Bush opposes 'legacy' college admissions

[Preechr]

Originally Posted by mburbank

I agree that one could have a nuanced enough view to actually take advantge of something and later repudiate it. Do any of you honestly think that's what's happening here?

No, not really. I wasn't so much defending Bush as bashing both of them... with nuance. Both candidates are product designed specifically for our voting pleasure. Political veal.

Originally Posted by mburbank

A reporter needs to follow up with, "Do you think Yale's admitting you was the wrong thing to do?" or "Should you have been admitted to Yale?"

Well, what would Ivy League schools be without legacy? Isn't that primarily what they are for? The "right" schools for the "right" people... Grades and potential are something for the parents to worry with. Getting in is all about exerting the proper amounts of pull, isn't it? I mean, if you aren't necesarily from the "right" background and have no access to that pull, you can still be an exemplary commoner and kiss alot of ass in order to attain that piece of paper with the Yale/Harvard/etc sticker that proclaims you're going somewhere... but it's still "the" school system for the upper-crust, primarily: The political and corporate elite.

From my view, Yale had no choice but to admit him. That's what Yale's for: Legacy, plus education. I think he rightly believes legacy has no place in lesser establishments that cater to commoners.

Originally Posted by mburbank

I don't think what you have here is either a nuanced, evolving position OR a flip-flop. It's a simple double standard.

Sure it's a double standard, but it takes a "nuanced" POV to think legacy works in certain situations when it's an intregal part of the system and doesn't work when regular schools try to do it. (...sensibility to, awareness of, or ability to express delicate shadings...) Ivy League schools serve a particular function for society, for which legacy is an intregal consideration.

Originally Posted by mburbank

Ask him if Jenna is qualified to go... wherever the hell she goes. Despite his manufactured Texas accent, this is an old money pig born with his head in a silver trough. His entire life has been a legacy program. For him to repudiate the idea, if not simply an expediant lie, shows an appalling lack of self knowledge. Him repudiating Legacy in anything is tantamount to saying, "Hi, I'm George Bush, and I don't deserve one damn thing I have, but I got mine, so screw you."

Again, replace "Bush" with "Kerry." Same thing. Coke vs. Pepsi.

I tend to think of Bush more as the first CEO of America. Sure, he was bred for this, and many thresholds were lowered for him along the way here, but it's the departure from the system that was necessary to the Republicans, and you've gotta start somewhere... Most of his idiocy, I believe, is only a put-on to hide the nature of what he represents.

Originally Posted by mburbank

It's not as if he legacied into a State University and an undeserved middle management position at his Dad's Kinkos franchise.

Actually, it disturbingly is much like that.