| |
Main
Date: 18 Jan 2007 23:39:57
From:
Subject: MI5 Persecution: Website Index (1839)
|
Persecuted by the Security Service
Since June 1990 the British security service MI5 has waged a campaign of harassment against a UK citizen,
through the broadcast and print media, verbal abuse at work, and molestation in public and during travel.
Despite widespread knowledge of the campaign in the UK and discussion of its characteristics on Usenet for
over three years, it continues today both in Britain and North America. Its cause and basis is xenophobia
on the basis of the genetic accident of mental illness, coupled with discrimination against an inferior
"foreigner" whom they condemn as "not up to British Standards".
If this is your first visit to this site, please read the FAQ first. Feel free to contact the author with
any questions.
Frequently Asked Questions article outlines the parameters of the persecution. Who is involved, and why?
What technical and social means do they employ? What response have I made, and why has their campaign yet
to be exposed?
The UK Security Services which are believed to be behind it all. Domestic security is the province of MI5
while the secret intelligence service MI6 combats foes (and its former employees) on foreign shores.
Usenet archive chronicling the (sometimes very enthusiastic) exchanges which have taken place on UK-local
newsgroups since May 1995. Make your k on the continuing discussion!
Believe it or not, a few items of evidence have been recorded. Although none of them is particularly
conclusive, by presenting them I hope to explain what I understand from some television and radio programmes.
Most of the "clinching" material was aired in 1990-92, and no recordings exist now, which is quite unfortunate.
My complaints to the BBC and MI5 (via the Security Service Tribunal and Interception of Communications Tribunal),
and their response to my challenges, are recorded here. Basically they deny everything, they have put their
denials (mostly - Buerk and Lewis refused) in writing, and I don't believe them. Part of the website also
documents media coverage of my campaign to expose the persecution.
Faxed articles to, and responses from British organisations including Parliament and UK media. Over 24,259 faxes
in all were sent from 1998 to 2000. Their aim was to boot discussion of the persecution into the public domain,
and that aim was not accomplished.
1839
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
|
|
| |
Date: 19 Jan 2007 10:06:40
From: MnMikew
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
"William A. T. Clark" <clark.31@osu.edu > wrote in message
news:clark.31-62EF99.19145518012007@charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu...
> In article <45B00750.98C72206@att.net>, Robert Hamilton <DBID@att.net>
> wrote:
>
>> 38% Bush; 33% Pelosi.
>
> Nice try, but Dubya is President, and Pelosi is the obscure Leader of
> the House - apples and oranges. Most people, outside of you rabid smear
> mongers, have barely heard of her.
>
OBSCURE?????????? Now that's funny.
|
| | |
Date: 19 Jan 2007 14:05:40
From: William A. T. Clark
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
In article <51c8khF1jgoqtU1@mid.individual.net >,
"MnMikew" <mnmiikkew@aol.com > wrote:
> "William A. T. Clark" <clark.31@osu.edu> wrote in message
> news:clark.31-62EF99.19145518012007@charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu...
> > In article <45B00750.98C72206@att.net>, Robert Hamilton <DBID@att.net>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> 38% Bush; 33% Pelosi.
> >
> > Nice try, but Dubya is President, and Pelosi is the obscure Leader of
> > the House - apples and oranges. Most people, outside of you rabid smear
> > mongers, have barely heard of her.
> >
> OBSCURE?????????? Now that's funny.
OK, without going to Google or otherwise looking it up, name the last
ten Presidents and the last ten Leaders of the House.
Now do you understand?
William Clark
|
| | | |
Date: 19 Jan 2007 14:06:38
From: MnMikew
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
"William A. T. Clark" <clark.31@nospamosu.edu > wrote in message
news:clark.31-5D5D0B.14054019012007@charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu...
> In article <51c8khF1jgoqtU1@mid.individual.net>,
> "MnMikew" <mnmiikkew@aol.com> wrote:
>
>> "William A. T. Clark" <clark.31@osu.edu> wrote in message
>> news:clark.31-62EF99.19145518012007@charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu...
>> > In article <45B00750.98C72206@att.net>, Robert Hamilton <DBID@att.net>
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> >> 38% Bush; 33% Pelosi.
>> >
>> > Nice try, but Dubya is President, and Pelosi is the obscure Leader of
>> > the House - apples and oranges. Most people, outside of you rabid smear
>> > mongers, have barely heard of her.
>> >
>> OBSCURE?????????? Now that's funny.
>
> OK, without going to Google or otherwise looking it up, name the last
> ten Presidents and the last ten Leaders of the House.
>
> Now do you understand?
>
You either don't read newspapers or watch TV.
|
| | | | |
Date: 23 Jan 2007 05:06:40
From: John B.
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
Bert Robbins wrote:
> William A. T. Clark wrote:
> > In article <jor9r214u2srgv9fvolihvk3cn1t7q6cc9@4ax.com>,
> > Jack Hollis <xsleeper@aol.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On Sun, 21 Jan 2007 09:31:22 -0500, Bert Robbins <screw@you.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Money is not the the problem, teachers are a part of the problem and
> >>> greater parent involvement is the solution.
> >>>
> >>> Teacher to student ratio 30 to 1.
> >>> Parent to child ration 1 to 1.
> >> Education is over funded in the US and still gets a poor return on
> >> it's money. It's interesting that the US can have the best higher
> >> education system in the world and a below average priy and
> >> secondary education system.
> >>
> > While the US spends the most in actual dollars, it ranks only 10th in
> > educational spending as a fraction of GDP. In terms of spending per
> > capita, Norway even ranks ahead of the US. Over funded? I think not - if
> > it was you would know that the possessive of "it" is "its".
>
> At what point would the US school system be over funded?
>
> >> Parent involvement is the key and that is often what is lacking in the
> >> inner city schools. Even a st kind with good parents will have a
> >> hard time leaning in an inner city school because the rest of the kids
> >> are out of control and most of the good teachers that can get a job
> >> teaching somewhere else do so as soon as they can.
> >
> > Actually parents are what are often lacking in inner city schools, but
> > then I suppose that it is really the kid's fault when one or both
> > parents are dead, gone, or in jail.
