Interesting WSJ Article on Collge Admissions

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

UltimateHombre

Doc Holliday D.D.S.
10+ Year Member
Joined
May 10, 2010
Messages
1,144
Reaction score
119
In an age that is thirsting for diversity, uniqueness, and a well-rounded class; is being "just" a good student a disadvantage.

Although this article is full of satire, and may offend some, it is interesting that a senior in high school is actually able to realize what happens in college admissions. I think it is safe to say that the same principles govern professional school admissions as well.

Despite having a 4.5 GPA and a 2120 SAT score, she was rejected from Princeton, Yale, Penn, and Vanderbilt. Thus she went on to write this article...

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB100...8390340064578654.html?KEYWORDS=SUZY+LEE+WEISS

Is she right? Does being from a wealthy, white family with little struggles and diversity help or hurt her case? What are your guys thoughts?

Members don't see this ad.
 
Last edited:
I think it hurts her case, i feel like im in a similar situation, and probably many others are too. not everyone has some amazing story to describe on their PS about something that drastically changed their life or a huge obstacle they had to overcome. not that it makes them any less of an applicant but adcoms may see it differently
 
I feel for her. Aside from hoping we got acceptances, my parents always hoped that one of their three kids would get some help in the form of a scholarship from a school that really "liked them". Tuition was bad enough then, forget about it now. Yet, every single time, we watched the scholarships go to the kids from the tough neighborhoods, the minorities, the kids with two moms, and the "poor" people. Meanwhile, despite our great grades, we as the average "wealthy white" americans stood by and watched the colleges stick their palms out waiting for their check. I've never liked affirmative action.

All of this happens amidst a giant higher education bubble that seems like it will never burst, and the people feeling it the hardest are the kids labeled as coming from "rich families". Busting ass in school is meaning less and less these days - I agree with Suzy.

"Sen. Elizabeth Warren, I salute you and your 1/32 Cherokee heritage." Ha! I like this girl even more now.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
...Despite having a 4.5 GPA and a 2120 SAT score, she was rejected from Princeton, Yale, Penn, and Vanderbilt. Thus she went on to write this article...

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB100...8390340064578654.html?KEYWORDS=SUZY+LEE+WEISS

Is she right? Does being from a wealthy, white family with little struggles and diversity help or hurt her case? What are your guys thoughts?

According to Ron Unz (research linked below): if Weiss is Jewish, she was just less lucky than her contemporaries. If she is non-jewish white then she was pretty much out of luck from the getgo statistically speaking.

According to Ron Unz a Jew & Harvard graduate (pretty much impossible to claim bias), the drivel about "white privilege" might actually be approaching believable if the term were more aptly phrased "jewish privilege".

Ron Unz: "The Myth of American Meritocracy: How Corrupt Are Ivy League Admissions?":

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/the-myth-of-american-meritocracy/

f4-large.jpg


"...Fortunately, an alternate comparison population is readily available, namely that of American Jews, a group which is both reasonably well-defined and one which possesses excellent statistical information, gathered by various Jewish organizations and academic scholars. In particular, Hillel, the nationwide Jewish student organization with chapters on most major university campuses, has for decades been providing extensive data on Jewish enrollment levels. Since Karabel's own historical analysis focuses so very heavily on Jewish admissions, his book also serves as a compendium of useful quantitative data drawn from these and similar sources.

Once we begin separating out the Jewish portion of Ivy League enrollment, our picture of the overall demographics of the student bodies is completely transformed. Indeed, Karabel opens the final chapter of his book by performing exactly this calculation and noting the extreme irony that the WASP demographic group which had once so completely dominated America's elite universities and "virtually all the major institutions of American life" had by 2000 become "a small and beleaguered minority at Harvard," being actually fewer in number than the Jews whose presence they had once sought to restrict. Very similar results seem to apply all across the Ivy League, with the disproportion often being even greater than the particular example emphasized by Karabel.

In fact, Harvard reported that 45.0 percent of its undergraduates in 2011 were white Americans, but since Jews were 25 percent of the student body, the enrollment of non-Jewish whites might have been as low as 20 percent, though the true figure was probably somewhat higher. The Jewish levels for Yale and Columbia were also around 25 percent, while white Gentiles were 22 percent at the former and just 15 percent at the latter. The remainder of the Ivy League followed this same general pattern.

