I vote IVY LEAGUE:)
Find a Conversation
I vote IVY LEAGUE:)
| Tue, 09-09-2008 - 1:14pm |
No Idaho potatoes here, no 5th from the bottom of my class (ahem MCCAIN), if you can't even get into Harvard why the hell are you applying for the most difficult job in the land??????? Oh I know, bc you're drinking the McCain koolaid at a rate of 2 pitchers a day huh..GET REAL

Pages
You're joking right??
"you're drinking the McCain koolaid at a rate of 2 pitchers a day huh..GET REAL"
LOL.
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
Interestingly, WikiPedia offers, as an example of a habitual user of the term, none other than Bill O'Lielly, notorious FOX blowhard. Not exactly a liberal.
Ashes where the bodies burning
No more war pigs have the power
Hand of God has sturck the hour
Day of judgement, God is calling
On their knees, the war pigs crawling Begging
It was in many ways a brilliant political insight, and some of both its brilliance and its cynicism can be found very clearly today in the assumptions and strategies of Karl Rove and other disciples of Nixon and Donald Segretti. But as brilliant a strategic move as it was, it ignored one crucial thing (as did Nixon himself): "stars," whether in football or academia, are usually that way because of their talents and accomplishments. There's a reason for it. That's not to say that there aren't people out there in the "masses" who couldn't potentially be as good, as smart, as accomplished, as...whatever, as those stars. But they didn't have the right backgrounds, the right connections, the right opportunities, whatever. Undoubtedly true. And Nixon himself is living proof. He was a VERY smart man, and a brilliant politician who had enough insight and faith in himself to recognize that he COULD be the equal of any of the "Franklins," whether in the petri dish of high school, or on the larger stage of life itself. And his career bears out and validates that faith Nixon had in himself. But what Nixon either failed to notice, or noticed and didn't care as long as it brought him the things he wanted for himself and his party, was that out of the great mass of people who weren't already "stars" or "Franklins," not that many people fit his description - not that many were diamonds in the rough, who could be the equal of any of the cream of the crop who'd had all the right breaks AND the personal skills and talents. Nixon was unique - not one-of-a-kind, but certainly in a very small subset of a very large group.
I'm sure this will sound horribly "elitist" to some people, but I believe that simple "hard work" will not inevitably yield the results one wants: you cannot simply set your mind on a goal and achieve it, without fail, as long as you just "work hard enough." There's a reason why, in every race at the Olympics, there's an order in which people cross the finish line. Hard work and persistence can take a person quite far indeed in life - probably, in the last analysis, farther than any one other factor - but it cannot, by itself, make one into a world-class competitor for anything. I remember, years ago, seeing an interview with Harrison Ford, in which the interviewer asked Ford to what he attributed his great success as an actor. Ford paused a moment, and then gave one of the most honest and accurate answers I've personally ever witnessed out of an actor in such a setting. He said (paraphrasing) "honestly? I've been lucky. People tell me I'm good-looking, and that's something one needs to succeed in Hollywood as a leading man. Good looking men are a dime a dozen in Hollywood, though. I believe I'm a pretty good actor, too - but there are plenty of actors as good or better than me in Hollywood, too. I think those things were just the entrance-ticket - something I had to have in order to be able to do what I've done, but in the end, I was at the right place at the right time WITH those things, and it's that combination which has made me so successful.
I'm not suggesting that luck is the biggest factor, by any means - in fact, it takes away a bit from the point I was trying to make. The reason I bring that memory up is that what Ford did in thinking about his answer was acknowledge that he HAD to be both genetically blesssed with what are commonly viewed as "good looks" (a random event) AND had to have both the "innate" talent and the willingness to hone that talent into good acting chops, so that when opportunity (or "luck") struck, he could ride it as far as it would go.
That's what I want in a Presidential candidate, too: someone with the self-awareness to recognize that they are exceptional, and the modesty not to let it go to their head. Someone who is elite, if you will, but not ELITIST. There's a difference. Obama's gifts are obvious. He is clearly brilliant, and has been an accomplished, hard-worker who has already achieved much in life. Why WOULDN'T you want someone like that? I understand that people might not want Obama because they disagree with his policies or beliefs, and that's totally valid. What I don't get is the desire to overlook him simply because he IS smart and accomplished scholastically. Isn't that (at least part of) what we WANT in a President? I want the person leading this country to be one of its best people - and that means "elite" by DEFINITION, practically. I don't want them to be a haughty snob, or conceited enough to feel they are ENTITLED to the office - or to anything, for that matter - but I most definitely don't want an average person (average intelligence, average wisdom, average insight, etc.) leading us. I want someone smarter than me, wiser than me, more temperate than me, better-read, and better-traveled. I want someone I can look up to. Isn't that part of what a leader IS? At least more than whether I can picture myself knocking back a brewski with the guy (or woman)?
Ashes where the bodies burning
No more war pigs have the power
Hand of God has sturck the hour
Day of judgement, God is calling
On their knees, the war pigs crawling Begging
"
Voting Ivy League is interesting, and most are happy to share in your choice.
The Naval Academy is not in the Ivy League.
Acknowledging your lack of academic achievement is admirable when you are NOT seeking the highest office in the land.
Pages