>
> Everyone has to play the hand they are dealt.
Well, isn't that glib.
|
| | | | |
Date: 19 Jan 2007 22:58:22
From: William A. T. Clark
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
In article <51cmmeF1jqh21U1@mid.individual.net >,
"MnMikew" <mnmiikkew@aol.com > wrote:
> "William A. T. Clark" <clark.31@nospamosu.edu> wrote in message
> news:clark.31-5D5D0B.14054019012007@charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu...
> > In article <51c8khF1jgoqtU1@mid.individual.net>,
> > "MnMikew" <mnmiikkew@aol.com> wrote:
> >
> >> "William A. T. Clark" <clark.31@osu.edu> wrote in message
> >> news:clark.31-62EF99.19145518012007@charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu...
> >> > In article <45B00750.98C72206@att.net>, Robert Hamilton <DBID@att.net>
> >> > wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> 38% Bush; 33% Pelosi.
> >> >
> >> > Nice try, but Dubya is President, and Pelosi is the obscure Leader of
> >> > the House - apples and oranges. Most people, outside of you rabid smear
> >> > mongers, have barely heard of her.
> >> >
> >> OBSCURE?????????? Now that's funny.
> >
> > OK, without going to Google or otherwise looking it up, name the last
> > ten Presidents and the last ten Leaders of the House.
> >
> > Now do you understand?
> >
> You either don't read newspapers or watch TV.
I do, but the majority of our fellow countrymen do not (at least the
news portions). You know, the same people that cannot find Canada on a
map.
William Clark
|
| | | | | |
Date: 22 Jan 2007 19:24:09
From: John B.
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
Jack Hollis wrote:
> On Mon, 22 Jan 2007 13:58:34 -0500, "William A. T. Clark"
> <clark.31@nospamosu.edu> wrote:
>
> >So, I give an inner city kid $10K to go to a private school. However,
> >these cost typically $20K-$30K a year, so what use is that?
>
> There is an excellent Catholic School in my area that charges a bit
> over $7,000 a year for grades 1-8 and less if you're a parishioner.
> I'm sure there are a lot of private schools in DC that would be happy
> to take kids at 9k a year and do a lot better job at educating them as
> well.
>
> I fell sorry for the kids stuck in inner city schools with no other
> choice.
If there's a private school in DC that charges only $9k in tuition, I
sure haven't heard about it. They all run in the $25k range.
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 25 Jan 2007 11:17:03
From: John B.
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
On Jan 25, 11:54 am, "the Moderator" <sparky@no_spam_engineer.com >
wrote:
> "John B." <johnb...@gmail.com> wrote in messagenews:1169694125.973079.175530@v45g2000cwv.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jan 24, 5:00 pm, Jack Hollis <xslee...@aol.com> wrote:
> > > On 24 Jan 2007 13:50:18 -0800, "John B." <johnb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > >I said in my original post that the Catholic schools generally charge
> > > >less than the private schools. Your refusal to admit error in the face
> > > >of proof is cowardly and pitiable. You remind me of my kids when they
> > > >were toddlers.Wait a minute. You said that most of the private schools
> in the DC
> > > area charge 25K a year. I just showed you a list of 22 that charge
> > > under 10K with 18 of them charging under 5K.
>
> > > In light of that, how could you possibly maintain that your assertion
> > > is correct.
>
> > Catholic schools are not private, they're parochial, run by the
> > Archdiocese of Washington. For the third time, I said Catholic schools
> > charge less.Huh? Is the Catholic Church a branch of the government?!? Of course
> Catholic schools are private.
Well, I guess "private" is a relative term. But I think of private
schools as those that are not answerable to any governing body.
Catholic schools anwser to, and are partly funded by, the diocese in
which they're situated.
- Hide quoted text -- Show quoted text -
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 24 Jan 2007 19:02:06
From: John B.
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
On Jan 24, 5:00 pm, Jack Hollis <xslee...@aol.com > wrote:
> On 24 Jan 2007 13:50:18 -0800, "John B." <johnb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >I said in my original post that the Catholic schools generally charge
> >less than the private schools. Your refusal to admit error in the face
> >of proof is cowardly and pitiable. You remind me of my kids when they
> >were toddlers.Wait a minute. You said that most of the private schools in the DC
> area charge 25K a year. I just showed you a list of 22 that charge
> under 10K with 18 of them charging under 5K.
>
> In light of that, how could you possibly maintain that your assertion
> is correct.
Catholic schools are not private, they're parochial, run by the
Archdiocese of Washington. For the third time, I said Catholic schools
charge less.
|
| | | | | | | |
Date: 25 Jan 2007 14:35:40
From: sfb
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
By your definition, if a private entity owned and operated two schools, then
the schools aren't private. Don't think so.
"John B." <johnb505@gmail.com > wrote in message
news:1169694125.973079.175530@v45g2000cwv.googlegroups.com...
>
>
> On Jan 24, 5:00 pm, Jack Hollis <xslee...@aol.com> wrote:
>> On 24 Jan 2007 13:50:18 -0800, "John B." <johnb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >I said in my original post that the Catholic schools generally charge
>> >less than the private schools. Your refusal to admit error in the face
>> >of proof is cowardly and pitiable. You remind me of my kids when they
>> >were toddlers.Wait a minute. You said that most of the private schools
>> >in the DC
>> area charge 25K a year. I just showed you a list of 22 that charge
>> under 10K with 18 of them charging under 5K.
>>
>> In light of that, how could you possibly maintain that your assertion
>> is correct.
>
> Catholic schools are not private, they're parochial, run by the
> Archdiocese of Washington. For the third time, I said Catholic schools
> charge less.
>
|
| | | | | | | |
Date: 25 Jan 2007 10:54:52
From: the Moderator
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
"John B." <johnb505@gmail.com > wrote in message
news:1169694125.973079.175530@v45g2000cwv.googlegroups.com...
