Unqualfied white man admitted into Harvard over more qualfied blacks

[sealybobo]

More lefty racism ^^^^^^^

The guy in your photo is a white Asian. No one ever slips up and says chink anymore or polack so they're pretty much white.

Jews are white except they get offended if you call someone cheap a f'ing Jew.

I know this marine I didn't know he's a Chaldean. He's white. Or his kid will be.

When we show up to interview we see black or white. Mr Gonzalez is basically a white guy unless he has the accent.

None of you have the same problems blacks have. You're white unkotard

 

[JoeMoma]

I certainly have not read the entire thread, so someone else may have pointed this out. The man was not admitted to Harvard because he's white, he was admitted to Harvard because of green -- 2,500,000 green dollars. For that amount of green, Harvard would probably find a way to admit Lassie.

 

[Unkotare]

More lefty racism ^^^^^^^

The guy in your photo is a white Asian. No one ever slips up and says chink anymore or polack so they're pretty much white.

Jews are white except they get offended if you call someone cheap a f'ing Jew.

I know this marine I didn't know he's a Chaldean. He's white. Or his kid will be.

When we show up to interview we see black or white. Mr Gonzalez is basically a white guy unless he has the accent.

.......

Uh.....huh.......

 

[TroglocratsRdumb]

Let's just face the facts. Voting Democrat is racist.

 

[sealybobo]

Let's just face the facts. Voting Democrat is racist.

You poor poor whites.

 

[IM2]

LOL...what did Barry have to do with the unemployment rate, JQ? He really didn't have an economic plan to create jobs for the last six years he was in office! He's the guy who had to use "Jobs created or saved" as his go to statistic because despite spending nearly a trillion dollars in stimulus money to create jobs...so few jobs were created that it was a major embarrassment to Obama and his minions!

History will show he did a great job. You were conned.

I find it interesting how intellectually dishonest Republicans are when it comes to how good Obama did.

Is there any question if it were McCain or Romney Republicans would have made the argument that presidents don't have that much to do with the economy.

Or they be bragging about McCain 80 months of job growth.

I remember last year they didn't want to hear about the stock market this year it's all they talk about.

And now the unemployment is 4% but last year it was 20% according to liar Republicans

What's really intellectually dishonest, Sealy..my pointing out that Obama struggled with economic policy throughout his two terms...or your claim that 80 months of tepid job growth, despite spending trillions in stimulus, is an accomplishment?

Actually what is intellectually dishonest is not mentioning the republican obstruction Obama faced for 8 years.

Obama entered office with huge majorities in both the House and Senate. The American people elected Republicans and sent them to Washington in the midterm elections two years later to stop what Barack Obama, Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi were doing with those huge majorities. What you call Republican "obstruction" was the will of the American voter! Barack Obama lectured his GOP counterparts about elections having consequences when he was elected in 2008. He was entirely correct in that assertion! What's intellectually dishonest is to claim that the elections in 2010 didn't also have consequences! It isn't the GOP that obstructed Barry...it was the American people!

Republicans obstructed Obama from day one and 2010 was a whitelash.

 

[IM2]

I certainly have not read the entire thread, so someone else may have pointed this out. The man was not admitted to Harvard because he's white, he was admitted to Harvard because of green -- 2,500,000 green dollars. For that amount of green, Harvard would probably find a way to admit Lassie.

Whites love to deny racism.

 

[JoeMoma]

I certainly have not read the entire thread, so someone else may have pointed this out. The man was not admitted to Harvard because he's white, he was admitted to Harvard because of green -- 2,500,000 green dollars. For that amount of green, Harvard would probably find a way to admit Lassie.

Whites love to deny racism.

And you deny your own racism.

 

[IM2]

As Trump takes aim at affirmative action, let’s remember how Jared Kushner got into Harvard.

In 1998, according to sources familiar with the gift, the New York University alumnus [Charles Kushner] pledged $2.5 million to Harvard, to be paid in annual installments of $250,000. ... At the time of the pledge, Kushner’s older son, Jared, was starting the college admissions process at the Frisch School, a Jewish high school in Paramus, New Jersey. A senior in 1998-99, Jared was not in the school’s highest academic track in all courses, and his test scores were below Ivy League standards. Frisch officials were surprised when he applied to Harvard — and dismayed when he was admitted.

