<p>Wow, did any of you read this yet? It's so bad...written by a princeton conservative stereotype</p>
<p>He attacks the "closemindedness" of others' views yet advocates his own biased positions. Real classy.</p>
<p>I say, good riddance of him. Princeton doesn't need people like him.</p>
<p>that guy should go into a cave and hide, there is nothing wrong with having a woman as a college president</p>
<p>haha maybe his kid was deferred ED or something :D</p>
<p>I didnt apply ed sucharita</p>
<p>You're his kid? :confused:</p>
<p>???? I didnt know who you were referring to, I was most certainly not the spawn of the vitriolic author of the author</p>
<p>sempitern this is a comedy of errors.
i was trying to analyze the reasons for the aforementioned vitriolic author's attack and came up with the theory that maybe his kid was deferred. then you replied by saying that you didnt apply ED...which added to the general confusion and prompted my question about your parentage :p</p>
<p>oscar wilde would be proud</p>
<p>^^hahaha</p>
<p>But the truth is that, no matter how much we dislike these allegations, most if not all are correct. </p>
<p>But it doesn't really matter though because Princeton still ROCKS!!! :D</p>
<p>"Princeton still ROCKS!!! "</p>
<p>Cant emphasize more</p>
<p>I agree with Summers' statement. Not only are men generally more interested in the hard sciences than women, they tend to excel too -- and that's a fact. Shame for NOW's demanding Summers' resignation.</p>
<p>By the way, I'm a woman. I'm also not that keen with these feminist groups. :/ (And oh, I didn't read the entire article.)</p>
<p>It's like.... blah... i'm not even in the mood to restate what a moron this man is, not for stating things which are completely untrue, but for repeatedly remodeling facts and statements to support his view. </p>
<p>i do like the editor's or whatever comment:
"Steven M. Warshawsky frequently comments on politics and current affairs from a conservative perspective." </p>
<p>It's like: "if you were offended and think that this man is utterly stupid, don't be shocked! He does this all the time!" :D</p>
<p>I must confess that the article did scare me a bit about Tilghman: i now picture her as a crazy feminist in one of south parks insane episodes... i better stay out of this... <em>leaves</em></p>
<p>Ok, so there's a lot of stuff that bothers me in that article (starting with the idiot author's irrational and bigoted prejudice against the "backward" cultures and nations around the world, that are so obviously inferior and disgusting that the U.S. and Princeton should avoid even mentioning building international relations because that might mean interacting with those filthy third-world countries... ok, wow, run-on tangent.) Anyway. Here we have the sentence that is perhaps the most interesting of all (it appears in the second last paragraph):</p>
<p>"So why do conservative alumni continue to support the university? And why do conservative parents continue to send their sons and daughters to Princeton?"</p>
<p>Well, that's an interesting thought. Princeton isn't a meritocracy. The author assumes that rich conservative well-bred private-schooled children of rich, conservative alums automatically get free tickets to Princeton. Huh. I hope his kid gets rejected, because ta-da! I can only imagine someone with scum like that as a father is probably pretty stupid. I'm sure the kid's essay on visiting Paris and horse riding and discovering the fascinating process of filtering caviar that sparked her interest in food engineering will be brilliant. </p>
<p>Wow, I hope the author gets stranded in a starving village in Zimbabwe for a year with nothing on him whatsoever. Then I hope he gets transported to a poor feudal community in Pakistan where he has to slave in the fields 14 hours a day. Maybe spend a few months as a desperate unemployed hungry man who has to bear the shame of coming home everyday empty handed to his family on the streets of Tehran. Or someone could just shoot him in the face so the earth gets rid of his putrid ignorance, but that would be letting him off the hook too easily. I haven't actually gotten angry over an article for years now, so wow, congrats Mr. Steven M. Warshawsky, you bigoted, closeminded, elitist piece of crap.</p>
<p>SoWhatNow, F U C K I N G S H I T, exactly! precisely! and to the point!</p>
<p>His irrational xenophobia and the last paragraph where he tries to persuade conservatives all over to stop supporting Pton were the things that bothered me most too... </p>
<p>But really, although i wish him the same things, and more (encounters with KKK and humiliation from untermenschen from inferior countries etc), i don't think you should get angry becasue this is exactly one of the purposes of the article; and it's so irritating because of the stupid, unnatural and wrong way he arguments his points of view... don't give him the satisfaction... </p>
<p>i sent him an email with a link to this post :D</p>
<p>"i don't think you should get angry becasue this is exactly one of the purposes of the article; and it's so irritating because of the stupid, unnatural and wrong way he arguments his points of view... don't give him the satisfaction..."</p>
<p>Yeah, good point, thanks Pavalon. :) He is really, really dishonest in his method of arguing... he takes the randomest, most inoccuous quotes and from them extrapolates paragraphs on someone's personal philosophy and intentions. The only people he could convince with such a poorly written, badly disguised distortion of facts (actually, it's almost bordering on fabrication), are ignorant, closeminded people like himself. So it's all good, Mr. Warshawsky, hope you enjoyed your Civet coffee and Black Truffles for breakfast, I'm sure plenty of terrorist Pashtun kids around Karakoram are keeping you in their prayers.</p>
<p>"For a picture of what Harvard will look like if the feminists get their way, just take a look at Princeton." </p>
<p>"When I look at Princeton today, I see a left-wing ideologue as president, a faculty that barely tolerates the presence of even a handful of conservative professors, and a campus environment that offers little sustenance to conservative students. "</p>
<p>WHAT DA HELL? somebody's smoking the WRONG stuff....</p>
<p>I consider myself a very liberal person, but I think that a lot of what Warshawsky said makes sense, and is very well documented. Princeton seems to be turning overwhelmingly liberal and feminist in agenda. The way I see it, that is Princeton's right as a private university. Are all the decisions being made necessarily the best decisions? That's not for me to say. That's for the leadership at the University to say. As free citizens, we can decide if we want to go there or not. As for me, I'd love to go there :-D</p>
<p>His plea for conservatives to stop funding the University, while legitimate, is both short-sighted and hardly appreciative. Alumni give back to the University for two primary reasons: 1)Show gratitude to a school that made them what they are today and 2)Make it possible for future generations to benefit the same way. Neither of those factors are negated by a changing political scene on campus.</p>
<p>coolies.,.....lol</p>
<p>[sarcasm]</p>
<p>Whooooooa, my FIFTH post went to the Princeton message board!</p>
<p>[/sarcasm]</p>