Harvard tell Trump to pound sand

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Has Harvard stopped its racial discrimination?

WTF are you going on about? This is about the RWNJs dictating what will be taught, who will teach it, what can not be taught and who can attend Harvard. This is Mao Tse-tung thought police and you are Trumps Red Guard.

Wow. So, this is how democracy does in darkness. Criticism of only one party is allowed. Proof that goose steppers also vote blue and wear blue.

Most people that typically support Democrats will admit that nominating Biden in 2020 was a mistake because his unfitness wound up making it possible for an even bigger mistake to win a second POTUS term in 2024. Being honest with yourself by admitting mistakes is a sign of intelligence that leads to not repeating mistakes. Very few people who mistakenly supported Trump have admitted to their mistake and most of them have repeated that mistake.

What does all this mean? The average Dem is a few notches up the IQ ladder from the average Republican.

Agree that admitting mistakes is a sign of intelligence. Comparing one party to another is ridiculous. Side A being slightly less ((bad characteristic)) than side B on an issue doesn’t mean that side Ą is good. What the PP upthread failed to understand is that some do-good policies at Harvard lead to discriminatory behaviors. They cannot see that because they see that is somehow exempts them from criticism and feel the need to shut down such comments. THAT is also totalitarian behavior. Free speech is only free if it supports the correct side (or the side in office).

Please tell us which "side" is "correct". All we've had to witness in recent years is a bunch of pathetic losers losing to another group of pathetic losers.

The side that doesn't discriminate based on race

Nice try but that factor eliminates both "sides" from the realm of righteousness.

And so it should. A pox on both their houses. But they discriminate against different groups so it yield different results.

Republicans are nativist, white supremacists, racist against urm, and anti intellectual.

Democrats are elitist, white supremacist, racist against Asians, bigoted against pre and working class whites, and anti merit.

There are no good options just the least of two evils.

This is bullsh*t. Dems are not racist against Asians and do believe in merit. We just believe that everyone should at least get a chance to compete. The Republicans have shown over and over again that they do not believe in merit. Look at Trump's cabinet.

Yep. Only in the upside down is it considered racist to try broaden the opportunities for everyone. Mind boggling.

If people are equally capable for a job or university, then fine; but it's wrong to hold someone back or push someone forward due to race. Quotas are wrong, too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Has Harvard stopped its racial discrimination?

WTF are you going on about? This is about the RWNJs dictating what will be taught, who will teach it, what can not be taught and who can attend Harvard. This is Mao Tse-tung thought police and you are Trumps Red Guard.

Wow. So, this is how democracy does in darkness. Criticism of only one party is allowed. Proof that goose steppers also vote blue and wear blue.

Most people that typically support Democrats will admit that nominating Biden in 2020 was a mistake because his unfitness wound up making it possible for an even bigger mistake to win a second POTUS term in 2024. Being honest with yourself by admitting mistakes is a sign of intelligence that leads to not repeating mistakes. Very few people who mistakenly supported Trump have admitted to their mistake and most of them have repeated that mistake.

What does all this mean? The average Dem is a few notches up the IQ ladder from the average Republican.

Agree that admitting mistakes is a sign of intelligence. Comparing one party to another is ridiculous. Side A being slightly less ((bad characteristic)) than side B on an issue doesn’t mean that side Ą is good. What the PP upthread failed to understand is that some do-good policies at Harvard lead to discriminatory behaviors. They cannot see that because they see that is somehow exempts them from criticism and feel the need to shut down such comments. THAT is also totalitarian behavior. Free speech is only free if it supports the correct side (or the side in office).

Please tell us which "side" is "correct". All we've had to witness in recent years is a bunch of pathetic losers losing to another group of pathetic losers.

The side that doesn't discriminate based on race

Nice try but that factor eliminates both "sides" from the realm of righteousness.

And so it should. A pox on both their houses. But they discriminate against different groups so it yield different results.

Republicans are nativist, white supremacists, racist against urm, and anti intellectual.

Democrats are elitist, white supremacist, racist against Asians, bigoted against pre and working class whites, and anti merit.

There are no good options just the least of two evils.

This is bullsh*t. Dems are not racist against Asians and do believe in merit. We just believe that everyone should at least get a chance to compete. The Republicans have shown over and over again that they do not believe in merit. Look at Trump's cabinet.

