Quote Originally Posted by Vectorfsm:
Esplanade,
Have you ever applied to Law School? Let alone Harvard law, but law school in general?
Have you ever BEEN through law school?
I never went, but I went through the application process...I got a 3.45 gpa undergrad and scored a top 1% 172 on my LSAT...
Now I was qualified for a lot of schools but decided not to go through with this...but let one thing be known...
I'm about 100% certain I did better than you in both of these areas, and I am black, and there was NO WAY I was getting into Harvard Law.
My gpa put me in about the low 10-15% of those admitted , and my 172 lsat put me at the 55-60% level of those admitted.
To go to a school like that, you have to be a working machine...these people didn't have a life..at ALL.
I actually had a life, I went to the college I went to because it was voted the #1 party school in the country entering freshman year. I wanted to have fun and do well.
Long story short, I truly appreciate the hard work it takes get to certain places in life, and it is one of many reasons I have a lot of respect for Obama.
Now the guy may have made mistakes and did things incorrectly as president, but the insinuation of him not working hard is beyond me. I think that's what Uber is mostly meaning when he emphasizes reason as opposed to a look-at-the-numbers approach.
This is the issue with what you guys are bashing.
You are using statistics to argue POLITICAL situations. Then you are using POLITICAL scenarios to argue ECONOMIC results. Economics, sadly, do NOT have much to do with politics.
As much as people, including Obama, would love to think so, the success or demise of a business has very little to do with politics, as a savvy businessman will simply navigate AROUND politics to ensure success. Trying to work politically is a surefire way to demise.
The results we ALL want are not there. This does not make Obama lazy, and it does not make him incompetent. That guy is working as hard as he fucking can, and I can tell JUST by looking at his resume. There are a tremendous amount of people in congress that make passing anything virtually fucking impossible.
Look at sports wagering, for example? Some people get it, even Obama has taken an OPEN approach, but it takes a RIDICULOUS amount of attributes to pass legislation that would allow it.
You don't graduate Harvard Law by being a slouch, and you certainly don't get any Laude accreditation by skimping around at ANY school.
And seriously, FUCK YOU for that equal opportunity bullshit. This years class has roughly 100 black people in it. You think there are 100 hard-working black people in this fucking country?
Your racism is stronger than the validity of your viewpoints.
Would need a road map to make it though all that poor grammar and recognizing that vulgarity is the clear last respite of a weak mind and capitulation on your part.
Sorry pal. I graduated from one of the best business schools in the country on scholarship and with honors based on a GMAT score in the top 2% in the country and honors graduation from a top undergraduate institution.
I also worked in the admissions office of the aforementioned graduate school.
Let me lay out the admissions criteria for you as you obviously are uninformed if not naive (since it clearly benefits you) to the ways of equal opportunity admission.
It's called realism and having been there unlike you who apparently is just an entitled whiner. Racism would be when 99% of blacks voted for obama on straight color lines yet have the audacity to decry racism on white America who voted obama basically 50%.
GMAT admissions criteria for black applicants. (1995)
800 point max score
effective range of applicant scores 400-700 (90%)
So as the true range of scores was really only 300 points which the acceptance point being 580.
HOWEVER, if you were a black applicant an this Big Ten B school
you got 100 points added to your score as a male and 150 as a female (and if that still were not good enough there were other criteria used as well).
So to you, raise your game.