Collage Records

[SHIT-TANK]

Obama and Biden study at places we've actually fucking heard of and studied politics.

Obama:
Occidental College (Los Angeles) - 2 years studying Politics and Public Policy.
Columbia University (New York) - B.A. Political Science with a specialization in International Relations.
Harvard Law School - Juris Doctor (J.D.) Magna Cum Laude, Editor-in-Chief of the Harvard Law Review.

Biden:
University of Delaware - B.A. in History and a B.A. in Political Science.
Syracuse University College of Law - Juris Doctor (J.D)

------------------------------------

McCain:
United States Naval Academy - Class rank 894 of 899. <----- LOL

Palin:
Hawaii Pacific University - 1 semester - Business Administration.
North Idaho College - 2 semesters - General Studies.
University of Idaho - 2 semesters - Journalism.
Matanuska-Susitna College - 1 semester.
University of Idaho - 3 semesters - B.A. in Journalism.

It looks like Palin had no idea what the fuck she wanted to do, I really think stuff like this crushes the experience bullshit McCain and Palin are spewing.

[HogWashSoup]

collage????

[CaiWengi]

I see your point, but that was a long time ago, since Mccains right old now anyway, im sure it seems like another lifetime.

It certainly doesnt prove he would be a bad president

[SadisticMonkey]

At 9/14/08 05:05 PM, CaiWengi wrote: It certainly doesnt prove he would be a bad president

It doesn't, but it is interesting nonetheless.

[XaosLegend]

it is a real university, it's also one where mccain's daddy was tied to it as an admiral or the navy and on top of that mccain finished at like the bottom 5% of his class (being a legacy you have to wonder if it were possible for him to finish any lower almost no matter what he did)

[Memorize]

I like how the topic starter is attempting to push his candidates out in front by what they studied at college... all while not having the capability to spell 'college".

Collage. lol.

This thread is a parody in and of itself.

[dySWN]

At 9/14/08 03:19 PM, SHIT-TANK wrote: McCain:
United States Naval Academy - Class rank 894 of 899. <----- LOL

You know what they call the guy who graduates the academy last in his class?

"Sir."

I really think stuff like this crushes the experience bullshit McCain and Palin are spewing.

...except when you take McCain's on-the-job experience into account.

[Saruman200]

Another stupid thread about the "experience issue". Seriously, as I've said before and I'll say again, experience doesn't mean shit. Nothing can prepare you for the job of president, so everyone needs to stop pretending they'd be a better president because of their "experience".

[Idiot-Finder]

At 9/14/08 03:31 PM, HogWashSoup wrote: collage????

Had it for art project many years ago.

[JoS]

At 9/14/08 03:19 PM, SHIT-TANK wrote: McCain:
United States Naval Academy - Class rank 894 of 899. <----- LOL

Annapolis is a decent school and it is an actual school with a long and proud heritage. Fuck, I would pick a graduate of Annapolis over any school for a BA if I were hiring, because they teach you more than just book smarts, they teach you leadership.

Palin:
Hawaii Pacific University - 1 semester - Business Administration.
North Idaho College - 2 semesters - General Studies.
University of Idaho - 2 semesters - Journalism.
Matanuska-Susitna College - 1 semester.
University of Idaho - 3 semesters - B.A. in Journalism.

A lot of people switch schools or switch majors. I switched majors 3 or 4 times. And I notice 5 semesters (2.5 years) were at Idaho for Journalism, which would mean by here second half of Sophomore she had picked a major to stick with, which is about hwo long it takes alot of students (myself included) to pick.

I do not see how this makes them any less qualified for the job? Its very pompous and elitist of you to think that just because someone went to a military academy or had troubles picking their major they are not as good of a candidate as a fancy Ivy League School.

Besides should the kid who spelt college wrong really be judging other people based on what "collage" they went to?

It looks like Palin had no idea what the fuck she wanted to do, I really think stuff like this crushes the experience bullshit McCain and Palin are spewing.

[SHIT-TANK]

For all of you idiots who can't read bold font or my any kind of inferences whatsoever because you to busy changing your political views depending what topic your currently spamming, I was laughing at his class rank, it's pathetic.

[JoS]

At 9/14/08 10:21 PM, SHIT-TANK wrote: For all of you idiots who can't read bold font or my any kind of inferences whatsoever because you to busy changing your political views depending what topic your currently spamming, I was laughing at his class rank, it's pathetic.