Not all Democrats are racist against Asians but they all tolerate discrimination against Asians and they all subscribe to the hierarchy of oppression over the hierarchy of competence.

The woke left do not believe in giving everyone a chance to compete, they want to see proportional results along racial lines and that means discrimination against Asians. Spin it however you want, we saw the evidence on the Harvard lawsuit.

Trump is a weird corner case. Before he was elected nobody would have considered him a credible Republican candidate but Trump realized that the Democrats had driven away all but the wokest of the working class and now we have a bunch of previously democratically aligned unions aligning with Republicans.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Has Harvard stopped its racial discrimination?

WTF are you going on about? This is about the RWNJs dictating what will be taught, who will teach it, what can not be taught and who can attend Harvard. This is Mao Tse-tung thought police and you are Trumps Red Guard.

Wow. So, this is how democracy does in darkness. Criticism of only one party is allowed. Proof that goose steppers also vote blue and wear blue.

Most people that typically support Democrats will admit that nominating Biden in 2020 was a mistake because his unfitness wound up making it possible for an even bigger mistake to win a second POTUS term in 2024. Being honest with yourself by admitting mistakes is a sign of intelligence that leads to not repeating mistakes. Very few people who mistakenly supported Trump have admitted to their mistake and most of them have repeated that mistake.

What does all this mean? The average Dem is a few notches up the IQ ladder from the average Republican.

Agree that admitting mistakes is a sign of intelligence. Comparing one party to another is ridiculous. Side A being slightly less ((bad characteristic)) than side B on an issue doesn’t mean that side Ą is good. What the PP upthread failed to understand is that some do-good policies at Harvard lead to discriminatory behaviors. They cannot see that because they see that is somehow exempts them from criticism and feel the need to shut down such comments. THAT is also totalitarian behavior. Free speech is only free if it supports the correct side (or the side in office).

Please tell us which "side" is "correct". All we've had to witness in recent years is a bunch of pathetic losers losing to another group of pathetic losers.

The side that doesn't discriminate based on race

Nice try but that factor eliminates both "sides" from the realm of righteousness.

And so it should. A pox on both their houses. But they discriminate against different groups so it yield different results.

Republicans are nativist, white supremacists, racist against urm, and anti intellectual.

Democrats are elitist, white supremacist, racist against Asians, bigoted against pre and working class whites, and anti merit.

There are no good options just the least of two evils.

This is bullsh*t. Dems are not racist against Asians and do believe in merit. We just believe that everyone should at least get a chance to compete. The Republicans have shown over and over again that they do not believe in merit. Look at Trump's cabinet.

Yep. Only in the upside down is it considered racist to try broaden the opportunities for everyone. Mind boggling.

If people are equally capable for a job or university, then fine; but it's wrong to hold someone back or push someone forward due to race. Quotas are wrong, too.

No duh peabrain. That's what Civil Rights laws are for. If anyone is truly being picked over in the manner you describe simply because of their race, they have every right to sue the racist party doing the discriminating.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Has Harvard stopped its racial discrimination?

WTF are you going on about? This is about the RWNJs dictating what will be taught, who will teach it, what can not be taught and who can attend Harvard. This is Mao Tse-tung thought police and you are Trumps Red Guard.

Wow. So, this is how democracy does in darkness. Criticism of only one party is allowed. Proof that goose steppers also vote blue and wear blue.

Most people that typically support Democrats will admit that nominating Biden in 2020 was a mistake because his unfitness wound up making it possible for an even bigger mistake to win a second POTUS term in 2024. Being honest with yourself by admitting mistakes is a sign of intelligence that leads to not repeating mistakes. Very few people who mistakenly supported Trump have admitted to their mistake and most of them have repeated that mistake.

What does all this mean? The average Dem is a few notches up the IQ ladder from the average Republican.

Agree that admitting mistakes is a sign of intelligence. Comparing one party to another is ridiculous. Side A being slightly less ((bad characteristic)) than side B on an issue doesn’t mean that side Ą is good. What the PP upthread failed to understand is that some do-good policies at Harvard lead to discriminatory behaviors. They cannot see that because they see that is somehow exempts them from criticism and feel the need to shut down such comments. THAT is also totalitarian behavior. Free speech is only free if it supports the correct side (or the side in office).

Please tell us which "side" is "correct". All we've had to witness in recent years is a bunch of pathetic losers losing to another group of pathetic losers.

