>> ^shinyblurry:

You should scrolled further to my response..the act established the first public schools, and was the historical first step towards a national public school system. Benjamin Franklin in 1749 said the teaching of history in schools should “afford frequent opportunities of showing the necessity of a public religion … and the excellency of the Christian religion above all others". Public education was originally developed as a tool to teach people scripture, and so were the ivy league schools like Harvard and Yale..

>> ^xxovercastxx:
elections
>> ^shinyblurry:
For instance, did you know that the act which established the public school system in this country is called "The Old Deluder Satan Act"?
Did you know the Massachusetts General School Law of 1647 (aka The Old Deluder Satan Law) was passed in 1647, almost 130 years before the Declaration of Independence and over 140 years before the ratification of the Constitution?
There was no "this country" back then. It was merely a British colony.
edit: Never mind, I see @Grimm has already said this. Should have scrolled down further before responding.



I did, that's why I said never mind.

You should scrolled further to my response..the act established the first public schools, and was the historical first step towards a national public school system. Benjamin Franklin in 1749 said the teaching of history in schools should “afford frequent opportunities of showing the necessity of a public religion … and the excellency of the Christian religion above all others". Public education was originally developed as a tool to teach people scripture, and so were the ivy league schools like Harvard and Yale..


>> ^xxovercastxx:
elections
>> ^shinyblurry:
For instance, did you know that the act which established the public school system in this country is called "The Old Deluder Satan Act"?
Did you know the Massachusetts General School Law of 1647 (aka The Old Deluder Satan Law) was passed in 1647, almost 130 years before the Declaration of Independence and over 140 years before the ratification of the Constitution?
There was no "this country" back then. It was merely a British colony.
edit: Never mind, I see @Grimm has already said this. Should have scrolled down further before responding.

First link has no mention regarding "24 out of the 56 signers of the declaration of independence had seminary degrees, and some of them were ministers."

The second link points out that I was correct that the statement is misleading. You are counting anyone that graduated from Harvard, Yale, and Princeton as having a "seminary degree".

You are aware that all of those schools were founded by the puritans, right? Before they became secular instituions in the mid 1800's, their mandate was to train ministers and missionaries to spread the gospel of Jesus Christ. So yes, they were seminary degrees.

Another misleading piece of information...the Old Deluder Satan Act was something the "colony" Massachusetts did in 1647. Over 100 years before we were a country and had a Constitution. No one is making the argument that some of the colony governments weren't "religious". It's a pretty big leap to point at the colonies who shifted educating the public from the church to the government as an example of how this country is founded on religion. Your case would be stronger if it were the other way around...that the government put the churches in charge of educating the public.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massachusetts_School_Laws

The Massachusetts School Laws were three legislative acts of 1642, 1647 and 1648 enacted in the Massachusetts Bay Colony. The most famous by far is the law of 1647, also known as the Old Deluder Satan Law (after the law's first sentence) and The General School Law of 1647. They are commonly regarded as the historical first step toward compulsory government-directed public education in the United States of America. Shortly after the three laws passed, similar laws were enacted in the other New England colonies.[1] Most mid-Atlantic colonies followed suit, though in some Southern colonies it was a further century before publicly funded schools were established there.[2]

>> ^Grimm:
Another misleading piece of information...the Old Deluder Satan Act was something the "colony" Massachusetts did in 1647. Over 100 years before we were a country and had a Constitution. No one is making the argument that some of the colony governments weren't "religious". It's a pretty big leap to point at the colonies who shifted educating the public from the church to the government as an example of how this country is founded on religion. Your case would be stronger if it were the other way around...that the government put the churches in charge of educating the public.>> ^shinyblurry:
For instance, did you know that the act which established the public school system in this country is called "The Old Deluder Satan Act"? The reason it was called that is because they wanted the public to be able to read and understand scripture so they wouldn't be deluded about the truth by Satan. Is it getting clear to you yet?
http://www.constitution.org/primarysources/deluder.html

First link has no mention regarding "24 out of the 56 signers of the declaration of independence had seminary degrees, and some of them were ministers."