>
>
> On Jan 24, 5:00 pm, Jack Hollis <xslee...@aol.com> wrote:
> > On 24 Jan 2007 13:50:18 -0800, "John B." <johnb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > >I said in my original post that the Catholic schools generally charge
> > >less than the private schools. Your refusal to admit error in the face
> > >of proof is cowardly and pitiable. You remind me of my kids when they
> > >were toddlers.Wait a minute. You said that most of the private schools
in the DC
> > area charge 25K a year. I just showed you a list of 22 that charge
> > under 10K with 18 of them charging under 5K.
> >
> > In light of that, how could you possibly maintain that your assertion
> > is correct.
>
> Catholic schools are not private, they're parochial, run by the
> Archdiocese of Washington. For the third time, I said Catholic schools
> charge less.
Huh? Is the Catholic Church a branch of the government?!? Of course
Catholic schools are private.
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 23 Jan 2007 11:37:00
From: Jack Hollis
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
On 22 Jan 2007 19:24:09 -0800, "John B." <johnb505@gmail.com > wrote:
>> I fell sorry for the kids stuck in inner city schools with no other
>> choice.
>
>If there's a private school in DC that charges only $9k in tuition, I
>sure haven't heard about it. They all run in the $25k range.
John, why do you do this to yourself. Where exactly did you get this
$25K figure? Did you actually take the time to look up the tuition at
DC area private schools or did you just pull it out of the air?
|
| | | | | |
Date: 22 Jan 2007 09:52:09
From: John B.
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
Jack Hollis wrote:
> On Sun, 21 Jan 2007 10:49:01 -0500, "William A. T. Clark"
> <clark.31@osu.edu> wrote:
>
> >Your argument is self-contradictory. Firstly, your claim about DC's
> >apparently high cost per pupil is baseless. DC actually spends over
> >$3,800 less per pupil than Arlington, $2,100 less than Alexandria, and
> >so on. Add to that the fact that DC has a very high proportion of
> >children with special (i.e. more expensive) educational needs, that take
> >up a significant fraction of the funding and it is clear that pupils in
> >the DCPS system are at a considerable disadvantage compared to
> >surrounding suburbs.
>
> You quote from a report that is designed to explain away why DC
> schools, that have more than adequate funding, perform so poorly. Just
> hand picking a few surburban school districts that spend more than DC
> does not explain away the fact that DC schools perform so poorly
> despite the fact that they are funded better than most of the rest of
> the country.
>
> Money is not the problem and the idea that inner city schools are not
> funded as well as suburban schools is not true because inner city
> schools get federal funding not available to inner city schools.
>
> Here is a GAO study.
>
> "Among the schools GAO reviewed, differences in per-pupil spending
> between inner city and suburban schools varied across metropolitan
> areas, with inner city schools spending more in some metropolitan
> areas and suburban schools spending more in other areas. The inner
> city schools that GAO examined generally spent more per pupil than
> suburban schools in Boston, Chicago, and St. Louis, while in Fort
> Worth and New York the suburban schools in GAO's study almost always
> spent more per pupil than the inner city schools. In Denver and
> Oakland, spending differences between the selected inner city and
> suburban schools were mixed. In general, higher per-pupil expenditures
> at any given school were explained priily by higher staff salaries
> regardless of whether the school was an inner city or suburban school.
> Two other explanatory factors were student-teacher ratios and ratios
> of students to student support staff, such as guidance counselors,
> nurses, and librarians. Federal funds are generally targeted to
> low-income areas to compensate for additional challenges faced by
> schools in those areas. In some cases, the infusion of federal funds
> balanced differences in per-pupil expenditures between the selected
> inner city and suburban schools."
>
>
> Conclusion: It's not money.
What differentiates DC public schools from those in other cities is
that DC is not part of a state and therefore does not share in a
state's tax base. Your assertion that DC public schools have more than
adequate funding is laughable. Come visit us here in the DC area
sometime and take a look at some of the DC high schools. They most
certainly do not have adequate funding or anything close to it.
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 22 Jan 2007 16:25:59
From: Jack Hollis
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
On 22 Jan 2007 09:52:09 -0800, "John B." <johnb505@gmail.com > wrote:
>What differentiates DC public schools from those in other cities is
>that DC is not part of a state and therefore does not share in a
>state's tax base. Your assertion that DC public schools have more than
>adequate funding is laughable. Come visit us here in the DC area
>sometime and take a look at some of the DC high schools. They most
>certainly do not have adequate funding or anything close to it.
The DC schools have better funding than all but two US states.
|
| | | | | | | |
Date: 23 Jan 2007 01:31:53
From: Howard Brazee
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
On Mon, 22 Jan 2007 16:25:59 -0500, Jack Hollis <xsleeper@aol.com >
wrote:
>The DC schools have better funding than all but two US states.
There are lots of counties that have better funding though.
|
| | | | | | | | |
Date: 22 Jan 2007 21:51:55
From: Jack Hollis
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
On Tue, 23 Jan 2007 01:31:53 GMT, Howard Brazee <howard@brazee.net >
wrote:
>On Mon, 22 Jan 2007 16:25:59 -0500, Jack Hollis <xsleeper@aol.com>
>wrote:
>
>>The DC schools have better funding than all but two US states.
>
>There are lots of counties that have better funding though.
I don't doubt that.
Where I live, the money is distributed depending on what school
district you live in. I don't know how many school district there are
in my county but some get more money than others. I pay a lot of
money in school taxes and I expect to have (and do have) good schools
in return.
|
| | | | | | | |
Date: 22 Jan 2007 17:16:30
From: William A. T. Clark
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
In article <98aar29t7rvbbck8chd231i0993jn1dgeo@4ax.com >,
Jack Hollis <xsleeper@aol.com > wrote:
> On 22 Jan 2007 09:52:09 -0800, "John B." <johnb505@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >What differentiates DC public schools from those in other cities is
> >that DC is not part of a state and therefore does not share in a
> >state's tax base. Your assertion that DC public schools have more than
> >adequate funding is laughable. Come visit us here in the DC area
> >sometime and take a look at some of the DC high schools. They most
> >certainly do not have adequate funding or anything close to it.
>
> The DC schools have better funding than all but two US states.
Yes, but DC is not a state - it is a small district with an abnormally
large number of socially disadvantaged inhabitants. That makes schooling
very expensive.
