<p>There were exceptions of course, I am sure your dad's cousin was either BRILLIANT and good at everything (super meritocratic) or had relatives go there (aristocratic). That's pretty amazing.</p>
<p>Anyway when Bush went it was like 1960, things changed within then and the 70s...</p>
<p>Pinkheart,
if your dad's cousin went on full ticket, that does not refute pv's point: if you had the lineage or money, you were in. It's just that the schools were just beginning to feel guilty about excluding blacks and jews and minorities about that time, and they were under increasing social and federal pressure to diversify. The fact that your dad's cousin went on a scholarship does not mean that lineage and money did not get students in. PV has his finger on the pulse.</p>
<p>I'm kind of on the wall on this:</p>
<p>I'm sure GWB didn't get in just on relations but coming from a very rich family, with connections, and as a legacy must have helped substantially. I think what PV and Pan are trying to get to is that even though you could have gotten in without any money/relations it would've been much easier to get in with those things, and if you think about it; it applies to current times as well. </p>
<p>ex: Going to Yale in the 20's (I know 40 year difference but still somewhat similar) like in the Great Gatsby meant something completely different as compared to getting into Yale in 2009.</p>
<p>Maybe you are right, but I am getting at the fact that if you have money+pedigree you are IN, no matter what. And it is a lot harder to get in on a MERIT basis. In today's times it matters if your Dad built a building, nothing short of that. Especially at places like Andover (only need blind institution).</p>
<p>So Tiger Wood's son who might have 590 580 610 SSAT's should not be accepted at Andover? MERITOCRATIC?
You think Stanford won't take Tiger Wood's child who has 1050 SAT's? MERITOCRATIC? (the more things change the more they stay the same)
Grejuni I think we can agree that nothing has changed. The dirty little secret is the grading system is a bit skewed towards the struggling lower income students, as to not discourage their acceptances at the best universities. But other than that, it is ALL MERITOCRATIC >wink<</p>
<p>If you read my post I said that elements of the old tradition of Elite education remains. So yes people who are not deserving will get in, but they will be fewer and farther in between.</p>
<p>I don't believe so. Due to the economic situation there will be more FP students and less FA students admitted. Quantitatively, wouldn't that mean that there will be less undeserving FA students getting in, and more of the Elite FP undeserving students?
One has to presume that there have been plenty of undeserving FA students being admitted in the past over plenty deserving FP Elite students to the SHADE schools.</p>
<p>Viola, Andover is not the only Need-Blind institution. Two others are St. Andrews in DE and Boston day school Roxbury Latin.</p>
<p>This NYT article from 2000 gives some insight into George Bush at Andover. An interesting read. It gives info. about his Yale application toward the very end.</p>
<p>George</a> W. Bush's Journey: The Cheerleader: Earning A's in People Skills at Andover</p>
<p>^^Let's not forget where the NY Times sits on the balance of the political spectrum.</p>
<p>Bush had better grades than John Kerry at Yale.</p>
<p>Anybody think John Kennedy Jr. got into Andover and Brown based on his intellect (trust me, he didn't). </p>
<p>Anybody think Brooks Shields went to Princeton based on merit?</p>
<p>Al Gore's daddy was a US Senator from Tennessee -- and he failed out of Divinity school after Harvard.</p>
<p>And on it goes...</p>
<p>That's all irrelevant to us. Bush totally ***ed our economy up, that is *very relevant with us.</p>
<p>Now its irrelevant...</p>
<p>Ted Kennedy's Daddy got him into Harvard -- he was expelled for cheating on a Spanish Exam his soph year, spent two years in the Army, and then was readmitted. He was in the bottom of his class at UVA Law. Of course this was before he got drunk (his usual state for 25 years) and killed Mary Jo Kopechne...</p>
<p>Talk about a guy who has screwed up America...</p>
<p>Dollars to doughnuts you knew none of these facts about Teddy (aka The swimmer).</p>
<p>You are taking the most pointless facts and twisting them into crap. "There are lies, there are liars, and then there are statistics". Bush did not have stellar grades either, fyi. All these people you state (other tha Kerrey, who was an epic failure) actually had a positive impact on this earth. Bush? Well, I think we would be better w/o him.</p>
<p>That's a non response...</p>
<p>Yes, because your response resembles that of a bunch of idiots* trying to strip away everything Michael Phelps did because he smoked pot. Don't take away everything someone has done because of some, stupid thing. </p>
<p>Bush, on the other hand, did not do anything positive. He was a coward when he was in the National Guard, and he used his influence to get out of crap. As a president? Probably the worst of all.</p>
<p>*Not implying you are an idiot</p>
<p>Wow so harsh, you even bring in our National hero Michael Phelps? I bet FIF passed him the bong!
Bush in an anomaly, most guys with his background and grades would have done a superb job! How many great generals have we had that were at the bottom of their West Point class? What were FDR's grades at Groton? Harvard? What were Obama's grades at Columbia? Occidental? we may never know and that scares me.
Most guys and gals that get into great schools on the coattails of their parents I presume do fine in life. It's the ones that don't that we all hear about.</p>
<p>I don't think Obama got in anywhere because of his parents...</p>
<p>Obama wouldn't have gotten out of Occidental to an IVY without good grades, we know that much.</p>