This overrepresentation of Jews is really quite extraordinary, since the group currently constitutes just 2.1 percent of the general population and about 1.8 percent of college-age Americans. Thus, although Asian-American high school graduates each year outnumber their Jewish classmates nearly three-to-one, American Jews are far more numerous at Harvard and throughout the Ivy League. Both groups are highly urbanized, generally affluent, and geographically concentrated within a few states, so the "diversity" factors considered above would hardly seem to apply; yet Jews seem to fare much better at the admissions office....

...Therefore, assuming an admissions system based on strictest objective meritocracy, we would expect our elite academic institutions to contain nearly five Asians for every Jew; but instead, the Jews are far more numerous, in some important cases by almost a factor of two. This raises obvious suspicions about the fairness of the Ivy League admissions process..."

jewishenrollment-large.jpg


eliteenrollment-large.jpg


Who Controls the Ivy League?

Brown University:
Ruth J. Simmons(Black) – President
David I. Kertzer(Jew) – Provost
Thomas J. Tisch(Jew) – Chancellor, Brown Corporation

Columbia University:
Lee C. Bollinger(Jew) – President
Claude M. Steele(Black) – Provost
William V. Campbell(White European) – Chairman, Board of Trustees

Cornell University:
David J. Skorton(Jew) – President
W. Kent Fuchs(Jew) – Provost
Peter C. Meinig(Jew) – Chairman, Board of Trustees

Dartmouth College:
Jim Yong Kim(Korean) – President
Carol L. Folt(Jew) – Acting Provost
Stephen F. Mandel Jr.(Jew) – Chairman, Board of Trustees

Harvard University:
Drew Gilpin Faust(Jew husband: Charles E. Rosenberg) – President
Steven E. Hyman(Jew) – Provost
Robert D. Reischauer(Jew) – Senior Fellow, Harvard Corporation

Princeton University:
Shirley M. Tilghman(Jew husband: Joseph Tilghman) – President
Christopher L. Eisgruber(Jew) – Provost
Stephen A. Oxman(Jew) – Chairman, Board of Trustees

University of Pennsylvania:
Amy Gutmann(Jew) – President
Vincent Price(Jew) – Provost
David L. Cohen(Jew) – Chairman, Board of Trustees

Yale University:
Richard C. Levin(Jew) – President
Peter Salovey(Jew) – Provost
Richard C. Levin(Jew) – Chairman, Yale Corporation

Of the twenty-four(24) senior administrators of the Ivy League colleges and universities, twenty(20) are Jews or have Jewish spouses. This is a numerical representation of 83%. Jews are approximately 2% of the United States population. This means that Jews are over-represented among the senior administrators of the Ivy League colleges and universities by a factor of 41.5 times times, or 4,150 percent. This extreme numerical over-representation of Jews among the senior administrators of the Ivy League colleges and universities cannot be explained away as a coincidence or as the result of mere random chance.

jewish-discrimination-chart-harvard1.jpg


jewish-discrimination-chart-harvard2.jpg


By the way, personally I say more power to the jews as a group (I am not 'anti-semitic' if the aforementioned facts are true). If what Ron Unz states is true, I only wish every group was capable of so much racial solidarity with their own kind. Its inspiring and I think all other racial groups can learn from their approach & the results.
 
Last edited:
Hah! I love her sarcasm, and I agree with a lot of what she is saying. So much of admissions is just a game. HOWEVER, I will say that a 2120 isn't *that* exceptional, especially for upper-tier schools. And a 4.5 certainly isn't exceptional, at least in my state where an A in an AP class counts as a 6.0.
 
@BobbyFischer

Same old antisemitic rhetoric that we've heard for centuries but I am curious as to why you limited Jewish status only to those married to Jews when mein kampf clearly includes anyone even 1/4 Jewish? That would certainly bring up your numbers now wouldn't it?

Oh I almost forgot my disclaimer - I didn't find anything inflammatory in your statements and only wish more WASPs were as vocal about it as you.
 
Hah! I love her sarcasm, and I agree with a lot of what she is saying. So much of admissions is just a game. HOWEVER, I will say that a 2120 isn't *that* exceptional, especially for upper-tier schools. And a 4.5 certainly isn't exceptional, at least in my state where an A in an AP class counts as a 6.0.

:thumbup:

I just checked the average SAT scores for my alma mater and the middle 50% had scores ranging from 2150-2350.
 