The second link points out that I was correct that the statement is misleading. You are counting anyone that graduated from Harvard, Yale, and Princeton as having a "seminary degree".
>> ^shinyblurry:

http://www.adherents.com/gov/Founding_Fathers_Religion.html
http://ourfoundingtruth.blogspot.com/2007/10/founding-fath
ers-considered-clergy.html
>> ^Grimm:
I believe this is misleading...what proof is there of this claim?>> ^shinyblurry:
24 out of the 56 signers of the declaration of independence had seminary degrees, and some of them were ministers.

I am slightly frustrated (annoyed) that you missed my point, given that I think I made it very clear.

Not everyone who is having trouble finding a job is undereducated, not willing to explore labor jobs, educated in something that is not useful, or self-entitled.

In fact, quite the opposite. Most people I know who are having trouble finding work are unemployed because they lack industry experience, which they can't get because no one is hiring entry level positions. Thus, your reductive and simplistic rant is an naive interpretation of the current economic situation. As such, your blanket statements about people who can't find a job are simply false.

I gave a specific example that demonstrated empirically (a concrete example of) my point. To reiterate (repeat), highly educated people are unable to obtain labor jobs due to their credentials, because companies like Safeway, Wholes Foods, Walmart, etc fear these employees will not stay long enough to recoup any investment in training.

The fact that you persist in clinging on to your beliefs and cant say simply "You are right, and I was wrong. Good point, I should not have made a blanket statement" indicates to me that you are willfully ignorant (intentionally making an effort to not understand).

I look forward to your reply.

Here are the specific answers to your questions:
1) I am an experimental physicist and my wife is a biologist.

2) At research universities (Harvard, Stanford, etc), Professors hired based on research. Typically they are pioneers in their field and have numerous high profile publications.

3) My position is based on merit. As I said, I received numerous awards based on my academic and research performance.

4 & 5) non sequiturs (off topic).

6) You advice is to LIE! What is she supposed to say she has done for employment in the last 6 years? Are you kidding me?


In reply to this comment by ptrcklgrs:
Sorry I didn't respond. I got a few replys and missed yours.

My first question is what is your PHD in.

My comment on that is, I dropped out of college. I didn't see a use for it. College sadly has gotten to be a for profit education system.

IV league schools probably only 10% of the people who go there, got in on merit. The rest are because Mommy or Daddy is famous. George Bush Jr didn't diserve to go to Yale. He got in because of who his dad was.

I had a teacher in college who made us Buy his book and we had to buy it new. He would also sign the inside cover so people couldn't use the same book twice. If we didn't it would effect 5% of our grade. He was a greedy little shit.

Which is why Tenure is corrupting our Education system. I had great teachers and I had shitty teachers. I just want to be able to get rid of the shitty teachers to bring in more great teachers.

Florida got rid of tenure, and you can search and read the benefits it has had on the children.

If you use College as a Vocational (Trade) school it still works. But I have alot of friends who have degrees in Communication and Physical Education who are having a hard time finding jobs and don't understand why. And I feel bad for them.

Art History majors. We are simply graduating 100x the amount of art history majors then there are jobs in art history.

I undestand your issue with being over qualified and it sucks. If I were you or your wife, I would leave it off my resume and lie. If your dealing with Safeway or a big company, no one is getting hurt. I wouldn't do that to a Mom and Pop Shop.
>> ^MycroftHomlz:

^When replying to comments like this, I think it is useful to put my answer in context with my own experience.
My wife and I both recently finished our PhDs. We went to top ten institutions. As a graduate student, I received numerous awards, over 20 peer-reviewed publications, and outstanding letters of reference. I am telling you this to establish that I am a competitive candidate.
After graduation I had a temporary position, while working there I searched for a job. I applied to several jobs and fellowships, etc. Although I consistently made it to the final cut, I did not get an offer right away. Long story short, it took me a year to find a job.
My wife has been searching for a job for over a year. She applied to jobs at Safeway, Whole Foods, etc. to make ends meet. However, once they find out she has an advanced degree they toss out her application. Most industry positions require 2+ years industry experience. Hence, she can't get labor jobs because she is too educated, and she can't get industry jobs because she does not have industry experience.
Do you see the problem? And, I am sure we are not the only people who are struggling. In summary, I think reductive and simplistic rants like yours are naive at best and willfully ignorant at worst.

crickets???