William Clark
|
| | | | | | | | |
Date: 22 Jan 2007 19:03:31
From: Bert Robbins
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
William A. T. Clark wrote:
> In article <98aar29t7rvbbck8chd231i0993jn1dgeo@4ax.com>,
> Jack Hollis <xsleeper@aol.com> wrote:
>
>> On 22 Jan 2007 09:52:09 -0800, "John B." <johnb505@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> What differentiates DC public schools from those in other cities is
>>> that DC is not part of a state and therefore does not share in a
>>> state's tax base. Your assertion that DC public schools have more than
>>> adequate funding is laughable. Come visit us here in the DC area
>>> sometime and take a look at some of the DC high schools. They most
>>> certainly do not have adequate funding or anything close to it.
>> The DC schools have better funding than all but two US states.
>
> Yes, but DC is not a state - it is a small district with an abnormally
> large number of socially disadvantaged inhabitants. That makes schooling
> very expensive.
If they don't like it they can move.
|
| | | | | | | | | |
Date: 22 Jan 2007 20:24:30
From: William A. T. Clark
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
In article <lMKdnbHqUoROzSjYnZ2dnUVZ_u_inZ2d@comcast.com >,
Bert Robbins <screw@you.com > wrote:
> William A. T. Clark wrote:
> > In article <98aar29t7rvbbck8chd231i0993jn1dgeo@4ax.com>,
> > Jack Hollis <xsleeper@aol.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On 22 Jan 2007 09:52:09 -0800, "John B." <johnb505@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> What differentiates DC public schools from those in other cities is
> >>> that DC is not part of a state and therefore does not share in a
> >>> state's tax base. Your assertion that DC public schools have more than
> >>> adequate funding is laughable. Come visit us here in the DC area
> >>> sometime and take a look at some of the DC high schools. They most
> >>> certainly do not have adequate funding or anything close to it.
> >> The DC schools have better funding than all but two US states.
> >
> > Yes, but DC is not a state - it is a small district with an abnormally
> > large number of socially disadvantaged inhabitants. That makes schooling
> > very expensive.
>
> If they don't like it they can move.
Brilliant - where would you suggest to? Palm Springs, perhaps, or
perhaps they can drop in next to Larry in Rancho Mirage and play golf
with all those retied admirals. Maybe they can snuggle in next to k
O'Meara and Tiger in Isleworth.
This really does take the cake for idiotic reks.
William Clark
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 22 Jan 2007 21:02:04
From: Bert Robbins
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
William A. T. Clark wrote:
> In article <lMKdnbHqUoROzSjYnZ2dnUVZ_u_inZ2d@comcast.com>,
> Bert Robbins <screw@you.com> wrote:
>
>> William A. T. Clark wrote:
>>> In article <98aar29t7rvbbck8chd231i0993jn1dgeo@4ax.com>,
>>> Jack Hollis <xsleeper@aol.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 22 Jan 2007 09:52:09 -0800, "John B." <johnb505@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> What differentiates DC public schools from those in other cities is
>>>>> that DC is not part of a state and therefore does not share in a
>>>>> state's tax base. Your assertion that DC public schools have more than
>>>>> adequate funding is laughable. Come visit us here in the DC area
>>>>> sometime and take a look at some of the DC high schools. They most
>>>>> certainly do not have adequate funding or anything close to it.
>>>> The DC schools have better funding than all but two US states.
>>> Yes, but DC is not a state - it is a small district with an abnormally
>>> large number of socially disadvantaged inhabitants. That makes schooling
>>> very expensive.
>> If they don't like it they can move.
>
> Brilliant - where would you suggest to? Palm Springs, perhaps, or
> perhaps they can drop in next to Larry in Rancho Mirage and play golf
> with all those retied admirals. Maybe they can snuggle in next to k
> O'Meara and Tiger in Isleworth.
Montgomery County or Prince Georges county. They both border DC and
there is not fence, just walk down the street.. Look them up they are
very well off counties.
> This really does take the cake for idiotic reks.
You've never crossed a city, county or state border? It wasn't too hard
just took a little bit of effort on your part to get up off your ass and
do it.
|
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 22 Jan 2007 21:51:23
From: William A. T. Clark
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
In article <CY6dnfYA-5gB8SjYnZ2dnUVZ_ruknZ2d@comcast.com >,
Bert Robbins <screw@you.com > wrote:
> William A. T. Clark wrote:
> > In article <lMKdnbHqUoROzSjYnZ2dnUVZ_u_inZ2d@comcast.com>,
> > Bert Robbins <screw@you.com> wrote:
> >
> >> William A. T. Clark wrote:
> >>> In article <98aar29t7rvbbck8chd231i0993jn1dgeo@4ax.com>,
> >>> Jack Hollis <xsleeper@aol.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> On 22 Jan 2007 09:52:09 -0800, "John B." <johnb505@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> What differentiates DC public schools from those in other cities is
> >>>>> that DC is not part of a state and therefore does not share in a
> >>>>> state's tax base. Your assertion that DC public schools have more than
> >>>>> adequate funding is laughable. Come visit us here in the DC area
> >>>>> sometime and take a look at some of the DC high schools. They most
> >>>>> certainly do not have adequate funding or anything close to it.
> >>>> The DC schools have better funding than all but two US states.
> >>> Yes, but DC is not a state - it is a small district with an abnormally
> >>> large number of socially disadvantaged inhabitants. That makes schooling
> >>> very expensive.
> >> If they don't like it they can move.
> >
> > Brilliant - where would you suggest to? Palm Springs, perhaps, or
> > perhaps they can drop in next to Larry in Rancho Mirage and play golf
> > with all those retied admirals. Maybe they can snuggle in next to k
> > O'Meara and Tiger in Isleworth.
>
> Montgomery County or Prince Georges county. They both border DC and
> there is not fence, just walk down the street.. Look them up they are
> very well off counties.
>
> > This really does take the cake for idiotic reks.
>
> You've never crossed a city, county or state border? It wasn't too hard
> just took a little bit of effort on your part to get up off your ass and
> do it.
Oh, why not? Anyone can move into a $500,000 home - just get off your
a**. And I sure they would be made sooooooo welcome.