Hah! I love her sarcasm, and I agree with a lot of what she is saying. So much of admissions is just a game. HOWEVER, I will say that a 2120 isn't *that* exceptional, especially for upper-tier schools. And a 4.5 certainly isn't exceptional, at least in my state where an A in an AP class counts as a 6.0.

Lol, I just did a scaled comparison of her SAT to mine (I took the SAT when it was at 1600) and that 2120 does not seem so impressive anymore now that I have a reference figure haha. Also, I like her sarcasm as well, but there is still something there that slightly annoys me... I think its that she is complaining of the process when she only applied to IVYs. Why not apply to a state school, or even some other private schools? Its almost like she was expecting to get in, and since she didn't she decided to shoot out a loud and satirical essay. I get it... I would be frustrated as well, but I think I would have approached the process differently... All said and done, I guess it just rubs me a little bit.
 
"In 1905, Harvard College adopted the College Entrance Examination Board tests as the principal basis for admission, which meant that virtually any academically gifted high-school senior who could afford a private college had a straightforward shot at attending. By 1908, the freshman class was seven per cent Jewish, nine per cent Catholic, and forty-five per cent from public schools, an astonishing transformation for a school that historically had been the preserve of the New England boarding-school complex known in the admissions world as St. Grottlesex.

As the sociologist Jerome Karabel writes in "The Chosen" (Houghton Mifflin; $28), his remarkable history of the admissions process at Harvard, Yale, and Princeton, that meritocratic spirit soon led to a crisis. The enrollment of Jews began to rise dramatically.By 1922, they made up more than a fifth of Harvard's freshman class. The administration and alumni were up in arms. Jews were thought to be sickly and grasping, grade-grubbing and insular. They displaced the sons of wealthy Wasp alumni, which did not bode well for fund-raising. A. Lawrence Lowell, Harvard's president in the nineteen-twenties, stated flatly that too many Jews would destroy the school: "The summer hotel that is ruined by admitting Jews meets its fate . . . because they drive away the Gentiles, and then after the Gentiles have left, they leave also."

The difficult part, however, was coming up with a way of keeping Jews out, because as a group they were academically superior to everyone else. Lowell's first idea—a quota limiting Jews to fifteen per cent of the student body—was roundly criticized. Lowell tried restricting the number of scholarships given to Jewish students, and made an effort to bring in students from public schools in the West, where there were fewer Jews. Neither strategy worked. Finally, Lowell—and his counterparts at Yale and Princeton—realized that if a definition of merit based on academic prowess was leading to the wrong kind of student, the solution was to change the definition of merit. Karabel argues that it was at this moment that the history and nature of the Ivy League took a significant turn.

The admissions office at Harvard became much more interested in the details of an applicant's personal life.
Lowell told his admissions officers to elicit information about the "character" of candidates from "persons who know the applicants well," and so the letter of reference became mandatory. Harvard started asking applicants to provide a photograph. Candidates had to write personal essays, demonstrating their aptitude for leadership, and list their extracurricular activities. "Starting in the fall of 1922," Karabel writes, "applicants were required to answer questions on ‘Race and Color,' ‘Religious Preference,' ‘Maiden Name of Mother,' ‘Birthplace of Father,' and ‘What change, if any, has been made since birth in your own name or that of your father? (Explain fully).' "

At Princeton, emissaries were sent to the major boarding schools, with instructions to rate potential candidates on a scale of 1 to 4, where 1 was "very desirable and apparently exceptional material from every point of view" and 4 was "undesirable from the point of view of character, and, therefore, to be excluded no matter what the results of the entrance examinations might be." The personal interview became a key component of admissions in order, Karabel writes, "to ensure that ‘undesirables' were identified and to assess important but subtle indicators of background and breeding such as speech, dress, deportment and physical appearance." By 1933, the end of Lowell's term, the percentage of Jews at Harvard was back down to fifteen per cent."

-Malcolm Gladwell
http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2005/10/10/051010crat_atlarge#ixzz2Pd3MljHl

When you have a bunch of applicants with 4.3 GPA and 2120 SAT (which isn't that high in my opinion), what other way is there to differentiate students?
 
@BobbyFischer

Same old antisemitic rhetoric that we've heard for centuries but I am curious as to why you limited Jewish status only to those married to Jews when mein kampf clearly includes anyone even 1/4 Jewish? That would certainly bring up your numbers now wouldn't it?