The side that doesn't discriminate based on race

Nice try but that factor eliminates both "sides" from the realm of righteousness.

And so it should. A pox on both their houses. But they discriminate against different groups so it yield different results.

Republicans are nativist, white supremacists, racist against urm, and anti intellectual.

Democrats are elitist, white supremacist, racist against Asians, bigoted against pre and working class whites, and anti merit.

There are no good options just the least of two evils.

This is bullsh*t. Dems are not racist against Asians and do believe in merit. We just believe that everyone should at least get a chance to compete. The Republicans have shown over and over again that they do not believe in merit. Look at Trump's cabinet.

Yep. Only in the upside down is it considered racist to try broaden the opportunities for everyone. Mind boggling.

If people are equally capable for a job or university, then fine; but it's wrong to hold someone back or push someone forward due to race. Quotas are wrong, too.

No duh peabrain. That's what Civil Rights laws are for. If anyone is truly being picked over in the manner you describe simply because of their race, they have every right to sue the racist party doing the discriminating.

Gee, you're adept at name-calling. You preface many of your posts in that manner. Do you truly think Harvard has had race blind admissions policies?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Has Harvard stopped its racial discrimination?

WTF are you going on about? This is about the RWNJs dictating what will be taught, who will teach it, what can not be taught and who can attend Harvard. This is Mao Tse-tung thought police and you are Trumps Red Guard.

Wow. So, this is how democracy does in darkness. Criticism of only one party is allowed. Proof that goose steppers also vote blue and wear blue.

Most people that typically support Democrats will admit that nominating Biden in 2020 was a mistake because his unfitness wound up making it possible for an even bigger mistake to win a second POTUS term in 2024. Being honest with yourself by admitting mistakes is a sign of intelligence that leads to not repeating mistakes. Very few people who mistakenly supported Trump have admitted to their mistake and most of them have repeated that mistake.

What does all this mean? The average Dem is a few notches up the IQ ladder from the average Republican.

Agree that admitting mistakes is a sign of intelligence. Comparing one party to another is ridiculous. Side A being slightly less ((bad characteristic)) than side B on an issue doesn’t mean that side Ą is good. What the PP upthread failed to understand is that some do-good policies at Harvard lead to discriminatory behaviors. They cannot see that because they see that is somehow exempts them from criticism and feel the need to shut down such comments. THAT is also totalitarian behavior. Free speech is only free if it supports the correct side (or the side in office).

Please tell us which "side" is "correct". All we've had to witness in recent years is a bunch of pathetic losers losing to another group of pathetic losers.

The side that doesn't discriminate based on race

Nice try but that factor eliminates both "sides" from the realm of righteousness.

And so it should. A pox on both their houses. But they discriminate against different groups so it yield different results.

Republicans are nativist, white supremacists, racist against urm, and anti intellectual.

Democrats are elitist, white supremacist, racist against Asians, bigoted against pre and working class whites, and anti merit.

There are no good options just the least of two evils.

This is bullsh*t. Dems are not racist against Asians and do believe in merit. We just believe that everyone should at least get a chance to compete. The Republicans have shown over and over again that they do not believe in merit. Look at Trump's cabinet.

Not all Democrats are racist against Asians but they all tolerate discrimination against Asians and they all subscribe to the hierarchy of oppression over the hierarchy of competence.

The woke left do not believe in giving everyone a chance to compete, they want to see proportional results along racial lines and that means discrimination against Asians. Spin it however you want, we saw the evidence on the Harvard lawsuit.

Trump is a weird corner case. Before he was elected nobody would have considered him a credible Republican candidate but Trump realized that the Democrats had driven away all but the wokest of the working class and now we have a bunch of previously democratically aligned unions aligning with Republicans.

These are wild generalizations. How do we tolerate Asian discrimination? How do we ALL subscribe to the hierarchy of oppression over the hierarchy of competence? Look at the Cabinets of Dem Presidents and make that statement make sense. The Asian lawsuit was always BS. The numbers of Asian students didn't really go up. Rich white kids were always taking spots away from everyone. Blame legacy admissions. How is it Dems fault that Harvard made the admissions decisions that they did.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is unwise for Harvard. They are going to piss off all their wealthy Zionist donors if they refuse to crack down on pro-palestine speech.

As a Harvard alum, I have no problem pissing off zionist donors. If Harvard is beholden to their motto, they should keep keepin' on. Because the truth is that zionism is an abhorrent ideology that deserves to be routinely called out for what it is.