In reply to this comment by ptrcklgrs:
Sorry I didn't respond. I got a few replys and missed yours.

My first question is what is your PHD in.

My comment on that is, I dropped out of college. I didn't see a use for it. College sadly has gotten to be a for profit education system.

IV league schools probably only 10% of the people who go there, got in on merit. The rest are because Mommy or Daddy is famous. George Bush Jr didn't diserve to go to Yale. He got in because of who his dad was.

I had a teacher in college who made us Buy his book and we had to buy it new. He would also sign the inside cover so people couldn't use the same book twice. If we didn't it would effect 5% of our grade. He was a greedy little shit.

Which is why Tenure is corrupting our Education system. I had great teachers and I had shitty teachers. I just want to be able to get rid of the shitty teachers to bring in more great teachers.

Florida got rid of tenure, and you can search and read the benefits it has had on the children.

If you use College as a Vocational (Trade) school it still works. But I have alot of friends who have degrees in Communication and Physical Education who are having a hard time finding jobs and don't understand why. And I feel bad for them.

Art History majors. We are simply graduating 100x the amount of art history majors then there are jobs in art history.

I undestand your issue with being over qualified and it sucks. If I were you or your wife, I would leave it off my resume and lie. If your dealing with Safeway or a big company, no one is getting hurt. I wouldn't do that to a Mom and Pop Shop.
>> ^MycroftHomlz:

^When replying to comments like this, I think it is useful to put my answer in context with my own experience.
My wife and I both recently finished our PhDs. We went to top ten institutions. As a graduate student, I received numerous awards, over 20 peer-reviewed publications, and outstanding letters of reference. I am telling you this to establish that I am a competitive candidate.
After graduation I had a temporary position, while working there I searched for a job. I applied to several jobs and fellowships, etc. Although I consistently made it to the final cut, I did not get an offer right away. Long story short, it took me a year to find a job.
My wife has been searching for a job for over a year. She applied to jobs at Safeway, Whole Foods, etc. to make ends meet. However, once they find out she has an advanced degree they toss out her application. Most industry positions require 2+ years industry experience. Hence, she can't get labor jobs because she is too educated, and she can't get industry jobs because she does not have industry experience.
Do you see the problem? And, I am sure we are not the only people who are struggling. In summary, I think reductive and simplistic rants like yours are naive at best and willfully ignorant at worst.

Sorry I didn't respond. I got a few replys and missed yours.

My first question is what is your PHD in.

My comment on that is, I dropped out of college. I didn't see a use for it. College sadly has gotten to be a for profit education system.

IV league schools probably only 10% of the people who go there, got in on merit. The rest are because Mommy or Daddy is famous. George Bush Jr didn't diserve to go to Yale. He got in because of who his dad was.

I had a teacher in college who made us Buy his book and we had to buy it new. He would also sign the inside cover so people couldn't use the same book twice. If we didn't it would effect 5% of our grade. He was a greedy little shit.

Which is why Tenure is corrupting our Education system. I had great teachers and I had shitty teachers. I just want to be able to get rid of the shitty teachers to bring in more great teachers.

Florida got rid of tenure, and you can search and read the benefits it has had on the children.

If you use College as a Vocational (Trade) school it still works. But I have alot of friends who have degrees in Communication and Physical Education who are having a hard time finding jobs and don't understand why. And I feel bad for them.

Art History majors. We are simply graduating 100x the amount of art history majors then there are jobs in art history.

I undestand your issue with being over qualified and it sucks. If I were you or your wife, I would leave it off my resume and lie. If your dealing with Safeway or a big company, no one is getting hurt. I wouldn't do that to a Mom and Pop Shop.
>> ^MycroftHomlz:

^When replying to comments like this, I think it is useful to put my answer in context with my own experience.
My wife and I both recently finished our PhDs. We went to top ten institutions. As a graduate student, I received numerous awards, over 20 peer-reviewed publications, and outstanding letters of reference. I am telling you this to establish that I am a competitive candidate.
After graduation I had a temporary position, while working there I searched for a job. I applied to several jobs and fellowships, etc. Although I consistently made it to the final cut, I did not get an offer right away. Long story short, it took me a year to find a job.
My wife has been searching for a job for over a year. She applied to jobs at Safeway, Whole Foods, etc. to make ends meet. However, once they find out she has an advanced degree they toss out her application. Most industry positions require 2+ years industry experience. Hence, she can't get labor jobs because she is too educated, and she can't get industry jobs because she does not have industry experience.
Do you see the problem? And, I am sure we are not the only people who are struggling. In summary, I think reductive and simplistic rants like yours are naive at best and willfully ignorant at worst.

http://videosift.com/video/Christine-O-Donnell-I-didn-t-go-to-Yale

From a Yahoon article:

After the altercation, the conductor came on the loudspeaker and reminded people to keep conversations quiet, "especially those people who went to Harvard or Yale or are from Westport."

From yt:

A stalemate between owners and players that threatens the upcoming NFL season and the widening scandal that forced beloved Ohio State University coach Jim Tressel to resign in disgrace are only the most recent reminders that football has always provoked a huge amount of controversy.

In the early 20th century, football was a literal bloodsport, writes John J. Miller in his new book The Big Scrum. After a series of game-related deaths, President Teddy Roosevelt called together the presidents of the three biggest football colleges (Harvard, Yale, and Princeton - yes, a very different America) and jawboned them into cleaning up the game to stave off legislative attempts to ban it outright.

The result, says Miller, was the creation of the distinctively American game football featuring forward passes, quarterbacks, spread offenses, and more.

The author of several books including the historical novel The First Assassin, Miller writes for National Review and is the new director of the journalism program at Hillsdale College. For more information about Miller, including links to his popular podcast series, go here (http://www.heymiller.com/).

Miller sat down with Reason's Nick Gillespie to talk about The Big Scrum, the scandal-ridden history of college football, and exactly what budding journalists need to learn in college (hint: it's not journalism).

About 6.31 minutes.

Shot by Jim Epstein, Meredith Bragg, and Josh Swain, who edited the piece.

>> ^dystopianfuturetoday:

Bush won despite being fairly clueless. Sarah could win too.


Not that it means much, but Palin makes Bush look like a natural born genius.

disclaimer: I'm not puffing up Bush here.

That said, Bush got a Business degree from Yale, and then his M.B.A. from Harvard. Palin spent six years bouncing between different little colleges and universities before finally getting a degree in journalism.

Not that it is likely to matter to many voters, but Bush looks like Einstein next to Palin. (and Obama make Bush look like a sideshow clown).

Dubya graduated from fucking Yale! YALE! Talk about obliterating a veil of class and superiority. It's like, if you can't graduate from Yale... don't even attempt community college. >> ^braindonut:

>> ^shponglefan:
How do people this obviously retarded get into positions of power?

This dude was a judge... Honestly, people like this call into question the validity of an education being any indicator towards intelligence.

Date: April 27th, 2010

The Forgotten Man

By Robert Ringer

Why have the combined mudslinging voices of the media (so called), Congressional Democrats, and the thin-skinned boy wonder who occupies the Oval Office not been able to turn the tide against the tea partiers? If you look at the poll numbers, the answer is obvious: Most Americans are tea partiers.

However, most of them are not yet in enough pain to skip a day at the ball park and stand in a crowd of thousands (sometimes tens of thousands) and listen to tea-party speakers. That’s a shame, but it doesn’t change the fact that they identify with the tea-party movement.

So, what is the common bond with which they identify? Taxes? Healthcare? Financial regulation? I thought about this question as I was rereading Amity Shlaes’ landmark book, The Forgotten Man. In it, she quotes Yale philosopher William Graham Sumner, who, clear back in 1883, explained the crux of the moral problem with progressivism as follows:

”As soon as A observes something which seems to him to be wrong, from which X is suffering, A talks it over with B, and A and B then propose to get a law passed to remedy the evil and help X. Their law always proposes to determine … what A, B, and C shall do for X.”

Shlaes goes on to add: ”But what about C? There was nothing wrong with A and B helping X. What was wrong was the law, and the indenturing of C to the cause. C was the forgotten man, the man who paid, ‘the man who never is thought of.”’