Oh I almost forgot my disclaimer - I didn't find anything inflammatory in your statements and only wish more WASPs were as vocal about it as you.

The feller that wrote the immaculately researched article is Jewish (as far as I know) and a Harvard graduate to boot. Not much room to claim any sort of bias.

...all that other stuff you are mentioning I don't know and don't care. So last century.
 
Thanks for everyone's' comments. And thank you Bobby and UCSF for the Data.

Hah! I love her sarcasm, and I agree with a lot of what she is saying. So much of admissions is just a game. HOWEVER, I will say that a 2120 isn't *that* exceptional, especially for upper-tier schools. And a 4.5 certainly isn't exceptional, at least in my state where an A in an AP class counts as a 6.0.

Thanks for your input Glimmer!!

I think it varies from state to state, because here in AZ, the max you could get with AP classes is a 5.0 on a 4.0 scale. And that is if every single one of your classes is AP. I know many H.S. only offer a few different AP classes and often times you are limited to only 3-4 a semester, simply because their isn't enough. I honestly don't know how you could say the above considering this. 4.5 in almost any circumstance is more than exceptional for a H.S. student.

Also, according to this site, http://www.satscores.us/sat_scores_by_score.asp?score=2120 (not sure of its realiability), a 2120 SAT score is in the 97th percentile, which in my book seems good. This averages about 707 a section, which also is in the middle range of accepted students to many of the ivys. http://collegeapps.about.com/od/sat/a/sat_side_x_side.htm

However, i could be very wrong... just my 2 cents.

Lol, I just did a scaled comparison of her SAT to mine (I took the SAT when it was at 1600) and that 2120 does not seem so impressive anymore now that I have a reference figure haha. Also, I like her sarcasm as well, but there is still something there that slightly annoys me... I think its that she is complaining of the process when she only applied to IVYs. Why not apply to a state school, or even some other private schools? Its almost like she was expecting to get in, and since she didn't she decided to shoot out a loud and satirical essay. I get it... I would be frustrated as well, but I think I would have approached the process differently... All said and done, I guess it just rubs me a little bit.

I totally agree with you Bereno... there is definitely a voice of entitlement in her writing. I will say though, i think she applied to more colleges than just 4, it just says she was rejected by those 4. Rejection from Yale and Princeton makes sense, as they are in the upper echelons of the ivies, but Penn and especially Vandy come as somewhat of a surprise.

But i agree with you 100%. You know my philosophy is the cheapest route possible, thus i feel that ives are very overrated, especially if your GPA suffers. I would rather be debt free and have a 3.6 from a state school, versus having a 50-100K in debt and having a 3.3. Obviously some will disagree.

However, having said all this... i can't help but wonder if she was more "diverse" (be it ethnicity, sexual orientation, socioeconomic status, etc) would she have been accepted more places... and possibly even given scholarships?

The problem is being Jewish is not a race, its a religion so I really don't understand your point.

No offense, but i thought being Jewish was both a race and religion. It was my impression that most of those from Israelite or Hebrew heritage are of the Jewish ethnicity, most of those, also happen to follow the Jewish faith. I was also under the assumption that those who convert to Judaism are "grafted in" to the genealogical tree and considered being of Jewish heritage. They do this, so the new converts can receive all the blessings of the House of Israel and still consider Abraham, Issac and Jacob as their ethnic and spiritual fathers.

Therefore, hypothetically, someone from Hebrew orgins and was ethnically a Jew, could actually convert to Christianity, and simultaneously be a Jew and a Christian (and vice versa)

However, this is my understanding of Jewish doctrine and i could be way off. Maybe you could clarify some things.
 
I definitely agree they are great numbers. I didn't explain myself well. In the context of her article, I was saying that they weren't good enough to leave her with such a strong sense of entitlement. Had she made a 2350, I could understand a bit more why she would be so bitter and shocked. I just feel like her stats had better "walk on water" before she feels so indignant. :)
 
Last edited:
Wait, she didn't have the grades nor the extracurrics and she wants to get into a top-tier school?

She goes on a rant making fun of everyone who did any extracurrics, saying it's fake, and then conveniently blames her race for her problems?