So? We don't know what rank Obama was, or Biden? They could have been dead last in their class for all we know. Besides, so what if he wasn't the most disciplined sailor in his class and got a lot of demerit points, that was what, like 40-50 years ago? He has changed a lot since then.

[rick8176]

Oh, boy. Once the media gets hold of these facts, they're going to go into a frenzy. McCain will probably lose a few points in the polls, not to mention one of his favorite lines of attack. He'll actually need to talk about issues (oh, no!) and engage in debate (the horror!)

[MortifiedPenguins]

Since Obama deems it grand enough to compare himself with Lincoln all the time, I think I can make this connection.

Guess what college Lincoln went to?

None. Know why, real intelligence and leadership isn't taught at College. From my expierence here, it's little more then a daycare for near adults.

You can't teach someone something that comes naturally, Charisma and the ability to lead transcends what one can gleam from a book or hear from a professor.

[Masculine]

At 9/14/08 09:37 PM, JoS wrote: I would pick a graduate of Annapolis over any school for a BA if I were hiring, because they teach you more than just book smarts, they teach you leadership.

More and more these days people are realizing the name of the school doesn't show the true character of the person they are hiring. You could have someone who graduated from the most prestigious school in the world but that doesn't mean crap about who the person is. It matters what they did with the time there that they had which some just breeze through without truly learning anything.

[Rideo]

At 9/14/08 03:19 PM, SHIT-TANK wrote: It looks like Palin had no idea what the fuck she wanted to do, I really think stuff like this crushes the experience bullshit McCain and Palin are spewing.

Oh my, a college student who hasn't decided what they want to do with their life yet?

Alert the media!

[TehChahlesh]

I'm a little lost as to how this ties into the "experience issue."

[RubberTrucky]

A president should be trained in diplomacy, national and international culture, history and legal system, foreign languages and rethorics. Not only does the right education cover those bases, it also proves what age the candidates were motivated to be into politics.
Education has a big part in this. Granted, Americans couldn't care less if their president can't tell Paris from Bejing, but in most countries it is still important.

Of course a carreer that has proven the candidate to excell in all those qualities, adds a lot more to experience than the education.

Personally, the Obama and Biden one-up Palin and McCain, cause political science and law should cover all those bases.

[JoS]

At 9/15/08 06:35 PM, RubberTrucky wrote: Not only does the right education cover those bases, it also proves what age the candidates were motivated to be into politics.

Frankly I would never want to elect someone who has wanted to be a politician all their life. Being a politicians should not be a career. The whole reason the President has term limits is to allow for new people, new ideas rather than getting bogged down with the same people. Frankly there should be term limits on Senators and Congressmen to prevent career politicians (of which all the people, with perhaps the exception of Palin are).

Personally, the Obama and Biden one-up Palin and McCain, cause political science and law should cover all those bases.

Or a degree in Journalism and a degree from a military academy. Journalism isn'[t just about how to write a short story, you usually have to take courses on politics and such as well. And since when does a political science or law degree teach you foreign languages. And for that fact, why is it important that a person speak multiple languages in the US/ In Canada it matters because we are bilingual, but not so much for the US.

[TheMason]

At 9/14/08 07:36 PM, Saruman200 wrote: Another stupid thread about the "experience issue". Seriously, as I've said before and I'll say again, experience doesn't mean shit. Nothing can prepare you for the job of president, so everyone needs to stop pretending they'd be a better president because of their "experience".

Ha, ha, ha! You said it so it must be so!

Anyway, experience does matter...even if there is no formal path to the presidency. For example there have been 17 presidents with gubernatorial experience and about 8 with senatorial experience. This is important because the structure of the governor's office very closely resembles the structure of the presidency.

Secondly, a person who had worked on Wall Street would have relevent experience in managing fiscal policy.

Third, a person who held a command in the military has relevent experience.

Now just because you have served in these capacities should not be the end of the discussion. Was John McCain a competent commander? Sarah Palin a good governor? Barrack Obama competent on Wall Street...wait he opted to become rich as a "community organizer" (thereby gaining experience in things that a president will not have to deal with).

So what does Obama really offer other than an amorphous call for "change"? Something that was easy to do...and FDR did in 1932 (and then took Hoover's policies to new levels of government intervention). When dealing with the Russians what does he bring to the table...or the Norweigans for that matter?

Sorry friend, but experience does matter...regardless of what you say.

