[Runner4064]

In some cases it's not about academic success and finding the best candidate. Often times it has more to do with "who you know" and "what they have in exchange" versus who is the BEST!

Case and point: Look at our president. He went to Yale. The same uppity advisors that let him through the "ivy emblazoned hallowed halls" would probably reject any of us outright, without so much as looking through our file. Is this to say it is because Mr. Bush is far superior in intellect than every big three grad (or applicant)? Absolutely NOT. He came from money and lineage. I'd be willing to bet dollars to doughnuts that his "C" average was in part, a gift.... like the millions in reciprocated donations. I'm sure in his own ways he is smart but I am a little taken back when he steps in front of the world's stage and uses words like "Iraquians".

These schools perpetuate people of power, to admit people of power, to perpetuate the cycle. Granted they occasionally let a handful of really insanely smart kids in who they know will do great things in order to "validate" themselves. Have you seen the price tag? Who can afford that? Exactly. This means that by sheer proclamation who goes there? Bingo. They were shot out of the cannon with the connections, support, and means to sustain it.

Ponder this: Take a cross sample of students from all schools. Without the "title" - and with equal resources and connections turn them loose. How would the scenario play out? I'm guessing that it would look like a broad shotgun pattern, all the way around.

And in one parting salvo... My cousin went to Berkeley for an undergrad. She then got a masters at Chapman. One day she was wearing a "Cal" sweatshirt and her boss asked her why she was wearing it. She told me she was so deflated to learn that her prestigious school wasn't even noted by the man who hired her.

Bottom line: Don't worry about it. Just do it- well.

(p.s.- this wasn't meant as a political or partisan put down. I could care less who the affiliation is.)