In other words, C is the guy who isn’t bothering anyone, but is forced to supply the funds to help the X’s of the world, those whom power holders unilaterally decide have been treated unfairly and must be compensated.

FDR, however, did a switcheroo on Sumner’s point by removing the moniker of ”the forgotten man” from C and giving it to X – ”the poor man, the old man, labor, or any other recipient of government help.” Very clever … very Obamanistic. As I recall, FDR originally used the phrase the forgotten man to refer to the victims of the dust bowl in the 1930s. Zap! Just like that, Sumner’s forgotten man was transformed into the opposite of what he was meant to be.

Today, I believe it is the tea-party people who represent Sumner’s Forgotten Man. They are taxed and told what they must do and what they must give up in the way of freedom and personal wealth every time a new law is passed. I believe it is this reality that bonds the tea-party people together.

Put another way, it is not healthcare or any other single issue the tea-party people are most angry about. It is all of the issues combined that have to do with impinging on their individual liberty. Above all, they are outraged by the fact that immoral politicians and bureaucrats not only violate their God-given right to live their lives as they please, they dismiss them as ”extremists.” Collectively, the tea-party people are today’s Forgotten Man.

In his essay (http://mises.org/books/forgottenman.pdf), Sumner went on to say:

”All history is only one long story to this effect: men have struggled for power over their fellow-men in order that they might win the joys of earth at the expense of others and might shift the burdens of life from their own shoulders upon those of others. It is true that, until this time, the proletariat, the mass of mankind, have rarely had the power and they have not made such a record as kings and nobles and priests have made of the abuses they would perpetrate against their fellow-men when they could and dared.

”But what folly it is to think that vice and passion are limited by classes, that liberty consists only in taking power away from nobles and priests and giving it to artisans and peasants and that these latter will never abuse it! They will abuse it just as all others have done unless they are put under checks and guarantees, and there can be no civil liberty anywhere unless rights are guaranteed against all abuses, as well from proletarians as from generals, aristocrats, and ecclesiastics.”

Sumner was a man of great insight. He saw the absurdity of assuming that the poor man is morally superior to the rich man. This is where I believe that sincere revolutionaries go wrong. While their initial intentions (to help ”the poor”) may, at least in their own minds, be well-meant, they begin with a false premise (that the misfortunes of those at the bottom of the economic ladder are a result of the evil actions of those who are more successful) and, from there, leap from one false conclusion to another.

Which is why politicians who pose as conservatives to get elected so often take the Mush McCain-Lindsey Graham-Charlie Crist route and continually rush to the aid of their progressive Democratic pals. I believe that these philosophically lost souls do the bidding of the intimidating left because they have never given any serious thought to the possibility that the very premise of progressivism is morally wrong.

As a result, they have no feeling for the (perceived) rich man. In plotting their do-gooder schemes, he is easy to forget. They see nothing whatsoever wrong with society’s sacrificing his liberty for the ”public good.” Bring out the guillotine! As Montaigne said, ”Men are most apt to believe what they least understand.”

What gave birth to the tea parties is that the Forgotten Man syndrome is like a metastasizing disease. As politicians long ago realized, there aren’t enough rich people to support all of the X’s. As the number of X’s (i.e., those who live off the surpluses of others) increases, a lot of A’s and B’s must, by necessity, be reclassified as C’s. And that is when they become candidates for joining the tea-party movement.

Put simply: When A’s and B’s are transformed into C’s, they mysteriously lose their enthusiasm for new laws to help out X. Put even more simply, they suddenly realize that they are now the Forgotten Man. And that realization is what automatically qualifies them as tea-party people. No recruitment necessary, thank you.

Man Pat sure knows his history! Those assholes at Yale must need Pat to fix the textbooks! (pardon my french)

/subtle ironic pun is subtle

The Wrestler was the only flick that lived up to its promise, for me.

Though I did like Avatar, Star Trek, Slumdog, and a few of the others mentioned above.

Basterds was okay--loved the bar scene--and it really did keep you wondering how it would end...but it wasn't a film I could watch twice.

"Harvard Beats Yale 29-29" was from 2008, but for a documentary where you know the ending right off the bat, I was honestly on the edge of my seat from about halfway through the film to the very end.

"Food, Inc." is also highly recommended.