How privileged it is to grow up in an upper class family and be stuck in the hole, probably playing World of Warcraft all throughout high school, and not taking initiative to go see the world. I'm sure her parents would have disposable income to fund at least one trip to a third world country. If they can't afford it, she could volunteer at a homeless shelter passing out food at Thanksgiving. Instead, she chooses to do NONE of anything, then complain how unfair it is.

There are so many people with mediocre GPAs and SATs, did she really think she can stand out and attend a top-tier school? Why does she feel so entitled?
 
Members don't see this ad :)
very interesting comments, especailly the one on harvard changing their application process to weed out the "jew."
It really makes me think that the whole "extracurricular" thing is setup to weed out the poor from the elite. Obviously, us poor kids need to get a summer job (usually forced by parents or sometimes when we do want to volunteer the parents will not fund it thus another need to do a summer job) and while the rich elite can volunteer in third world countries, pay for music lessons, etc. Just my conspiracy theory.
 
Well written, but a lot of fluff and not much substance. As a Stanford recruiter once said, all of their applicants have high gpa/SAT scores, but that is not exactly what they are looking for.
 
Asians are routinely discriminated against, especially in college admissions

Am hoping Scalia and Roberts get rid of this disgusting thinly veiled racism that is ruining this country. Makes me ashamed to be an American.

In the words of Johns Roberts:
"The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race
 
Asians are routinely discriminated against, especially in college admissions

First off, your post is quite off topic. Secondly, your statement above is questionable at best. Asian-Americans are often considered an over represented minority in higher education. Especially considering that Asians occupy only ~5% of the American demographic, yet occupy ~15-18% of enrollees in elite colleges (Ivies, MIT, CalTech, Stanford, etc).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_the_United_States
http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebat...statistics-indicate-an-ivy-league-asian-quota
 
I've overcome a lot of adversity and it didn't help me in the slightest.

But I'm a white male...
 
First off, your post is quite off topic. Secondly, your statement above is questionable at best. Asian-Americans are often considered an over represented minority in higher education. Especially considering that Asians occupy only ~5% of the American demographic, yet occupy ~15-18% of enrollees in elite colleges (Ivies, MIT, CalTech, Stanford, etc).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_the_United_States
http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebat...statistics-indicate-an-ivy-league-asian-quota


actually I read another article from NYtimes and it actually said UCberkely has 39% asian because it does not discriminate base on race (or the UC university system in general). So if there is no discrimination you will see a pretty similar % of asain at the ivies.

I think you are trying to say a small %age of asian population should reflect a similar %age in school enrollment? well that does not neccessarily mean it is a 1:1 correlation. Also the NYtimes article you linked indirectly stated that the Ivies did limit the amount of asian enrollment. The discrimination is real sadly.....
 
Last edited:
According to Ron Unz (research linked below): if Weiss is Jewish, she was just less lucky than her contemporaries. If she is non-jewish white then she was pretty much out of luck from the getgo statistically speaking.

According to Ron Unz a Jew & Harvard graduate (pretty much impossible to claim bias), the drivel about "white privilege" might actually be approaching believable if the term were more aptly phrased "jewish privilege".

Ron Unz: "The Myth of American Meritocracy: How Corrupt Are Ivy League Admissions?":

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/the-myth-of-american-meritocracy/

f4-large.jpg


"...Fortunately, an alternate comparison population is readily available, namely that of American Jews, a group which is both reasonably well-defined and one which possesses excellent statistical information, gathered by various Jewish organizations and academic scholars. In particular, Hillel, the nationwide Jewish student organization with chapters on most major university campuses, has for decades been providing extensive data on Jewish enrollment levels. Since Karabel's own historical analysis focuses so very heavily on Jewish admissions, his book also serves as a compendium of useful quantitative data drawn from these and similar sources.

Once we begin separating out the Jewish portion of Ivy League enrollment, our picture of the overall demographics of the student bodies is completely transformed. Indeed, Karabel opens the final chapter of his book by performing exactly this calculation and noting the extreme irony that the WASP demographic group which had once so completely dominated America's elite universities and "virtually all the major institutions of American life" had by 2000 become "a small and beleaguered minority at Harvard," being actually fewer in number than the Jews whose presence they had once sought to restrict. Very similar results seem to apply all across the Ivy League, with the disproportion often being even greater than the particular example emphasized by Karabel.