William Clark
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 22 Jan 2007 22:31:36
From: Bert Robbins
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
William A. T. Clark wrote:
> In article <CY6dnfYA-5gB8SjYnZ2dnUVZ_ruknZ2d@comcast.com>,
> Bert Robbins <screw@you.com> wrote:
>
>> William A. T. Clark wrote:
>>> In article <lMKdnbHqUoROzSjYnZ2dnUVZ_u_inZ2d@comcast.com>,
>>> Bert Robbins <screw@you.com> wrote:
>>>> If they don't like it they can move.
>>> Brilliant - where would you suggest to? Palm Springs, perhaps, or
>>> perhaps they can drop in next to Larry in Rancho Mirage and play golf
>>> with all those retied admirals. Maybe they can snuggle in next to k
>>> O'Meara and Tiger in Isleworth.
>> Montgomery County or Prince Georges county. They both border DC and
>> there is not fence, just walk down the street.. Look them up they are
>> very well off counties.
>>
>>> This really does take the cake for idiotic reks.
>> You've never crossed a city, county or state border? It wasn't too hard
>> just took a little bit of effort on your part to get up off your ass and
>> do it.
>
> Oh, why not? Anyone can move into a $500,000 home - just get off your
> a**. And I sure they would be made sooooooo welcome.
You don't live in the DC area do you? You haven't go the slightest clue
about its real estate environment.
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 23 Jan 2007 06:50:10
From: William A. T. Clark
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
In article <TZ6dnW5CVbAFHCjYnZ2dnUVZ_ubinZ2d@comcast.com >,
Bert Robbins <screw@you.com > wrote:
> William A. T. Clark wrote:
> > In article <CY6dnfYA-5gB8SjYnZ2dnUVZ_ruknZ2d@comcast.com>,
> > Bert Robbins <screw@you.com> wrote:
> >
> >> William A. T. Clark wrote:
> >>> In article <lMKdnbHqUoROzSjYnZ2dnUVZ_u_inZ2d@comcast.com>,
> >>> Bert Robbins <screw@you.com> wrote:
> >>>> If they don't like it they can move.
> >>> Brilliant - where would you suggest to? Palm Springs, perhaps, or
> >>> perhaps they can drop in next to Larry in Rancho Mirage and play golf
> >>> with all those retied admirals. Maybe they can snuggle in next to k
> >>> O'Meara and Tiger in Isleworth.
> >> Montgomery County or Prince Georges county. They both border DC and
> >> there is not fence, just walk down the street.. Look them up they are
> >> very well off counties.
> >>
> >>> This really does take the cake for idiotic reks.
> >> You've never crossed a city, county or state border? It wasn't too hard
> >> just took a little bit of effort on your part to get up off your ass and
> >> do it.
> >
> > Oh, why not? Anyone can move into a $500,000 home - just get off your
> > a**. And I sure they would be made sooooooo welcome.
>
> You don't live in the DC area do you? You haven't go the slightest clue
> about its real estate environment.
I have spent two years there - I have a very clear picture of DC area
real estate, thank you.
William Clark
|
| | | | | |
Date: 20 Jan 2007 15:29:20
From: Robert Hamilton
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
"William A. T. Clark" wrote:
> In article <51cmmeF1jqh21U1@mid.individual.net>,
> "MnMikew" <mnmiikkew@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > "William A. T. Clark" <clark.31@nospamosu.edu> wrote in message
> > news:clark.31-5D5D0B.14054019012007@charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu...
> > > In article <51c8khF1jgoqtU1@mid.individual.net>,
> > > "MnMikew" <mnmiikkew@aol.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >> "William A. T. Clark" <clark.31@osu.edu> wrote in message
> > >> news:clark.31-62EF99.19145518012007@charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu...
> > >> > In article <45B00750.98C72206@att.net>, Robert Hamilton <DBID@att.net>
> > >> > wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> >> 38% Bush; 33% Pelosi.
> > >> >
> > >> > Nice try, but Dubya is President, and Pelosi is the obscure Leader of
> > >> > the House - apples and oranges. Most people, outside of you rabid smear
> > >> > mongers, have barely heard of her.
> > >> >
> > >> OBSCURE?????????? Now that's funny.
> > >
> > > OK, without going to Google or otherwise looking it up, name the last
> > > ten Presidents and the last ten Leaders of the House.
> > >
> > > Now do you understand?
> > >
> > You either don't read newspapers or watch TV.
>
> I do, but the majority of our fellow countrymen do not (at least the
> news portions). You know, the same people that cannot find Canada on a
> map.
>
> William Clark
I think that it is unfair to chide the Irish for generally not being able to find
Canada on a map. Most Canadians couldn't find Ireland either.
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 20 Jan 2007 12:02:17
From: William A. T. Clark
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
In article <45B2331C.79473BAC@att.net >, Robert Hamilton <DBID@att.net>
wrote:
> "William A. T. Clark" wrote:
>
> > In article <51cmmeF1jqh21U1@mid.individual.net>,
> > "MnMikew" <mnmiikkew@aol.com> wrote:
> >
> > > "William A. T. Clark" <clark.31@nospamosu.edu> wrote in message
> > > news:clark.31-5D5D0B.14054019012007@charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu...
> > > > In article <51c8khF1jgoqtU1@mid.individual.net>,
> > > > "MnMikew" <mnmiikkew@aol.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> "William A. T. Clark" <clark.31@osu.edu> wrote in message
> > > >> news:clark.31-62EF99.19145518012007@charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu...
> > > >> > In article <45B00750.98C72206@att.net>, Robert Hamilton
> > > >> > <DBID@att.net>
> > > >> > wrote:
> > > >> >
> > > >> >> 38% Bush; 33% Pelosi.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Nice try, but Dubya is President, and Pelosi is the obscure Leader
> > > >> > of
> > > >> > the House - apples and oranges. Most people, outside of you rabid
> > > >> > smear
> > > >> > mongers, have barely heard of her.
> > > >> >
> > > >> OBSCURE?????????? Now that's funny.
> > > >
> > > > OK, without going to Google or otherwise looking it up, name the last
> > > > ten Presidents and the last ten Leaders of the House.
> > > >
> > > > Now do you understand?
