Barack Hussein Obama teaches the Brits a geography lesson

mine gently weeps.

 

Obama is a citizen of these "57" United States. He can't help it if his geography is a little bit off.

 

Shhhh, basso doesn't respond when he's being shat on.

 

To be fair, I think what gwayneco's trying to say is that no black guys would have been smart enough to get into Harvard Law back then.

 

yep just like his birth certificate

 

It's an addendum based on his class standing. Here are the current rules:

For students who matriculated as of, or after, Fall Term 2008, the summa c*m laude will be determined by the requirement of a 4.75 GPA.

The magna c*m laude will be awarded to the next ten percent of the entire class.

http://www.law.harvard.edu/current/c...s/grading.html

So it's safe to say he was in the upper portion of his class based on GPA, provided that the rules then were similar to the rules today.

 

You have lost your mind.

 

It is if you're an idiot and are inadvertently good at explaining why you should be marginalized, ridiculed and/or ignored as part of a debilitatingly ham-fisted attempt to explain why you shouldn't be marginalized, ridiculed and/or ignored.

If you've ever gone to (or known somebody who has gone to) a real law school, and you know how things like Law Review and magna c*m laude work...you obviously don't.

I've always been tempted to wonder - what sheepskin lies on your wall son? This may explain quite a bit of pathology...

 

Obama's transcript-

Magna c*m Laude - Harvard

 

It's also worth noting that black guys never self-evaluate when considering what colleges or jobs to apply for.

 

I don't think Guitar Hero accessories count.

 

Even with URM (underrepresented minority) status, getting into Harvard requires something close to a 3.7 LSAC GPA and 170 LSAT, which is pretty damn godly anyways.

Affirmative action for Harvard is like scholarship material for most of the bottom tier of the T-14, and top of the class for any school ranked below 30.

You can try to marginalize achievement of this kind, but you really shouldn't try. It just makes you look like you don't know anything about where the best and brightest go.

 

Because of the passive benefits accrued by white people, men, tall people, good looking people, etc. you rarely ever know when anyone ever deserves anything. It must be very tough for you to be have to argue that every single white person, man, tall person, good looking person, doesn't deserve their successes in life. I personally just try my best to think about more constructive things.

In this case, given that he graduated in the top 10% of his class, you can presume that even if affirmative action, being a man, being tall, or being better looking than average tipped the scales in his favor in life, he demonstrated that he deserved his place at Harvard Law.

Given that he excelled at Harvard Law, where for the past 5 years the median GPA and LSAT for the bottom quartile of the entering class are 3.7 and 171 (corresponding to the top 1.5% of test takers), you can assume that he competed with and beat out 90% of the best and brightest. All this leads one to conclude that you A) he deserved his spot at Harvard Law, and B) that he is a very bright guy.

 

I don't question Obama's intelligence, just his divisive politics. He made a mistake. He is human. The thing I don't like is the media double standard. Had Bush said something like this or the "57" states comment, the media would never let it go. When Obama does it, it is barely mentioned.

 

Did someone say ham?

 

I ****ing love ham!

 

I'm still trying to wrap my head around the idea that education is a detriment and bad for the country.

So weird....

 

I bet you don't know anything about law school or graduate school period and you are, in fact, talking out of your ass.

 

So you disagree that we are graduating too many dysfunctional high-schoolers and that we have college kids wasting money on higher education that is not getting them desirable work?

Let me let you in on a secret: you can't get your mind around a problem that you don't even attempt to see.

Someone posted two pictures: one mocked a guy doing physical work. The other was intended to glorify another guy drawing something on a chalkboard. The attempt to was contrast work and education. The problem is that work rarely gets anyone in trouble while the wrong education is a waste of time and money and may not have been that effective in the first place.

It's not really that much of a mystery. Eduction is a noble goal but it is no panacea...