“There was no way anybody in the administrative office of the school thought he would on the merits get into Harvard,” a former school official told me. “His GPA did not warrant it, his SAT scores did not warrant it. We thought for sure, there was no way this was going to happen. Then, lo and behold, Jared was accepted. It was a little bit disappointing because there were at the time other kids we thought should really get in on the merits, and they did not” ...

... Margot Krebs, who was director of Frisch’s college preparatory program at the time, said, “Jared was certainly not anywhere near the top of his class. He had some very strong personal qualities. He’s a very charming young man with a great deal of poise, the sort of kid you would look at him and say, ‘This is a future politician.’ It was an unusual choice for Harvard to make.”

As Trump takes aim at affirmative action, let’s remember how Jared Kushner got into Harvard

Kushner is not the only example of someone white getting into a college they were not qualified to enter.

Can you name a few of the more qualified blacks? How about just one?

Nope. Because you guys can't name one unqualified blacks who have gotten into Harvard over someone white who was more qualified. So why should I have to?

After all this has been all of you racists continuing argument. In damn near every thread.

First of all, go fuck yourself with a hot curling iron you lying jackass. Personally, I have never heard of Harvard admitting unqualified blacks over qualified whites. However I do know with 100% certitude that other schools have because they flat out admitted it during the lawsuit regarding the matter that went to the Supreme Court.

Furthermore, you made the claim that Kushner was admitted over more qualified blacks, therefore the burden of proof is on you to back it up. Are you really too stupid to comprehend something that simple? Why can't you think logically?

And the article you cite doesn't even give a source. Why doesn't raise a red flag in your mind? WTF is your major malfunction? Are you smoking dope or something?

Again, go fuck yourself with a hot curling iron to discourage yourself from breeding, you lying jackass.

Stick a cactus up your ass punk,. You have no evidence that unqualified blacks are getting admitted over more qualified whites.

Now you go study the Gratz case real good because Essen states the facts. This case was is another example of white race baited crap due to the fact that Graz was making these charges even though she applied for admittance 3 years before the points system was implemented. Important FACTS like this miss your dumb ass. I am wasting my time arguing this with an unqualified white man.

 

[IM2]

I certainly have not read the entire thread, so someone else may have pointed this out. The man was not admitted to Harvard because he's white, he was admitted to Harvard because of green -- 2,500,000 green dollars. For that amount of green, Harvard would probably find a way to admit Lassie.

Whites love to deny racism.

And you deny your own racism.

I deny nothing, because I am not a racist. That dumb ass trick whites like you try pulling calling someone black a racist for pointing out how whites get things others don't because they are white isn't going to work here.

 

[JoeMoma]

I certainly have not read the entire thread, so someone else may have pointed this out. The man was not admitted to Harvard because he's white, he was admitted to Harvard because of green -- 2,500,000 green dollars. For that amount of green, Harvard would probably find a way to admit Lassie.

Whites love to deny racism.

And you deny your own racism.

I deny nothing, because I am not a racist. That dumb ass trick whites like you try pulling calling someone black a racist for pointing out how whites get things others don't because they are white isn't going to work here.

There you go again.

 

[IM2]

I certainly have not read the entire thread, so someone else may have pointed this out. The man was not admitted to Harvard because he's white, he was admitted to Harvard because of green -- 2,500,000 green dollars. For that amount of green, Harvard would probably find a way to admit Lassie.

Whites love to deny racism.

And you deny your own racism.

I deny nothing, because I am not a racist. That dumb ass trick whites like you try pulling calling someone black a racist for pointing out how whites get things others don't because they are white isn't going to work here.

There you go again.

Another unqualified white man trying to create his own version of racism.

 

[Oldstyle]

History will show he did a great job. You were conned.

I find it interesting how intellectually dishonest Republicans are when it comes to how good Obama did.

Is there any question if it were McCain or Romney Republicans would have made the argument that presidents don't have that much to do with the economy.

Or they be bragging about McCain 80 months of job growth.

I remember last year they didn't want to hear about the stock market this year it's all they talk about.

And now the unemployment is 4% but last year it was 20% according to liar Republicans

What's really intellectually dishonest, Sealy..my pointing out that Obama struggled with economic policy throughout his two terms...or your claim that 80 months of tepid job growth, despite spending trillions in stimulus, is an accomplishment?

Actually what is intellectually dishonest is not mentioning the republican obstruction Obama faced for 8 years.