> > > >
> > > You either don't read newspapers or watch TV.
> >
> > I do, but the majority of our fellow countrymen do not (at least the
> > news portions). You know, the same people that cannot find Canada on a
> > map.
> >
> > William Clark
>
> I think that it is unfair to chide the Irish for generally not being able to
> find
> Canada on a map. Most Canadians couldn't find Ireland either.
Oh, Canadians could - it's the Americans that couldn't. You see, the
Canadians have an educational system modeled after the British one.
William Clark
|
| | | | | | | |
Date: 23 Jan 2007 10:52:18
From: John B.
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
Jack Hollis wrote:
> On 22 Jan 2007 19:24:09 -0800, "John B." <johnb505@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> I fell sorry for the kids stuck in inner city schools with no other
> >> choice.
> >
> >If there's a private school in DC that charges only $9k in tuition, I
> >sure haven't heard about it. They all run in the $25k range.
>
>
> John, why do you do this to yourself. Where exactly did you get this
> $25K figure? Did you actually take the time to look up the tuition at
> DC area private schools or did you just pull it out of the air?
Actually, Jack, it's the former. My daughter attends Potomac School in
McLean Va., a DC suburb. Tuition: $25,400. My niece attends Sidwell
Friend School in Washington DC. Tuition: $26,000. I am quite familiar
with the tuition level at the various private schools in this area.
They are all in that range, except the Catholic schools, which run
about $15K.
|
| | | | | | | | |
Date: 25 Jan 2007 14:27:42
From: Jack Hollis
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
On 23 Jan 2007 10:52:18 -0800, "John B." <johnb505@gmail.com > wrote:
>Actually, Jack, it's the former. My daughter attends Potomac School in
>McLean Va., a DC suburb. Tuition: $25,400. My niece attends Sidwell
>Friend School in Washington DC. Tuition: $26,000. I am quite familiar
>with the tuition level at the various private schools in this area.
>They are all in that range, except the Catholic schools, which run
>about $15K.
John, above is exactly what you said. And, as we all know, there are
close to 100 Catholic K-8 Schools in DC, or the DC area, that are
under $10K. In fact about 3/4 of those Catholic Schools are under $5K.
In addition there are 7 Catholic High Schools that have tuition at
$10.5K or below.
There is also an existing "scholarship" program in DC and there are 50
private schools that are participating.
So there's nothing to stop a voucher program. I have no idea why
anyone would want to limit the choices of inner city kids. They often
attend schools that are total failures and this would give them a
chance to improve their education.
|
| | | | | | | | | |
Date: 26 Jan 2007 09:03:42
From: William A. T. Clark
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
In article <bh0ir25c2hfv19l8io5k2bbaikh8739o5g@4ax.com >,
Jack Hollis <xsleeper@aol.com > wrote:
> On 23 Jan 2007 10:52:18 -0800, "John B." <johnb505@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >Actually, Jack, it's the former. My daughter attends Potomac School in
> >McLean Va., a DC suburb. Tuition: $25,400. My niece attends Sidwell
> >Friend School in Washington DC. Tuition: $26,000. I am quite familiar
> >with the tuition level at the various private schools in this area.
> >They are all in that range, except the Catholic schools, which run
> >about $15K.
>
>
> John, above is exactly what you said. And, as we all know, there are
> close to 100 Catholic K-8 Schools in DC, or the DC area, that are
> under $10K. In fact about 3/4 of those Catholic Schools are under $5K.
>
> In addition there are 7 Catholic High Schools that have tuition at
> $10.5K or below.
>
> There is also an existing "scholarship" program in DC and there are 50
> private schools that are participating.
>
> So there's nothing to stop a voucher program. I have no idea why
> anyone would want to limit the choices of inner city kids. They often
> attend schools that are total failures and this would give them a
> chance to improve their education.
Because it will not be available for all kids. There is no way that
these parochial schools could (or would want to) accommodate 14,000 DCPS
students in grades 9-12, so the majority will be left behind to rot in
an increasingly poor and run down system. You may think that is
acceptable - I think it is a recipe for social disaster.
William Clark
PS: You still have not addressed the issue of the tuition at schools in
the 9-12 grades, very few of which are close to your $10,000 figure. How
will you make space for 14,000 DCPS students?
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 26 Jan 2007 13:03:50
From: Jack Hollis
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
On Fri, 26 Jan 2007 09:03:42 -0500, "William A. T. Clark"
<clark.31@nospamosu.edu > wrote:
>PS: You still have not addressed the issue of the tuition at schools in
>the 9-12 grades, very few of which are close to your $10,000 figure. How
>will you make space for 14,000 DCPS students?
First of all, these programs don't empty out the entire population of
the public schools. They tend to be used by only the parents in the
worst schools. There are some DC schools that are better than others.
Parents that are satisfied with their public schools wont use
vouchers.
Even if the program can't be maintained from 9-12 (which is unlikely)
the benefits from K-8 are worth it, even if the kids have to go back
to a public high school. To propose that you can't have a program
that improves education from K-8 because you can't continue it from
9-12 (which is not the case) is absurd.
BTW, Bill here's an evaluation of the experience with vouchers in
Florida. They has an interesting approach. They set up a system
where some schools were threatend with a voucher program if the
contuinually failed. Thus the schools were threatend with
competition.
Florida Public School Achievement
Jay P. Greene, Ph.D.
Senior Fellow, Manhattan Institute for Policy Research
cus A. Winters
Research Associate, Manhattan Institute for Policy Research
*********************************************
Executive Sumy
Florida’s A+ Program may be the most controversial education reform
program in the country, because it combines two extremely contentious
education reforms: vouchers and high-stakes testing. Florida’s
high-stakes test, the Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test (FCAT), is
used to grade schools on a scale from A to F. If a school receives two
F grades in any four-year period, it is considered to be chronically
failing and its students become eligible to receive vouchers they can
use to attend other public or private schools.