[TheMason]

At 9/14/08 03:19 PM, SHIT-TANK wrote: Palin:
Hawaii Pacific University - 1 semester - Business Administration.
North Idaho College - 2 semesters - General Studies.
University of Idaho - 2 semesters - Journalism.
Matanuska-Susitna College - 1 semester.
University of Idaho - 3 semesters - B.A. in Journalism.

It looks like Palin had no idea what the fuck she wanted to do, I really think stuff like this crushes the experience bullshit McCain and Palin are spewing.

You know what is funny? After this post you charge people responding as being unable to see past their partisanship. You appear to be stumbling over the same rock.

1) Two of the colleges listed are community colleges. It is a common occurence for people who cannot afford a private liberal arts college like Oxy (Occidental College), to start at a community college. Now it appears that Palin attempted to attend college in a state with a very high standard of living. So she left after a semester and went to a two-year Junior College, and then went on to that state's flagship university. Then she spends a semester at another two-year Junior College...which is something that is very common for students who live out of state to do.

2) You list the University of Idaho TWICE. Honest mistake or feeble attempt at obfuscation?

You need to ask the question: Why?

Why did Palin leave Hawaii, and why did she choose to spend a semester in an Alaskan Junior College after going to the U of Idaho? You make an assumption (that she lacked direction) and then link it to experience (a very weak link...for which you fail to articulate any argument)...all out of ignorance. Was it money? Was it poor grades? Was there a family emergency? You simply do not have enough information to make your partisan argument.

Finally, why did Obama leave one four year university to go to another one? You simply gloss over this little tid-bit.

Sorry...but you fail the "partisanship" test yourself.

[Elfer]

Since when is college "experience"?

[Saruman200]

At 9/15/08 08:38 PM, TheMason wrote:

At 9/14/08 07:36 PM, Saruman200 wrote: Another stupid thread about the "experience issue". Seriously, as I've said before and I'll say again, experience doesn't mean shit. Nothing can prepare you for the job of president, so everyone needs to stop pretending they'd be a better president because of their "experience".

Ha, ha, ha! You said it so it must be so!

And likewhise, it must be important because you said it was? This can go either way.

Anyway, experience does matter...even if there is no formal path to the presidency. For example there have been 17 presidents with gubernatorial experience and about 8 with senatorial experience. This is important because the structure of the governor's office very closely resembles the structure of the presidency.

Some of those presidents that had senatorial experience were some of the best. And I know this fact has been beaten to death, but Lincoln didn't have any experience when he became president.

Secondly, a person who had worked on Wall Street would have relevent experience in managing fiscal policy.

Third, a person who held a command in the military has relevent experience.

True, a person does have experience in those things, but that doesn't effect whenever they'd be a good president or not. I suppose that was my real point: not really that experience is completely worthless, rather that experience doesn't make a good president. But I've already said this so many times, I won't to make it short and blunt. Sorry for any confusion.

Now just because you have served in these capacities should not be the end of the discussion. Was John McCain a competent commander? Sarah Palin a good governor? Barrack Obama competent on Wall Street...wait he opted to become rich as a "community organizer" (thereby gaining experience in things that a president will not have to deal with).

Well, that's completely subjective. I mean, a community organizer would have to "organize", wouldn't they, doesn't the president "organize" the cabinent, federal departments, budject, etc... Not saying that really important, just pointing out it subjective.

So what does Obama really offer other than an amorphous call for "change"? Something that was easy to do...and FDR did in 1932 (and then took Hoover's policies to new levels of government intervention). When dealing with the Russians what does he bring to the table...or the Norweigans for that matter?

Well, FDR was also one of our greatest presidents (but I suppose that's subjective too, but then again most historians agree with me on that). I'll answer your question about the Russians (and Norweigans): nothing. But really, what does John McCain, other than an over-aggresive attitude?

Sorry friend, but experience does matter...regardless of what you say.

And again, I can say "experience doesn't matter...regardless of what you say." It's a double-edged sword here buddy.

[TheMason]

At 9/15/08 10:54 PM, Saruman200 wrote:

At 9/15/08 08:38 PM, TheMason wrote:

At 9/14/08 07:36 PM, Saruman200 wrote: Another stupid thread about the "experience issue". Seriously, as I've said before and I'll say again, experience doesn't mean shit. Nothing can prepare you for the job of president, so everyone needs to stop pretending they'd be a better president because of their "experience".

Ha, ha, ha! You said it so it must be so!

And likewhise, it must be important because you said it was? This can go either way.

