fulbrightest

OMG i totally deserved this Fulbright.

I chose to ascribe my success to God to highlight the arbitrary nature of the final selection. It seems Fate, as well as brilliance and backing from quality referees, is required for one to win a Fulbright. Curious you mention my screen name. My use of the superlative in my screen name choice is a cheap play on words. I'm wondering about yours. "Nemo" being Latin for "no man" or "no one". Why are you so lonely? I've never used comparative claims in my posts here. I patted myself on my back not for being better than anyone here, but for being incredibly blessed and successful. I offered an appraisal of myself in isolation, not comparatively. I find your judgments regarding whether or not I deserve a Fulbright to be extremely contemptuous.

I haven't belittled. I've hopefully added the finishing touches to a sculpture that is just a few polishes away from being lauded a masterpiece. My critiques have been pragmatic, though the dink of the chisel may sting. You have not planted a seed of doubt. Not only do you think I am brilliant, so do three screening rounds of Fulbright panels, a host of Harvard professors, and most importantly, myself. You can keep your prayers. Evidently, God thinks I'm brilliant, too. She's on my side. Is She on yours? Did you get a Fulbright?

Because of indifference, one dies before one actually dies. -Elie Wiesel

Look, asshole, as an activist, I feel the need to call attention to injustices wherever I see them, and especially dangerous are our daily, nonchalant utterances that malign whole groups (or genders!) of people in a few words. The slight awkward nature of my defense of women is more than validated by the feminist redemption in my message. It is my belief that not speaking up is tantamount to collusion. And, seriously, "gracefully extricate themselves"? Requesting to use the paper representation of my greatest accomplishment (to date) to remove one's fecal matter is 'graceful'? This description of another's style casts doubt upon your assertion that I value style over substance. I take further issue with your description of intersexed people as those posessing "physical deformities." It is this normative, gender-binary-supporting anti-queer rhetoric that creates a hostile environment for those born outside of the very shaky and problematic definition of "normality".

You ignorant fuck. I sure as hell hope someone as inconsiderate as you has not been granted a Fulbright.

mkurti, I commended you for your efforts, and was only hoping to provide you with some practical advice for future applications / endeavors within the competitive milieu of our generation's day and age. My judgments were aimed at being constructive. I'm not sure why you're angry with me. Also, might I suggest equating 'a pair of balls' with courage is decidedly anti-feminist and disrespectful to courageous possessors of ovaries (and those inter-sexed individuals with neither!) everywhere.

Do you go to Stanford? The only time I ever hear "top five" as a distinction is from Stanford people. What do people from Harvard and Stanford have in common? They both got into Stanford. hehe, sorry, couldn't resist! Look, we both have colors as our mascots.

I've been lurking for a while, but just HAD to jump in here. BTW, Harvard senior heading to Macau on a Fulbright next year. Rahkan, maybe you are right, maybe the ruthless, cut-throat, sell-a-kidney mentality is what's required to succeed these days. These self-serving behaviors are the basis of the philosophy of our current economic consumption/production system: If we all act self-interestedly, the market will take care of itself and of us, and the benefits of prosperous economic growth will be enjoyed by the multitudes of the community and the nation. Paupers will enter the middle class. Innovations will lead to inventions that better our lives. The very attributes you praise in mkurti are the same characteristics that get bankers, consultants, and business leaders promoted. But as is becoming more evident day in and day out, this sense of self-entitlement, me-first-gimmie-gimmie radical individualism embodied by corporate and political leaders is leading to the destruction of the rainforests, the dumping of toxic wastes into our water sources and our atmosphere, the exploitation of the labor of our fellow humans in China (and elsewhere), and complete economic and social ruin the globe over are becoming palpable consequences. And for what? All for the bottom-line of corporations bent on increasing share-holders' profit margins above any other considerations. It's a disaster. mkurti may be an admirable non-conformist, a stellar scholar, and a model e-community member, but if her posts are indicative of the information available to the panelists who decided her dire fate, I would say she made a fatal flaw. She was too self-entitled, too sure, and too demanding. I see she must have called the IIE office a hundred times. If one is to do to the very best, to come out on top, she should have learned from leaders like Nike and hidden the source of her success. Nike has iron-clad doors on its sweatshops. Not only does this lead to deplorable fatalities in events such as fires, but also prevents muckraking journalists, academics, or labor organizers from threatening its corporate image and utter market domination. mkurti should have put an iron door on her entitlement, her connections (which she almost certainly got help with via her famous father), and her cunning, and instead put some more effort into her personal branding (Phil Knight has written books on this). The true warrior in today's day and age must infiltrate the Fulbright commission in a Trojan Horse. Appear as a curiosity, a humble, cute scholar, and hide the warrior within.