I think you are vastly underestimating the power these people wield and the amount of their donations

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is unwise for Harvard. They are going to piss off all their wealthy Zionist donors if they refuse to crack down on pro-palestine speech.

Why should Harvard crack down on “pro-Palestine” speech? Or any speech, for that matter?

Is pro KKK speech acceptable to you? Is pro white speech acceptable to you? Is speech ranting against African Americans acceptable to you?

DP. No, pro-KKK speech is not acceptable to me, which is precisely why anti-Zionists speech IS acceptable. They have a lot in common.

Absolutely the truth. Both of them espouse racism as a core principle of their ideology.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Harvard, along with the rest of the ancient-eight, have become little more than indoctrination centers.

They no longer provide a meaningful university education.

So where do you propose the Us government fund the fundamental science research that most Americans, including Project 2025 authors, support the US government paying for?

The current system involves rigorous merit based review. The government asked Harvard scientists to run research, using taxpayer dollars to pay for the project (to be clear not contribute to Harvard, pay for specific research projects) based on a highly competitive process based on merit. Please, let us know what we should replace this with. And please confirm that you support wasting taxpayer dollars by aborting studies on things like kidney transplants and quantum cryptography by cancelling them half way through without results because of a politician’s whims. I’d love to hear your thoughts here about how we should be doing better.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Has Harvard stopped its racial discrimination?

WTF are you going on about? This is about the RWNJs dictating what will be taught, who will teach it, what can not be taught and who can attend Harvard. This is Mao Tse-tung thought police and you are Trumps Red Guard.

Wow. So, this is how democracy does in darkness. Criticism of only one party is allowed. Proof that goose steppers also vote blue and wear blue.

Most people that typically support Democrats will admit that nominating Biden in 2020 was a mistake because his unfitness wound up making it possible for an even bigger mistake to win a second POTUS term in 2024. Being honest with yourself by admitting mistakes is a sign of intelligence that leads to not repeating mistakes. Very few people who mistakenly supported Trump have admitted to their mistake and most of them have repeated that mistake.

What does all this mean? The average Dem is a few notches up the IQ ladder from the average Republican.

Agree that admitting mistakes is a sign of intelligence. Comparing one party to another is ridiculous. Side A being slightly less ((bad characteristic)) than side B on an issue doesn’t mean that side Ą is good. What the PP upthread failed to understand is that some do-good policies at Harvard lead to discriminatory behaviors. They cannot see that because they see that is somehow exempts them from criticism and feel the need to shut down such comments. THAT is also totalitarian behavior. Free speech is only free if it supports the correct side (or the side in office).

Please tell us which "side" is "correct". All we've had to witness in recent years is a bunch of pathetic losers losing to another group of pathetic losers.

The side that doesn't discriminate based on race

Nice try but that factor eliminates both "sides" from the realm of righteousness.

And so it should. A pox on both their houses. But they discriminate against different groups so it yield different results.

Republicans are nativist, white supremacists, racist against urm, and anti intellectual.

Democrats are elitist, white supremacist, racist against Asians, bigoted against pre and working class whites, and anti merit.

There are no good options just the least of two evils.

This is bullsh*t. Dems are not racist against Asians and do believe in merit. We just believe that everyone should at least get a chance to compete. The Republicans have shown over and over again that they do not believe in merit. Look at Trump's cabinet.

Yep. Only in the upside down is it considered racist to try broaden the opportunities for everyone. Mind boggling.

If people are equally capable for a job or university, then fine; but it's wrong to hold someone back or push someone forward due to race. Quotas are wrong, too.

No duh peabrain. That's what Civil Rights laws are for. If anyone is truly being picked over in the manner you describe simply because of their race, they have every right to sue the racist party doing the discriminating.

Gee, you're adept at name-calling. You preface many of your posts in that manner. Do you truly think Harvard has had race blind admissions policies?

They should and I'll assume they do have race blind admission policies until proof is presented otherwise.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Has Harvard stopped its racial discrimination?

WTF are you going on about? This is about the RWNJs dictating what will be taught, who will teach it, what can not be taught and who can attend Harvard. This is Mao Tse-tung thought police and you are Trumps Red Guard.

Wow. So, this is how democracy does in darkness. Criticism of only one party is allowed. Proof that goose steppers also vote blue and wear blue.

