And heck, I'm pretty sure Bush got in because of his family, but so what? That's how these schools work. My old boss went to Yale, and his father went to Yale, and his grandfather went there, and his great-grandfather went there. Because of the family "legacy," his kids are more likely to get into Yale than other students. So what?
Well thanks for a softball!
The "so what" here is that that (family lineage being valued over individual accomplishment) is how the governments of the Middle East are currently structured, and that is inherently opposed to the idea that "all men are created equal". Hosni Mubarak's son (likely next leader of Egypt) is just a bit more equal than most Egyptians. King Abdullah of Jordan didn't do more to win his "throne" other than being born son of the former king. The House of Saud in Saudi are all related. Syria, Oman, Kuwait, the list is endless.
And that's the region of the world that George, son of George, wants to"reform".
"So what" is that admission to top tier university based in any way on family lineage as opposed to individual merit is the OPPOSITE of what George CLAIMS to be promoting in the Middle East.
And yet.....
George's entire presidency would likely never had occurred had he not been born the son of a president, and that is one more reason I vote against him. His history (Governor of Texas with virtually zero experience, Harvard MBA despite C grades in Yale, shady Texas business deals that result in him making millions of dollars) SMACKS of exactly the type of social system that he claims to want to reform. |
