<p>Before we get too misty-eyed over Roberts summer stint in the steel mills, please recall that his father was a senior executive at Bethlehem Steel. Not quite a working-class hero, I guess.</p>
<p>Not a hero at all. Ted Kennedy won't, but I really hope he tears him to pieces in the nomination hearings.</p>
<p>Bush made an excellent strategic choice for this one. He'll be a very reliable conservative not of the Scalia/Thomas faction but the Rehnquist one.</p>
<br>
<p>I don't think it's fair to count Ginsburg in the HLS column, because although she did attend HLS, she transferred out to Columbia Law and graduated there. Otherwise, by the same argument, you could say that Princeton can claim JFK</p>
<br>
<p>Not at all comparable to JFK. JFK didn't even complete his first year at Princeton, and he started freshman year over again, spending four full years at Harvard and using zero Princeton credits to graduate.</p>
<p>In contrast, Ginsburg left Harvard Law after two full years (including a year on the Law Review) in order to be with her husband, and completed only her third year at Columbia. Today, it is a common practice for a law student to spend the third year of law school at another institution and receive the law degree from the original school (e.g., Harvard grants several JDs per year to students who spent their third years at Berkeley), but that policy had not come into vogue at the time. More importantly, however, GINSBURG considers herself a Harvard Law alumna, and was quite involved with the 50 Years of Women Alumnae celebration, etc. So if you think that she doesn't belong in the HLS crowd, you'll have to take that up with her.</p>
<p>Romney is the "liberal" in this field. I see him as the VP candidate - paired with Senator Frist of Tennessee (and Princeton, and Harvard Medical School).</p>
<p>Hanna, but she's not a GRADUATE. That's the key. There's a big difference between being a graduate and not being a graduate. And I'm sure Columbia Law isn't shy about claiming her as a graduate. You can't be claimed by 2 schools if you only have 1 law degree. </p>
<p>I mean, to say that she is a Harvard graduate just opens up a huge can of worms. Seriously - where do you draw the line? So if I go to Harvard for a while, then transfer out and graduate somewhere else (transferring my Harvard credits over), I can still legitimately call myself a Harvard graduate? Or is it just a state of mind - as long as you consider yourself to be a Harvard alumni, and you involve yourself with some alumni activities, then you are an alumni? So can Bill Gates be a Harvard alumni if he just 'considers' himself to be one and involves himself in some alumni events? Can Matt Damon? </p>
<p>I'll put it to you this way. The Harvard Alumni Association specifically says that only people who have actually graduated from Harvard are able to join. Ms. Ginsburg can consider herself to be a Harvard alumni all she wants, but I don't think she would be allowed to formally join the HAA. She may be allowed to speak at alumni events, just like lots of dignitaries who are not themselves alumni will speak at alumni events, but that doesn't mean that they are allowed to formally join the HAA. To join HAA, you have to be a graduate, simple at that. You can't just say "Well, I was almost a graduate, and I consider myself to be a graduate, so I should be allowed to join". No . The rule is simple. You have to be a graduate. </p>
<p>So I don't think it has to do with taking matters up with her. I think it has to do with taking up matters with the HAA.</p>
<p>Byerly, way to turn the discussion to things that don't matter. You're good at that, I commend you.</p>
<br>
<p>So can Bill Gates be a Harvard alumni if he just 'considers' himself to be one and involves himself in some alumni events?</p>
<br>
<p>Apparently yes. Harvard eagerly embraces Bill Gates as one of its own. Similarly, Stanford gladly claims Tiger Woods, even though he too attended for only one year.</p>
<p>Frist is a former moderate patrician and now he is beholden to the evangelicals. Romney has no credentials and would make a terrible national figure. No-one realizes he's not as moderate as he seems. </p>
<p>I am hoping for a Warner/Richardson ticket to carry the New Democrats and the DLC types to victory over the Republicans.</p>
<p>Just how do Warner's "credentials" rate higher than Romney's?</p>
<p>... and don't forget the Grey Goose guy, who only attended Brown for a year, but thought it changed his life. Just gave them $100 million for scholarships. I'm sure they consider him a member of the family.</p>
<p>this guy's background is anything but humble. his dad was an exec at a steel company, not toiling away on an assembly line. he grew up in fancy suburbs and attended top boarding schools etc. etc.</p>