In fact, Harvard reported that 45.0 percent of its undergraduates in 2011 were white Americans, but since Jews were 25 percent of the student body, the enrollment of non-Jewish whites might have been as low as 20 percent, though the true figure was probably somewhat higher. The Jewish levels for Yale and Columbia were also around 25 percent, while white Gentiles were 22 percent at the former and just 15 percent at the latter. The remainder of the Ivy League followed this same general pattern.

This overrepresentation of Jews is really quite extraordinary, since the group currently constitutes just 2.1 percent of the general population and about 1.8 percent of college-age Americans. Thus, although Asian-American high school graduates each year outnumber their Jewish classmates nearly three-to-one, American Jews are far more numerous at Harvard and throughout the Ivy League. Both groups are highly urbanized, generally affluent, and geographically concentrated within a few states, so the "diversity" factors considered above would hardly seem to apply; yet Jews seem to fare much better at the admissions office....

...Therefore, assuming an admissions system based on strictest objective meritocracy, we would expect our elite academic institutions to contain nearly five Asians for every Jew; but instead, the Jews are far more numerous, in some important cases by almost a factor of two. This raises obvious suspicions about the fairness of the Ivy League admissions process..."

jewishenrollment-large.jpg


eliteenrollment-large.jpg


Who Controls the Ivy League?

Brown University:
Ruth J. Simmons(Black) – President
David I. Kertzer(Jew) – Provost
Thomas J. Tisch(Jew) – Chancellor, Brown Corporation

Columbia University:
Lee C. Bollinger(Jew) – President
Claude M. Steele(Black) – Provost
William V. Campbell(White European) – Chairman, Board of Trustees

Cornell University:
David J. Skorton(Jew) – President
W. Kent Fuchs(Jew) – Provost
Peter C. Meinig(Jew) – Chairman, Board of Trustees

Dartmouth College:
Jim Yong Kim(Korean) – President
Carol L. Folt(Jew) – Acting Provost
Stephen F. Mandel Jr.(Jew) – Chairman, Board of Trustees

Harvard University:
Drew Gilpin Faust(Jew husband: Charles E. Rosenberg) – President
Steven E. Hyman(Jew) – Provost
Robert D. Reischauer(Jew) – Senior Fellow, Harvard Corporation

Princeton University:
Shirley M. Tilghman(Jew husband: Joseph Tilghman) – President
Christopher L. Eisgruber(Jew) – Provost
Stephen A. Oxman(Jew) – Chairman, Board of Trustees

University of Pennsylvania:
Amy Gutmann(Jew) – President
Vincent Price(Jew) – Provost
David L. Cohen(Jew) – Chairman, Board of Trustees

Yale University:
Richard C. Levin(Jew) – President
Peter Salovey(Jew) – Provost
Richard C. Levin(Jew) – Chairman, Yale Corporation

Of the twenty-four(24) senior administrators of the Ivy League colleges and universities, twenty(20) are Jews or have Jewish spouses. This is a numerical representation of 83%. Jews are approximately 2% of the United States population. This means that Jews are over-represented among the senior administrators of the Ivy League colleges and universities by a factor of 41.5 times times, or 4,150 percent. This extreme numerical over-representation of Jews among the senior administrators of the Ivy League colleges and universities cannot be explained away as a coincidence or as the result of mere random chance.

jewish-discrimination-chart-harvard1.jpg


jewish-discrimination-chart-harvard2.jpg


By the way, personally I say more power to the jews as a group (I am not 'anti-semitic' if the aforementioned facts are true). If what Ron Unz states is true, I only wish every group was capable of so much racial solidarity with their own kind. Its inspiring and I think all other racial groups can learn from their approach & the results.

:scared:

Your latter images were taken from David Duke's website.

http://www.davidduke.com/images/jewish-discrimination-chart-harvard1.jpg[/img

[img]http://www.davidduke.com/images/jewish-discrimination-chart-harvard2.jpg[/img
 
"I had the prereqs to get into these name brand schools and I was just a rat...." etc

She obviously is not that intelligent if she thought doing the minimum would get her very far..Don't most of the 83747456784 applicants to any school have the prereqs before wasting money to submit an application :confused:
 
"I had the prereqs to get into these name brand schools and I was just a rat...." etc

She obviously is not that intelligent if she thought doing the minimum would get her very far..Don't most of the 83747456784 applicants to any school have the prereqs before wasting money to submit an application :confused:

not necessarily
 
Top