The theory behind the A+ Program is that chronically failing public
schools will have an incentive to improve if they must compete with
other schools for students and the funding they generate. This study
identifies five categories of low-performing schools based on the
degree of threat each school faces from voucher competition: Voucher
Eligible Schools (where students are already receiving vouchers),
Voucher Threatened Schools (where one more F will make vouchers
available), Formerly Threatened Schools (which used to be Voucher
Threatened but no longer are), and two categories of similarly
low-performing schools not facing any immediate threat of voucher
competition. It then examines test score improvements on the FCAT and
on the Stanford-9, a nationally respected standardized test, to see
whether low-performing schools facing a greater degree of threat from
voucher competition made better improvements than low-performing
schools facing a lesser degree of threat from vouchers.
The results demonstrate the following:
* Florida’s low-performing schools are improving in direct
proportion to the challenge they face from voucher competition. These
improvements are real, not the result of test gaming, demographic
shifts, or the statistical phenomenon of “regression to the mean.”
* Schools already facing competition from vouchers showed the
greatest improvements of all five categories of low-performing
schools, improving by 9.3 scale score points on the FCAT math test,
10.1 points on the FCAT reading test, and 5.1 percentile points on the
Stanford-9 math test relative to Florida public schools that were not
in any low-performing category.
* Schools threatened with the prospect of vouchers showed the
second greatest improvements, making relative gains of 6.7 scale
points on the FCAT math test, 8.2 points on the FCAT reading test, and
3.0 percentile points on the Stanford-9 math test.
* Low-performing schools that have never received any grade other
than a D, or that have received at least one D since FCAT grading
began, produced small and indistinguishable gains, respectively,
relative to Florida public schools that were not low-performing. While
these schools were similar to schools facing voucher competition, they
failed to make similar gains in the absence of competitive incentives.
* Some researchers theorize that failing schools improve because
of the stigma of a failing grade rather than the threat of voucher
competition. The results of this study contradict this thesis. Schools
that received one F in 1998-99 but none since are no longer exposed to
the potential of voucher competition. These schools actually lost
ground relative to non-low-performing Florida public schools,
supporting the conclusion that once the threat of vouchers goes away,
so does the incentive for failing schools to improve.
|
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 26 Jan 2007 14:31:41
From: William A. T. Clark
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
In article <avfkr2t4g7jb2n83m2vcrjcgg6nkb3751r@4ax.com >,
Jack Hollis <xsleeper@aol.com > wrote:
> On Fri, 26 Jan 2007 09:03:42 -0500, "William A. T. Clark"
> <clark.31@nospamosu.edu> wrote:
>
> >PS: You still have not addressed the issue of the tuition at schools in
> >the 9-12 grades, very few of which are close to your $10,000 figure. How
> >will you make space for 14,000 DCPS students?
>
> First of all, these programs don't empty out the entire population of
> the public schools. They tend to be used by only the parents in the
> worst schools. There are some DC schools that are better than others.
> Parents that are satisfied with their public schools wont use
> vouchers.
So who chooses who will get "emptied out", when the demand exceeds the
availability of places? Hmmmm.
>
> Even if the program can't be maintained from 9-12 (which is unlikely)
> the benefits from K-8 are worth it, even if the kids have to go back
> to a public high school. To propose that you can't have a program
> that improves education from K-8 because you can't continue it from
> 9-12 (which is not the case) is absurd.
Sorry, but 9-12 is where it's at. That is college prep. time, ACTs,
SATs, and the rest. You drop these kids after middle school, then they
are no better off. But at least you now admit it can't be done from
grades 9 - 12, so that's progress.
>
>
> BTW, Bill here's an evaluation of the experience with vouchers in
> Florida. They has an interesting approach. They set up a system
> where some schools were threatend with a voucher program if the
> contuinually failed. Thus the schools were threatend with
> competition.
>
> Florida Public School Achievement
>
> Jay P. Greene, Ph.D.
> Senior Fellow, Manhattan Institute for Policy Research
> cus A. Winters
> Research Associate, Manhattan Institute for Policy Research
>
> *********************************************
>
> Executive Sumy
>
> Florida’s A+ Program may be the most controversial education reform
> program in the country, because it combines two extremely contentious
> education reforms: vouchers and high-stakes testing. Florida’s
> high-stakes test, the Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test (FCAT), is
> used to grade schools on a scale from A to F. If a school receives two
> F grades in any four-year period, it is considered to be chronically
> failing and its students become eligible to receive vouchers they can
> use to attend other public or private schools.
>
> The theory behind the A+ Program is that chronically failing public
> schools will have an incentive to improve if they must compete with
> other schools for students and the funding they generate. This study
> identifies five categories of low-performing schools based on the
> degree of threat each school faces from voucher competition: Voucher
> Eligible Schools (where students are already receiving vouchers),
> Voucher Threatened Schools (where one more F will make vouchers
> available), Formerly Threatened Schools (which used to be Voucher
> Threatened but no longer are), and two categories of similarly
> low-performing schools not facing any immediate threat of voucher
> competition. It then examines test score improvements on the FCAT and
> on the Stanford-9, a nationally respected standardized test, to see
> whether low-performing schools facing a greater degree of threat from
> voucher competition made better improvements than low-performing
> schools facing a lesser degree of threat from vouchers.
>
> The results demonstrate the following:
>
> * Florida’s low-performing schools are improving in direct
> proportion to the challenge they face from voucher competition. These
> improvements are real, not the result of test gaming, demographic
> shifts, or the statistical phenomenon of “regression to the mean.”
> * Schools already facing competition from vouchers showed the
> greatest improvements of all five categories of low-performing
> schools, improving by 9.3 scale score points on the FCAT math test,
> 10.1 points on the FCAT reading test, and 5.1 percentile points on the
> Stanford-9 math test relative to Florida public schools that were not
> in any low-performing category.
> * Schools threatened with the prospect of vouchers showed the
> second greatest improvements, making relative gains of 6.7 scale
> points on the FCAT math test, 8.2 points on the FCAT reading test, and
> 3.0 percentile points on the Stanford-9 math test.
> * Low-performing schools that have never received any grade other
> than a D, or that have received at least one D since FCAT grading
> began, produced small and indistinguishable gains, respectively,
> relative to Florida public schools that were not low-performing. While
> these schools were similar to schools facing voucher competition, they
> failed to make similar gains in the absence of competitive incentives.