You came across as flippantly disregarding the notion that a person's experience is unnecessary for consideration.

Furthermore, an appeal to authority when that person is an authority on the subject is legitimate.

Anyway, experience does matter...even if there is no formal path to the presidency. For example there have been 17 presidents with gubernatorial experience and about 8 with senatorial experience. This is important because the structure of the governor's office very closely resembles the structure of the presidency.

Some of those presidents that had senatorial experience were some of the best. And I know this fact has been beaten to death, but Lincoln didn't have any experience when he became president.

You do not address my main point, but instead bite upon trivia. From a structural perspective, certain offices are remarkably similar to that of the presidency. In fact if you look at the last five presidents only one was not a governor and had Federal experience (Bush the Elder). You said that there was nothing to prepare someone to be president and I made the argument that being governor is a good route that many have taken.

Secondly, a person who had worked on Wall Street would have relevent experience in managing fiscal policy.

Third, a person who held a command in the military has relevent experience.

True, a person does have experience in those things, but that doesn't effect whenever they'd be a good president or not. I suppose that was my real point: not really that experience is completely worthless, rather that experience doesn't make a good president. But I've already said this so many times, I won't to make it short and blunt. Sorry for any confusion.

Experience is only a piece of the pie...but to totally discard it as an important issue is folly.

Now just because you have served in these capacities should not be the end of the discussion. Was John McCain a competent commander? Sarah Palin a good governor? Barrack Obama competent on Wall Street...wait he opted to become rich as a "community organizer" (thereby gaining experience in things that a president will not have to deal with).

Well, that's completely subjective. I mean, a community organizer would have to "organize", wouldn't they, doesn't the president "organize" the cabinent, federal departments, budject, etc... Not saying that really important, just pointing out it subjective.

It is not really all that subjective when you look at it from a structural perspective. A community organizer is powerless and can only influence policy not legislate or craft it. But again...the question initially raised is actually a nod towards your position. Quantity matters...but so does quality. And in regards to Obama and Palin...this is a double-edged sword. It cuts the Republicans a little less because Palin is in the #2 slot rather than the #1.

So what does Obama really offer other than an amorphous call for "change"? Something that was easy to do...and FDR did in 1932 (and then took Hoover's policies to new levels of government intervention). When dealing with the Russians what does he bring to the table...or the Norweigans for that matter?

Well, FDR was also one of our greatest presidents (but I suppose that's subjective too, but then again most historians agree with me on that). I'll answer your question about the Russians (and Norweigans): nothing. But really, what does John McCain, other than an over-aggresive attitude?

Too bad that most economists now look upon the Hoover/FDR policies as prolonging the Great Depression. And he saddled us with Social Security (and then bankrupted it with IOUs)...which will implode the federal budget in the next twenty years. Helluva legacy.

Sorry friend, but experience does matter...regardless of what you say.

And again, I can say "experience doesn't matter...regardless of what you say." It's a double-edged sword here buddy.

Again it comes down to an appeal to authority and how has the cred to back it up. BS, Masters and half-way through PhD in Political Science here. You're profile says student, so upon what does your argument stand?

[Slizor]

Too bad that most economists now look upon the Hoover/FDR policies as prolonging the Great Depression.

That's because most economists are blinkered by their ideological beliefs and don't reflect on actualy situations or different modes of thought.

And he saddled us with Social Security (and then bankrupted it with IOUs)...which will implode the federal budget in the next twenty years. Helluva legacy.

There's always military spending the US can cut back on, or it could decide which way to go with its health system rather than having its current pathetic halfbreed that sucks up money to give to private companies.

[SHIT-TANK]

At 9/14/08 11:53 PM, Masculine wrote:

At 9/14/08 09:37 PM, JoS wrote: I would pick a graduate of Annapolis over any school for a BA if I were hiring, because they teach you more than just book smarts, they teach you leadership.

More and more these days people are realizing the name of the school doesn't show the true character of the person they are hiring. You could have someone who graduated from the most prestigious school in the world but that doesn't mean crap about who the person is. It matters what they did with the time there that they had which some just breeze through without truly learning anything.

You do not breeze though Columbia University and Harvard University when you got them on scholarships. I don't get your reasoning if I wanted a job as a lawyer but never went to law school why the world would I expect to get that job? Here your saying McCain has "seen the other side" by being a POW, I'm not disputing the fact that what John McCain went through was a living nightmare and he is a great American for doing so, but is really has nothing to do with qualifications.

