Harvard Rescinds Admission To Conservative Kyle Kashuv

[jimnyc]

Never mind trashing him back then when he made comments. Never mind trashing him when he brought about his apology. And never mind continually bashing him when he made appearances about his pro gun stance.

And now, with all the glee in the world towards an 18yr old, the continue to trash him. The left oozes hatred. The celebrity left continually show what scum most of them are.

---

Celebs Trash ‘Racist’ Parkland Survivor Rejected By Harvard

Who would have thought liberal celebrities would hate on Parkland shooting survivors?

When conservative teenager and former Turning Point USA spokesman Kyle Kashuv announced on Twitter that Harvard had rescinded his acceptance, liberals cheered. Celebrities called him a “racist,” while the propaganda rag Splinter referred to all conservatives defending Kashuv as “shitheads.”

Kashuv’s acceptance was rescinded in the wake of a scandalous Google doc where he was caught saying racial slurs. However, the young highschooler was 16 at the time of the recordings, before the shooting, and has since publicly apologized for his actions.

The liberal media and Hollywood have not accepted his apologies, instead slamming him at every opportunity. Will and Grace TV star Debra Messing retweeted CNN commentator Keith Boykin, who claimed “Mistakes have consequences. Harvard had every right to rescind that student’s admission.” Messing commented, “ABSOLUTELY.” Messing has retweeted and defended the liberal Parkland survivor, David Hogg, multiple times.

One-time actor and liberal conspiracy theorist Tom Arnold called out Ben Shapiro for defending Kashuv. Arnold said, “Looks like you just want a fellow racist to get into Harvard.” It’s ok, Tom. We all know your Russian conspiracy theories didn’t work out.

Human Rights Committee spokesperson Charlotte Clymer wrote, “Tens of millions of kids who aren't going to Harvard this year. I think he'll be okay.” A year ago, Clymer wrote, “Attack me. Leave children alone. What the hell is wrong with you cowards? #Parkland.”

Splinter, the liberal conspiracy theory site that enjoys doxxing members of the Trump administration, wrote, “Conservative shitheads race to defend teen's right to say the N-word and still go to Harvard.”

It seems like no one cares about the integrity of the Parkland kids anymore. At least, not the ones that are pro-Second Amendment.

https://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/cu...jected-harvard

[STTAB]

All one has to do is imagine the liberal outcry if David Hogg had gotten an offer from a prestigous college and then it was rescinded because years ago he had said something negative towards or about white people.

Liberal have zero shame and so double standards don't bother them at all.

[Kathianne]

And still mainly all that is discussed about him. It was spread like wildfire and as if it was crazy that he was "pro-gun" after the shootings.

and yet he was offered acceptance. The withdrawal of offer wouldn't make sense if that was 'primary motive.'

[Kathianne]

@Noir This: https://www.usatoday.com/story/opini...mn/1499024001/

[Gunny]

As I mentioned if there has been growth after the situation then it’s a shame, but presenting that growth is not easy done and if all you’re left with is ‘but I apologised’ that might not be considered enough. I think it’s worth staying that he wasn’t telling an offensive joke or reacting poorly to a situation etc, in one of the images I saw he posted the N word a dozen times.

There’s also ofciurse that fact of ‘only apologising because he got caught’ as it appears that up until a few weeks ago he /forgot/ the kinds of messages he liked to post with his friends. Which is odd, imo.



Here we simply disagree, I think 16 years old is plenty old enough for him to of known that what he was doing was wrong.

Also, I know from my schooling of someone was looking to go to a top University like Oxford/Cambridge etc then the would know about that path from 13/14 and be actively pursuing it throughout the next few years, so either the American education system is fundamentally different, or this guy didn’t realise he was aiming for Harvard until very late in his academic studies, or he knew he was pursuing a path to Harvard while making the posts he did about black students etc.



By the ‘its only one student’ metric they should never turn a student away for their personal life, which we can agree to disagree on, but i’d be surprised if we do.