Most people that typically support Democrats will admit that nominating Biden in 2020 was a mistake because his unfitness wound up making it possible for an even bigger mistake to win a second POTUS term in 2024. Being honest with yourself by admitting mistakes is a sign of intelligence that leads to not repeating mistakes. Very few people who mistakenly supported Trump have admitted to their mistake and most of them have repeated that mistake.

What does all this mean? The average Dem is a few notches up the IQ ladder from the average Republican.

Agree that admitting mistakes is a sign of intelligence. Comparing one party to another is ridiculous. Side A being slightly less ((bad characteristic)) than side B on an issue doesn’t mean that side Ą is good. What the PP upthread failed to understand is that some do-good policies at Harvard lead to discriminatory behaviors. They cannot see that because they see that is somehow exempts them from criticism and feel the need to shut down such comments. THAT is also totalitarian behavior. Free speech is only free if it supports the correct side (or the side in office).

Please tell us which "side" is "correct". All we've had to witness in recent years is a bunch of pathetic losers losing to another group of pathetic losers.

The side that doesn't discriminate based on race

Nice try but that factor eliminates both "sides" from the realm of righteousness.

And so it should. A pox on both their houses. But they discriminate against different groups so it yield different results.

Republicans are nativist, white supremacists, racist against urm, and anti intellectual.

Democrats are elitist, white supremacist, racist against Asians, bigoted against pre and working class whites, and anti merit.

There are no good options just the least of two evils.

This is bullsh*t. Dems are not racist against Asians and do believe in merit. We just believe that everyone should at least get a chance to compete. The Republicans have shown over and over again that they do not believe in merit. Look at Trump's cabinet.

Yep. Only in the upside down is it considered racist to try broaden the opportunities for everyone. Mind boggling.

If people are equally capable for a job or university, then fine; but it's wrong to hold someone back or push someone forward due to race. Quotas are wrong, too.

No duh peabrain. That's what Civil Rights laws are for. If anyone is truly being picked over in the manner you describe simply because of their race, they have every right to sue the racist party doing the discriminating.

Gee, you're adept at name-calling. You preface many of your posts in that manner. Do you truly think Harvard has had race blind admissions policies?

They should and I'll assume they do have race blind admission policies until proof is presented otherwise.

For years, they did consider race.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Has Harvard stopped its racial discrimination?

WTF are you going on about? This is about the RWNJs dictating what will be taught, who will teach it, what can not be taught and who can attend Harvard. This is Mao Tse-tung thought police and you are Trumps Red Guard.

Wow. So, this is how democracy does in darkness. Criticism of only one party is allowed. Proof that goose steppers also vote blue and wear blue.

Most people that typically support Democrats will admit that nominating Biden in 2020 was a mistake because his unfitness wound up making it possible for an even bigger mistake to win a second POTUS term in 2024. Being honest with yourself by admitting mistakes is a sign of intelligence that leads to not repeating mistakes. Very few people who mistakenly supported Trump have admitted to their mistake and most of them have repeated that mistake.

What does all this mean? The average Dem is a few notches up the IQ ladder from the average Republican.

Agree that admitting mistakes is a sign of intelligence. Comparing one party to another is ridiculous. Side A being slightly less ((bad characteristic)) than side B on an issue doesn’t mean that side Ą is good. What the PP upthread failed to understand is that some do-good policies at Harvard lead to discriminatory behaviors. They cannot see that because they see that is somehow exempts them from criticism and feel the need to shut down such comments. THAT is also totalitarian behavior. Free speech is only free if it supports the correct side (or the side in office).

Please tell us which "side" is "correct". All we've had to witness in recent years is a bunch of pathetic losers losing to another group of pathetic losers.

The side that doesn't discriminate based on race

Nice try but that factor eliminates both "sides" from the realm of righteousness.

And so it should. A pox on both their houses. But they discriminate against different groups so it yield different results.

Republicans are nativist, white supremacists, racist against urm, and anti intellectual.

Democrats are elitist, white supremacist, racist against Asians, bigoted against pre and working class whites, and anti merit.

There are no good options just the least of two evils.

This is bullsh*t. Dems are not racist against Asians and do believe in merit. We just believe that everyone should at least get a chance to compete. The Republicans have shown over and over again that they do not believe in merit. Look at Trump's cabinet.

Yep. Only in the upside down is it considered racist to try broaden the opportunities for everyone. Mind boggling.