Obama entered office with huge majorities in both the House and Senate. The American people elected Republicans and sent them to Washington in the midterm elections two years later to stop what Barack Obama, Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi were doing with those huge majorities. What you call Republican "obstruction" was the will of the American voter! Barack Obama lectured his GOP counterparts about elections having consequences when he was elected in 2008. He was entirely correct in that assertion! What's intellectually dishonest is to claim that the elections in 2010 didn't also have consequences! It isn't the GOP that obstructed Barry...it was the American people!

Republicans obstructed Obama from day one and 2010 was a whitelash.

I believe Barry described it as a "shellacking", IM2! So you're claiming that the same voters that put Democrats into huge majorities in 2008 suddenly became racists in 2010 and their decision to vote Republican had nothing to do with what Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid DID with those huge majorities? The uncomfortable truth for liberals like yourself is that the GOP didn't have the power to "obstruct" Obama, Pelosi and Reid in 2009 or 2010! They didn't gain that power until the midterm elections in 2010. If the voters had been happy with what they had done in those two years...the GOP would never had made historic gains in seats in that election. The voters were not happy with the direction the far left wing of the Democratic Party had taken the country. That wasn't a "racial" thing...that was a policy thing! Claiming otherwise is an amusing attempt at spinning what took place those first two years of the Obama Administration.

 

[Oldstyle]

As Trump takes aim at affirmative action, let’s remember how Jared Kushner got into Harvard.

In 1998, according to sources familiar with the gift, the New York University alumnus [Charles Kushner] pledged $2.5 million to Harvard, to be paid in annual installments of $250,000. ... At the time of the pledge, Kushner’s older son, Jared, was starting the college admissions process at the Frisch School, a Jewish high school in Paramus, New Jersey. A senior in 1998-99, Jared was not in the school’s highest academic track in all courses, and his test scores were below Ivy League standards. Frisch officials were surprised when he applied to Harvard — and dismayed when he was admitted.

“There was no way anybody in the administrative office of the school thought he would on the merits get into Harvard,” a former school official told me. “His GPA did not warrant it, his SAT scores did not warrant it. We thought for sure, there was no way this was going to happen. Then, lo and behold, Jared was accepted. It was a little bit disappointing because there were at the time other kids we thought should really get in on the merits, and they did not” ...

... Margot Krebs, who was director of Frisch’s college preparatory program at the time, said, “Jared was certainly not anywhere near the top of his class. He had some very strong personal qualities. He’s a very charming young man with a great deal of poise, the sort of kid you would look at him and say, ‘This is a future politician.’ It was an unusual choice for Harvard to make.”

As Trump takes aim at affirmative action, let’s remember how Jared Kushner got into Harvard

Kushner is not the only example of someone white getting into a college they were not qualified to enter.

Can you name a few of the more qualified blacks? How about just one?

Nope. Because you guys can't name one unqualified blacks who have gotten into Harvard over someone white who was more qualified. So why should I have to?

After all this has been all of you racists continuing argument. In damn near every thread.

First of all, go fuck yourself with a hot curling iron you lying jackass. Personally, I have never heard of Harvard admitting unqualified blacks over qualified whites. However I do know with 100% certitude that other schools have because they flat out admitted it during the lawsuit regarding the matter that went to the Supreme Court.

Furthermore, you made the claim that Kushner was admitted over more qualified blacks, therefore the burden of proof is on you to back it up. Are you really too stupid to comprehend something that simple? Why can't you think logically?

And the article you cite doesn't even give a source. Why doesn't raise a red flag in your mind? WTF is your major malfunction? Are you smoking dope or something?

Again, go fuck yourself with a hot curling iron to discourage yourself from breeding, you lying jackass.

Stick a cactus up your ass punk,. You have no evidence that unqualified blacks are getting admitted over more qualified whites.

Now you go study the Gratz case real good because Essen states the facts. This case was is another example of white race baited crap due to the fact that Graz was making these charges even though she applied for admittance 3 years before the points system was implemented. Important FACTS like this miss your dumb ass. I am wasting my time arguing this with an unqualified white man.

For someone to claim that Affirmative Action hasn't resulted in minorities getting admitted over more qualified whites is denying reality! It's pretty much the entire premise behind Affirmative Action! Agree with it or not...you can't argue it hasn't done what you're claiming it hasn't done...BECAUSE IT OBVIOUSLY HAS!

 

[Markle]

Whites love to deny racism

And Progressives urged on by the infamous race baiters, see racism everywhere when they lose an issue.