The more schooling you have and the more you experience the smarter you become. The more you study that laws and procuders of this country the better you are equipped to lead it.

As for Palin, she is just plain insane.

[TheMason]

At 9/16/08 06:51 AM, Slizor wrote:

Too bad that most economists now look upon the Hoover/FDR policies as prolonging the Great Depression.

That's because most economists are blinkered by their ideological beliefs and don't reflect on actualy situations or different modes of thought.

Not really, academic economists tend to shed their ideological leanings and deal with cold hard numbers. Sorry, but this argument fails.

And he saddled us with Social Security (and then bankrupted it with IOUs)...which will implode the federal budget in the next twenty years. Helluva legacy.

There's always military spending the US can cut back on, or it could decide which way to go with its health system rather than having its current pathetic halfbreed that sucks up money to give to private companies.

1) The military is actually bled dry. There is not much more cutting that can be done without destroying our effectiveness. This knee jerk argument is often the first sign of ignorance.

2) Healthcare needs to be kept private. In 20 years every dollar the government takes in will barely be able to pay for Social Security and Medicare/aid. There will be no revenue available for any other program: education, roads, military, or UHC (if we add it to our expenses). Pretty much our politicians (from FDR to the next president, Democrat or Republican) have put us on a collision course with governmental bankruptcy. Now is not the time to add another entitlement.

[TheMason]

At 9/16/08 12:03 PM, SHIT-TANK wrote: The more schooling you have and the more you experience the smarter you become. The more you study that laws and procuders of this country the better you are equipped to lead it.

Are you? What about character? Let's look at law school; they train you to be a shark. I've talked to people in laws chool. Do you realize that students in law school go into the law library and rip pages out of books so as to make it more difficult for their classmates to get the information...and thereby gain an unfair advantage? Do you really want someone who excelled in such an environment to lead our country? What does that say about Obama's character...yeah he's smart but is he corrupt?

He comes from Chicago a place known for its Democratic machine and for being corrupt. His campaign manager was part of the Daley Machine (a particularly corrupt and powerful incarnation of the Chicago machine). Is that really the change we want? Then there is Rezko's (a slum lord) wife who helped him buy a house in Hyde Park that Obama could barely afford? Yes the transaction was deemed legal after Rezko was federally indicted.

Add it all together...and I do not like the character of the man. At least McCain's sins are well known.

[Tri-Nitro-Toluene]

At 9/16/08 12:37 PM, TheMason wrote: 2) Healthcare needs to be kept private. In 20 years every dollar the government takes in will barely be able to pay for Social Security and Medicare/aid.

Wouldn't UHC remove the need for Medicare/aid?

[SHIT-TANK]

At 9/16/08 12:44 PM, TheMason wrote:

At 9/16/08 12:03 PM, SHIT-TANK wrote: The more schooling you have and the more you experience the smarter you become. The more you study that laws and procuders of this country the better you are equipped to lead it.

Are you? What about character? Let's look at law school; they train you to be a shark. I've talked to people in laws chool. Do you realize that students in law school go into the law library and rip pages out of books so as to make it more difficult for their classmates to get the information...and thereby gain an unfair advantage? Do you really want someone who excelled in such an environment to lead our country? What does that say about Obama's character...yeah he's smart but is he corrupt?

He comes from Chicago a place known for its Democratic machine and for being corrupt. His campaign manager was part of the Daley Machine (a particularly corrupt and powerful incarnation of the Chicago machine). Is that really the change we want? Then there is Rezko's (a slum lord) wife who helped him buy a house in Hyde Park that Obama could barely afford? Yes the transaction was deemed legal after Rezko was federally indicted.

Add it all together...and I do not like the character of the man. At least McCain's sins are well known.

Also McCain is sellout. Does anybody remember about 8 years ago where John McCain was viewed as a "Maverick" in the Republican Party and Bush and Carl Rove smeared his image and burried him so completely that he realized that he had to play ball with the republicans? He did whatever he could to get leverage i.e. that famous 90% voteing with Bush stat that everybody loves to through around. Two summers ago McCain was holding fundraisers so he could buy gas for his bus to get to the next state. So that makes me wonder how many lobbiest and corporations have him in his back pocket for him to go from dead last to number 1.

Barack Obama is not corrupt, he's just not safe and familiar enough for you to get past the bullshit. Also I sorry if I would like to vote for a candidate that is more educated then the competition I guess that makes me some elitist pussy.