One should not have to "present growth". I am totally with Kathianne on this on with regard to the difference between a 16 and 18 years old. Most are at the height of being a do-nothing kid at 16. By 18 they are at the bottom of the McDonald's job food chain. Two completely different worlds and two very different outlooks. Ever tried to get a 16 years old to even recognize that the future exists beyond "this Friday night" and a date with Suzy Rottencrotch?

Or find a 16 years old that isn't so damned full of his/her "Rights" they don't even understand they will proclaim loudly and in unison (while calling themselves individuals )they don't give a damned what you think or society thinks and society has no Right to judge them.

Regardless that, a basic tenet of "being American" is paying your debt to society and moving on. We see how that works in practice. One mistake caught by the PC thought police and you're just f*cked for life. You aren't an adult legally until 18. You cannot purchase alcohol, tobacco (here in the SA the latter) or a firearm until you are 21. No one can use your juvenile record against you in adult court. It is sealed at 18. Regardless the stupidity of most of those laws, they sure are okay when they suit the liberal agenda.

Compare this case to Jussie Smollett. Some justice system

[Kathianne]

One should not have to "present growth". I am totally with Kathianne on this on with regard to the difference between a 16 and 18 years old. Most are at the height of being a do-nothing kid at 16. By 18 they are at the bottom of the McDonald's job food chain. Two completely different worlds and two very different outlooks. Ever tried to get a 16 years old to even recognize that the future exists beyond "this Friday night" and a date with Suzy Rottencrotch?

Or find a 16 years old that isn't so damned full of his/her "Rights" they don't even understand they will proclaim loudly and in unison (while calling themselves individuals )they don't give a damned what you think or society thinks and society has no Right to judge them.

Regardless that, a basic tenet of "being American" is paying your debt to society and moving on. We see how that works in practice. One mistake caught by the PC thought police and you're just f*cked for life. You aren't an adult legally until 18. You cannot purchase alcohol, tobacco (here in the SA the latter) or a firearm until you are 21. No one can use your juvenile record against you in adult court. It is sealed at 18. Regardless the stupidity of most of those laws, they sure are okay when they suit the liberal agenda.

Compare this case to Jussie Smollett. Some justice system

I agree with you, though Harvard isn't the justice system. Likely though to have a bigger impact on his life than what Smollett will face.

[jimnyc]

and yet he was offered acceptance. The withdrawal of offer wouldn't make sense if that was 'primary motive.'

I believe 100% it was the primary motive - but had nothing to do with him getting originally accepted. My belief is that they caved to someone/some folks over his 2nd amendment activism. Imagine someone like that, drawing attention and maybe speeches or whatever to Harvard?

Alumni and other powerful people can most certainly have pull on such things. I don't think that's the way it should be, but money has always spoken. That's what I meant from the get go when I said I believe someone pushed for it. I am NOT saying he had anything to do with this, just an example... but if a donater/alumnist like George Soros were to make large donations and such to support, and then didn't want a popular activist being there, they would likely listen in a NYC minute.

Of course this is just my opinion.

[Gunny]

I agree with you, though Harvard isn't the justice system. Likely though to have a bigger impact on his life than what Smollett will face.

Not to veer too far off topic, but I don't get that. I understand the prestige of Ivy League schools. At the same time, I'd just as soon not. I'd as soon get a degree from a "mortal" school and not deal with the added pressure of just the name "Harvard".

I also realize this isn't the justice system. Or is it not? Media is being used by the loud-mouth left to destroy the lives of anyone that disagrees with their two-faced sets of rules. And yes, it DOES have far greater impact on one's life than the justice system. IMO, the mores, values and whatnots of the society should reflect and be reflected by the laws it has on the books.

It's like a crap shoot anymore. If one aspires to be anything as an adult one can only hope they were a perfect child. On the right, anyway. If you're a leftwinger you can say "there is no racism against white people" while complaining about them and be applauded and make the grade.

I fear it is too late for our society as a whole. This kind of crap is not the exception. It is the rule anymore.