 

[sealybobo]

I

I certainly have not read the entire thread, so someone else may have pointed this out. The man was not admitted to Harvard because he's white, he was admitted to Harvard because of green -- 2,500,000 green dollars. For that amount of green, Harvard would probably find a way to admit Lassie.

Whites love to deny racism.

That's because the current structure is one in which we remain in charge. Hiring managers don't want to be told who they have to hire. So we want to conserve the system that's in place because it's one where we keep power. Look at the NFL. White guys used to get all the coaching and quarterback jobs. Why would whites want to change the status quo?

I now see why Ben Carson is able to see things our way. Once someone has money they no longer have time for all that bullshit. Especially if the masses aren't even smart enough to show up and vote for Democrats. So why should rich blacks?

Think about this. The rich should only have ten percent representation in Congress. If the masses showed up and voted for a strong middle class, we'd have one. In fact we had it from the new deal to 2000. But then Republicans took over and made it every man for himself.

 

[sealybobo]

I find it interesting how intellectually dishonest Republicans are when it comes to how good Obama did.

Is there any question if it were McCain or Romney Republicans would have made the argument that presidents don't have that much to do with the economy.

Or they be bragging about McCain 80 months of job growth.

I remember last year they didn't want to hear about the stock market this year it's all they talk about.

And now the unemployment is 4% but last year it was 20% according to liar Republicans

What's really intellectually dishonest, Sealy..my pointing out that Obama struggled with economic policy throughout his two terms...or your claim that 80 months of tepid job growth, despite spending trillions in stimulus, is an accomplishment?

Actually what is intellectually dishonest is not mentioning the republican obstruction Obama faced for 8 years.

Obama entered office with huge majorities in both the House and Senate. The American people elected Republicans and sent them to Washington in the midterm elections two years later to stop what Barack Obama, Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi were doing with those huge majorities. What you call Republican "obstruction" was the will of the American voter! Barack Obama lectured his GOP counterparts about elections having consequences when he was elected in 2008. He was entirely correct in that assertion! What's intellectually dishonest is to claim that the elections in 2010 didn't also have consequences! It isn't the GOP that obstructed Barry...it was the American people!

Republicans obstructed Obama from day one and 2010 was a whitelash.

I believe Barry described it as a "shellacking", IM2! So you're claiming that the same voters that put Democrats into huge majorities in 2008 suddenly became racists in 2010 and their decision to vote Republican had nothing to do with what Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid DID with those huge majorities? The uncomfortable truth for liberals like yourself is that the GOP didn't have the power to "obstruct" Obama, Pelosi and Reid in 2009 or 2010! They didn't gain that power until the midterm elections in 2010. If the voters had been happy with what they had done in those two years...the GOP would never had made historic gains in seats in that election. The voters were not happy with the direction the far left wing of the Democratic Party had taken the country. That wasn't a "racial" thing...that was a policy thing! Claiming otherwise is an amusing attempt at spinning what took place those first two years of the Obama Administration.

Democrats show up every four years midterms are conservatives secret weapon. Usually. Independents don't show up.

 

[Oldstyle]

What's really intellectually dishonest, Sealy..my pointing out that Obama struggled with economic policy throughout his two terms...or your claim that 80 months of tepid job growth, despite spending trillions in stimulus, is an accomplishment?

Actually what is intellectually dishonest is not mentioning the republican obstruction Obama faced for 8 years.

Obama entered office with huge majorities in both the House and Senate. The American people elected Republicans and sent them to Washington in the midterm elections two years later to stop what Barack Obama, Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi were doing with those huge majorities. What you call Republican "obstruction" was the will of the American voter! Barack Obama lectured his GOP counterparts about elections having consequences when he was elected in 2008. He was entirely correct in that assertion! What's intellectually dishonest is to claim that the elections in 2010 didn't also have consequences! It isn't the GOP that obstructed Barry...it was the American people!

Republicans obstructed Obama from day one and 2010 was a whitelash.

I believe Barry described it as a "shellacking", IM2! So you're claiming that the same voters that put Democrats into huge majorities in 2008 suddenly became racists in 2010 and their decision to vote Republican had nothing to do with what Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid DID with those huge majorities? The uncomfortable truth for liberals like yourself is that the GOP didn't have the power to "obstruct" Obama, Pelosi and Reid in 2009 or 2010! They didn't gain that power until the midterm elections in 2010. If the voters had been happy with what they had done in those two years...the GOP would never had made historic gains in seats in that election. The voters were not happy with the direction the far left wing of the Democratic Party had taken the country. That wasn't a "racial" thing...that was a policy thing! Claiming otherwise is an amusing attempt at spinning what took place those first two years of the Obama Administration.