<p>sorry, but with that whole filibuster ruckus Frist caused, i don't think he has the credibility to get elected.</p>
<p>Warner's governorship in Virginia has been more successful than Romney's in Massachusetts. He has a strong record of being bipartisan, while Romney has survived by mainly contrasting himself to the Democratic majorities in the legislature. </p>
<p>This article clears things up: <a href="http://www.economist.com/displaystory.cfm?story_id=4112304%5B/url%5D">http://www.economist.com/displaystory.cfm?story_id=4112304</a></p>
<p>You can't honestly say that Romney would make a good president, now could you?</p>
<p>i am a great admirer of Romney's, and was a member of the 15-member "Draft Romney Committee" that lined up delegates for him at the last Republican State Convention.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Apparently yes. Harvard eagerly embraces Bill Gates as one of its own. Similarly, Stanford gladly claims Tiger Woods, even though he too attended for only one year.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>You twisted my question around. You say that Harvard goes around claiming Gates as 'one of its own', and Stanford does the same with Woods. But the question is - one of its own what? Again, there's a big difference between a school claiming a student who attended but did not graduate as 'one of their own' former students, and a school that actually goes around claiming them to be one of their own graduates/alumni when they didn't actually graduate. I doubt that Harvard or Stanford has ever gone around claiming that Gates or Woods are graduates/alumni. Nor am I aware of Gates or Woods ever claiming that they were graduates or alumni. Former students, yes. But graduates or alumni? I don't think so. The key is in the word 'graduate' or 'alumni'. To claim these designations, I would think that you would actually have to graduate. </p>
<p>But in any case, there's a simple way to resolve it. Let's consult the HAA database and see whether Ruth Bader Ginsburg (or Bill Gates) actually show up. I'm sure there is somebody here who has access to the database. So let's look it up. If their names show up, then I will admit that they are in fact graduates. I don't think they deserve to show up because they never graduated, but if their names show up in the HAA database, then fine, I will concede that Harvard considers them to be graduates. But if their names don't show up, well....</p>
<p>Not in the Alumni Directory, but he contributes to the annual fund every year (in addition to occasional large contributions from his foundation.)</p>
<br>
<p>Let's consult the HAA database and see whether Ruth Bader Ginsburg (or Bill Gates) actually show up.</p>
<br>
<p>I just looked her up in the HAA alumni directory. She's there, complete with home address and everything. So are Bill Gates, Bonnie Raitt, my friend Joseph, and a number of others who matriculated but have yet to graduate.</p>
<p>But really, we didn't need the directory when we have the dictionary. Here are the definitions of "alma mater" and of "alumnus":</p>
<p>As you can see, the definition does not require graduation; "alumus" and "graduate" are not synonyms.</p>
<p>ETA: Byerly, look on post.harvard; Gates, Mr. William H. III, is listed as entering in 1973, with his address as One Microsoft Way, Redmond, WA.</p>
<p>I forget to enter it last name first. (ie, Gates, William)</p>
<p>Allright, fine, I will concede the point. I don't think that's the way it should be, but I agree that if Harvard wants to call them alumni, then Harvard gets to call them alumni.</p>
<p>However, I would be interested in seeing whether JFK shows up in the Princeton "alumni" database, or whether Dick Cheney shows up in the Yale "alumni" database.</p>
<p>And for the purposes of this discussion, people were talking about whether having 6/9 HLS "alumni" was a record. In that case, then we have to compare it to situations where other previous judges matriculated at some law school, but never graduated. For example, if at some period in time, 6 SC justices had degrees from Yale Law, and one had just attended for one semester and then left, then technically speaking, that SC had 7/9 Yale Law "alumni". Heck, I could go even further. If there was ever a time when 7 justices had all been to Yale Law, but none of them graduated, then that would still count as 7/9 Yale Law "alumni". I don't know whether that has happened (probably not), but you see my point. If you want to use this new definition of 'alumni' for HLS, then you have to use it for all law schools.</p>
<p>Chief Justice Rhenquist obtained a Masters Degree in Government at Harvard.</p>