[Noir]

@Noir This: https://www.usatoday.com/story/opini...mn/1499024001/

I find the main thrust of the argument flawed, that ‘Harvard is such a good educator, it should include Kashuv because it can make him a better person’ as it supposes that the only relevant qualifier Harvard should consider is academic life, which is it’s own kind of discrimination.

Consider by example a student who is expected to do well in their academic studies, but not excellent, certainly not excellent enough to be considered for placement at Harvard. The above argument could be made with only a few changes to text. ‘Why shouldn’t Harvard offer the chance for someone with a poorer academic grading to the taught by the best, learn with the best, and become a better person for it. Of course Harvard’s output is exceptional because their input is so restrictive. Should a person have their chance to study at Harvard taken away because when they were 16 decided to socialise with friends rather than excessively revise for exams and their GPA suffered as a result. If Harvard was a good educator then they could teach kids with average grades to academically excel, this is their weakness’ etc etc. You could certainly have a professor proclaiming ‘I want to teach students from all academic backgrounds to be Harvard graduates.’

The spirit of what’s behind the USA Today story I can understand - the old mantra ‘be kind to unkind people, they need it most’ leaves a sour taste but it is probably the right path to take - but applying this to an institution as discriminatory as an elite university just isn’t going to go anywhere.

[Kathianne]

I find the main thrust of the argument flawed, that ‘Harvard is such a good educator, it should include Kashuv because it can make him a better person’ as it supposes that the only relevant qualifier Harvard should consider is academic life, which is it’s own kind of discrimination.

Consider by example a student who is expected to do well in their academic studies, but not excellent, certainly not excellent enough to be considered for placement at Harvard. The above argument could be made with only a few changes to text. ‘Why shouldn’t Harvard offer the chance for someone with a poorer academic grading to the taught by the best, learn with the best, and become a better person for it. Of course Harvard’s output is exceptional because their input is so restrictive. Should a person have their chance to study at Harvard taken away because when they were 16 decided to socialise with friends rather than excessively revise for exams and their GPA suffered as a result. If Harvard was a good educator then they could teach kids with average grades to academically excel, this is their weakness’ etc etc. You could certainly have a professor proclaiming ‘I want to teach students from all academic backgrounds to be Harvard graduates.’

The spirit of what’s behind the USA Today story I can understand - the old mantra ‘be kind to unkind people, they need it most’ leaves a sour taste but it is probably the right path to take - but applying this to an institution as discriminatory as an elite university just isn’t going to go anywhere.

Actually that is something that is the everyday norm, it's called affirmative action.

[STTAB]

@Noir This: https://www.usatoday.com/story/opini...mn/1499024001/

Do you think liberals would cheer on a private University who had previously offered admission to a liberal white kid only to rescind it later when it was determined that two years ago he made some racist remarks? No they would not.

Myself, I believe Harvard has the right to accept or reject whichever applicants they want, but I am sick to death of the constant double standards.

[jimnyc]

Do you think liberals would cheer on a private University who had previously offered admission to a liberal white kid only to rescind it later when it was determined that two years ago he made some racist remarks? No they would not.

Myself, I believe Harvard has the right to accept or reject whichever applicants they want, but I am sick to death of the constant double standards.

Imagine David Hogg having his acceptance rescinded over some comments around the shooting? And yep, a different set of beliefs about guns - and if he were denied after the fact, the libs would be screaming to the skies again.

[STTAB]

Imagine David Hogg having his acceptance rescinded over some comments around the shooting? And yep, a different set of beliefs about guns - and if he were denied after the fact, the libs would be screaming to the skies again.

Because leftists have ZERO principles. All they have is things they bash conservatives for doing. Even if they themselves are doing those exact same things, or worse.

[Noir]

Actually that is something that is the everyday norm, it's called affirmative action.

A practice you agree with?

[Noir]

Do you think liberals would cheer on a private University who had previously offered admission to a liberal white kid only to rescind it later when it was determined that two years ago he made some racist remarks? No they would not.

Myself, I believe Harvard has the right to accept or reject whichever applicants they want, but I am sick to death of the constant double standards.

Im not so sure - the left are non-too-shy at eating their own.