kicked out because he struck back at a detainee after the detainee assaulted him."</p>
<p>I think you need to learn what the definition of torture is.
<a href="http://www.ohchr.org/english/law/cat.htm%5B/url%5D">http://www.ohchr.org/english/law/cat.htm</a></p>
<pre><code> Any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity. It does not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in or incidental to lawful sanctions. -endquote
</code></pre>
<p>Judging from your statement, it seems to me that you don't understand the full scope of the situation.</p>
<p>What I don't understand is how did Bush get into HBS with a 2.4ish GPA</p>