If people are equally capable for a job or university, then fine; but it's wrong to hold someone back or push someone forward due to race. Quotas are wrong, too.

No duh peabrain. That's what Civil Rights laws are for. If anyone is truly being picked over in the manner you describe simply because of their race, they have every right to sue the racist party doing the discriminating.

Gee, you're adept at name-calling. You preface many of your posts in that manner. Do you truly think Harvard has had race blind admissions policies?

They should and I'll assume they do have race blind admission policies until proof is presented otherwise.

For years, they did consider race.

Michael Jordan sucked at basketball. Tom Brady was a loser. Trump and Biden were great presidents......... see how anyone can claim any nonsense as fact on an online thread?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is unwise for Harvard. They are going to piss off all their wealthy Zionist donors if they refuse to crack down on pro-palestine speech.

As a Harvard alum, I have no problem pissing off zionist donors. If Harvard is beholden to their motto, they should keep keepin' on. Because the truth is that zionism is an abhorrent ideology that deserves to be routinely called out for what it is.

I think you are vastly underestimating the power these people wield and the amount of their donations

New poster. Also an alum. No one is undrestimating their power. We have already seen them use it. I have been constantly disappointed in Harvard the last few years. Finally a little courage and pride.

[Anonymous]

Harvard will now be forced to make the wedding cakes for straight couples

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Has Harvard stopped its racial discrimination?

WTF are you going on about? This is about the RWNJs dictating what will be taught, who will teach it, what can not be taught and who can attend Harvard. This is Mao Tse-tung thought police and you are Trumps Red Guard.

Wow. So, this is how democracy does in darkness. Criticism of only one party is allowed. Proof that goose steppers also vote blue and wear blue.

Most people that typically support Democrats will admit that nominating Biden in 2020 was a mistake because his unfitness wound up making it possible for an even bigger mistake to win a second POTUS term in 2024. Being honest with yourself by admitting mistakes is a sign of intelligence that leads to not repeating mistakes. Very few people who mistakenly supported Trump have admitted to their mistake and most of them have repeated that mistake.

What does all this mean? The average Dem is a few notches up the IQ ladder from the average Republican.

Agree that admitting mistakes is a sign of intelligence. Comparing one party to another is ridiculous. Side A being slightly less ((bad characteristic)) than side B on an issue doesn’t mean that side Ą is good. What the PP upthread failed to understand is that some do-good policies at Harvard lead to discriminatory behaviors. They cannot see that because they see that is somehow exempts them from criticism and feel the need to shut down such comments. THAT is also totalitarian behavior. Free speech is only free if it supports the correct side (or the side in office).

Please tell us which "side" is "correct". All we've had to witness in recent years is a bunch of pathetic losers losing to another group of pathetic losers.

The side that doesn't discriminate based on race

Nice try but that factor eliminates both "sides" from the realm of righteousness.

And so it should. A pox on both their houses. But they discriminate against different groups so it yield different results.

Republicans are nativist, white supremacists, racist against urm, and anti intellectual.

Democrats are elitist, white supremacist, racist against Asians, bigoted against pre and working class whites, and anti merit.

There are no good options just the least of two evils.

This is bullsh*t. Dems are not racist against Asians and do believe in merit. We just believe that everyone should at least get a chance to compete. The Republicans have shown over and over again that they do not believe in merit. Look at Trump's cabinet.

Yep. Only in the upside down is it considered racist to try broaden the opportunities for everyone. Mind boggling.

If people are equally capable for a job or university, then fine; but it's wrong to hold someone back or push someone forward due to race. Quotas are wrong, too.

No duh peabrain. That's what Civil Rights laws are for. If anyone is truly being picked over in the manner you describe simply because of their race, they have every right to sue the racist party doing the discriminating.

Gee, you're adept at name-calling. You preface many of your posts in that manner. Do you truly think Harvard has had race blind admissions policies?

They should and I'll assume they do have race blind admission policies until proof is presented otherwise.

For years, they did consider race.

Michael Jordan sucked at basketball. Tom Brady was a loser. Trump and Biden were great presidents......... see how anyone can claim any nonsense as fact on an online thread?

The lawsuit and judge's ruling were lies?

[Anonymous]

Private schools should be able to choose for any factors they want.
100x better if they publish their strategy for all to know their method.

Public schools should be blind to demographics.