Democrats show up every four years midterms are conservatives secret weapon. Usually. Independents don't show up.

So how did something that you claim happens every midterm election become "whitelash", Sealy? Or was playing the race card a knee jerk reaction on your part?

And yes...mid term election turnouts tend to much smaller than Presidential elections but that doesn't explain the biggest swing of seats from one party to another in modern political history...does it?

 

[sealybobo]

Actually what is intellectually dishonest is not mentioning the republican obstruction Obama faced for 8 years.

Obama entered office with huge majorities in both the House and Senate. The American people elected Republicans and sent them to Washington in the midterm elections two years later to stop what Barack Obama, Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi were doing with those huge majorities. What you call Republican "obstruction" was the will of the American voter! Barack Obama lectured his GOP counterparts about elections having consequences when he was elected in 2008. He was entirely correct in that assertion! What's intellectually dishonest is to claim that the elections in 2010 didn't also have consequences! It isn't the GOP that obstructed Barry...it was the American people!

Republicans obstructed Obama from day one and 2010 was a whitelash.

I believe Barry described it as a "shellacking", IM2! So you're claiming that the same voters that put Democrats into huge majorities in 2008 suddenly became racists in 2010 and their decision to vote Republican had nothing to do with what Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid DID with those huge majorities? The uncomfortable truth for liberals like yourself is that the GOP didn't have the power to "obstruct" Obama, Pelosi and Reid in 2009 or 2010! They didn't gain that power until the midterm elections in 2010. If the voters had been happy with what they had done in those two years...the GOP would never had made historic gains in seats in that election. The voters were not happy with the direction the far left wing of the Democratic Party had taken the country. That wasn't a "racial" thing...that was a policy thing! Claiming otherwise is an amusing attempt at spinning what took place those first two years of the Obama Administration.

Democrats show up every four years midterms are conservatives secret weapon. Usually. Independents don't show up.

So how did something that you claim happens every midterm election become "whitelash", Sealy? Or was playing the race card a knee jerk reaction on your part?

And yes...mid term election turnouts tend to much smaller than Presidential elections but that doesn't explain the biggest swing of seats from one party to another in modern political history...does it?

Well it wasn't a mandate for Republican ideas.

 

[Oldstyle]

Obama entered office with huge majorities in both the House and Senate. The American people elected Republicans and sent them to Washington in the midterm elections two years later to stop what Barack Obama, Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi were doing with those huge majorities. What you call Republican "obstruction" was the will of the American voter! Barack Obama lectured his GOP counterparts about elections having consequences when he was elected in 2008. He was entirely correct in that assertion! What's intellectually dishonest is to claim that the elections in 2010 didn't also have consequences! It isn't the GOP that obstructed Barry...it was the American people!

Republicans obstructed Obama from day one and 2010 was a whitelash.

I believe Barry described it as a "shellacking", IM2! So you're claiming that the same voters that put Democrats into huge majorities in 2008 suddenly became racists in 2010 and their decision to vote Republican had nothing to do with what Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid DID with those huge majorities? The uncomfortable truth for liberals like yourself is that the GOP didn't have the power to "obstruct" Obama, Pelosi and Reid in 2009 or 2010! They didn't gain that power until the midterm elections in 2010. If the voters had been happy with what they had done in those two years...the GOP would never had made historic gains in seats in that election. The voters were not happy with the direction the far left wing of the Democratic Party had taken the country. That wasn't a "racial" thing...that was a policy thing! Claiming otherwise is an amusing attempt at spinning what took place those first two years of the Obama Administration.

Democrats show up every four years midterms are conservatives secret weapon. Usually. Independents don't show up.

So how did something that you claim happens every midterm election become "whitelash", Sealy? Or was playing the race card a knee jerk reaction on your part?

And yes...mid term election turnouts tend to much smaller than Presidential elections but that doesn't explain the biggest swing of seats from one party to another in modern political history...does it?

Well it wasn't a mandate for Republican ideas.

It was a mandate for Republican's to stop Progressive ideas, Sealy! All those voters didn't change their minds after two years because they liked what Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid were doing? If they HAD liked your agenda...they would have kept your Congress critters and Senators in office! They elected all of those Republicans to stop the nonsense before it really screwed up the country.