> * Some researchers theorize that failing schools improve because
> of the stigma of a failing grade rather than the threat of voucher
> competition. The results of this study contradict this thesis. Schools
> that received one F in 1998-99 but none since are no longer exposed to
> the potential of voucher competition. These schools actually lost
> ground relative to non-low-performing Florida public schools,
> supporting the conclusion that once the threat of vouchers goes away,
> so does the incentive for failing schools to improve.
Well, let's establish from the off that this is by a very conservative
think tank, with a definite axe to grind. An alternative analysis, which
compares Florida's experience with that in North Carolina, casts serious
doubt on the effectiveness of this program, and the specific conclusions
that Greene and Winters come to.
http://www.epinet.org/studies/vouchers-full.pdf
Oh, yes, and they seem to have actual data in their report, too.
William Clark
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 26 Jan 2007 16:06:40
From: Jack Hollis
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
On Fri, 26 Jan 2007 14:31:41 -0500, "William A. T. Clark"
<clark.31@nospamosu.edu > wrote:
>Well, let's establish from the off that this is by a very conservative
>think tank, with a definite axe to grind. An alternative analysis, which
>compares Florida's experience with that in North Carolina, casts serious
>doubt on the effectiveness of this program, and the specific conclusions
>that Greene and Winters come to.
>
>http://www.epinet.org/studies/vouchers-full.pdf
>
>Oh, yes, and they seem to have actual data in their report, too.
>
>William Clark
Sorry Bill, this falls short of the k.
Excerpts from the executive sumy
" Although vouchers lack broad public support, parents in low-income
inner cities are more likely to favor alternatives to traditional
public education, and this interest has stimulated small pilot
programs in a few urban school districts."
So he admits that the parents of inner city kids like the programs.
You have to ask yourself, why would they like it if it didn't work.
Who better to evaluate a program than the parent's of the kids in the
program?
"Such programs have the potential to inform public debate about
vouchers’ strengths and weaknesses, but they have been evaluated
mainly by researchers who openly and actively support vouchers. Yet
the media tend to report results from these analyses without necessary
caveats and alternative views."
The evaluation of the Cleveland voucher system was done by the Kennedy
School of Government at Harvard and is full of liberals.
"Do school vouchers improve student performance? A review of the
evidence finds that vouchers’ effects on student achievement are
almost certainly smaller than claimed by pro-voucher researchers."
However, he does admit that they do improve student performance.
"Identifying the effects of programs is a challenging task, especially
for vouchers. As the evidence slowly comes in, a balanced analysis
suggests that voucher effects may exist, but they are significantly
smaller than voucher proponents would have the public and the media
believe."
Again, the author does not deny that beneficial effects exist.
An excellent resource Bill. You proven my point. I'll have to
bookk the study. This is especially good because the author is
clearly not in favor of vouchers yet had the intellectual honesty to
admit that they have benefits. He certainly jumped through a lot of
hoops to try to provide alternative explanations and minimize the
benefits, but at least he admitted that there are benefits.
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 26 Jan 2007 20:45:22
From: William A. T. Clark
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
In article <ngqkr297mfk9iq2gvjaonl458069pjvdjv@4ax.com >,
Jack Hollis <xsleeper@aol.com > wrote:
> On Fri, 26 Jan 2007 14:31:41 -0500, "William A. T. Clark"
> <clark.31@nospamosu.edu> wrote:
>
> >Well, let's establish from the off that this is by a very conservative
> >think tank, with a definite axe to grind. An alternative analysis, which
> >compares Florida's experience with that in North Carolina, casts serious
> >doubt on the effectiveness of this program, and the specific conclusions
> >that Greene and Winters come to.
> >
> >http://www.epinet.org/studies/vouchers-full.pdf
> >
> >Oh, yes, and they seem to have actual data in their report, too.
> >
> >William Clark
>
> Sorry Bill, this falls short of the k.
>
> Excerpts from the executive sumy
>
> " Although vouchers lack broad public support, parents in low-income
> inner cities are more likely to favor alternatives to traditional
> public education, and this interest has stimulated small pilot
> programs in a few urban school districts."
>
> So he admits that the parents of inner city kids like the programs.
> You have to ask yourself, why would they like it if it didn't work.
> Who better to evaluate a program than the parent's of the kids in the
> program?
Of course they do - don't you think that the average inner city parents,
getting the hard sell on vouchers from your buddies, think that this is
a quick way out of their situation? Precisely the same view as they take
of athletic scholarships.
>
>
> "Such programs have the potential to inform public debate about
> vouchers’ strengths and weaknesses, but they have been evaluated
> mainly by researchers who openly and actively support vouchers. Yet
> the media tend to report results from these analyses without necessary
> caveats and alternative views."
My point exactly. No data, no comparable standardized tests, and a boat
load of exploiters scamming money for nothing (see Alex's Academics for
Excellence - Columbus has had several such schools fold and leave
parents and kids high and dry).
>
> The evaluation of the Cleveland voucher system was done by the Kennedy
> School of Government at Harvard and is full of liberals.
Good, then it should be a little more honest and reliable than the one
the Manhattan group produced.
>
>
> "Do school vouchers improve student performance? A review of the
> evidence finds that vouchers’ effects on student achievement are
> almost certainly smaller than claimed by pro-voucher researchers."
Thank you.
>
> However, he does admit that they do improve student performance.
But "almost certainly less than claimed by pro-voucher researchers".
>
>
> "Identifying the effects of programs is a challenging task, especially
> for vouchers. As the evidence slowly comes in, a balanced analysis
> suggests that voucher effects may exist, but they are significantly
> smaller than voucher proponents would have the public and the media
> believe."
>
> Again, the author does not deny that beneficial effects exist.
No, but he doesn't find any quantitative evidence for them, either.
>
>
> An excellent resource Bill. You proven my point. I'll have to
> bookk the study. This is especially good because the author is
> clearly not in favor of vouchers yet had the intellectual honesty to
> admit that they have benefits. He certainly jumped through a lot of
> hoops to try to provide alternative explanations and minimize the
> benefits, but at least he admitted that there are benefits.
Of course there are benefits for certain kids in certain schools - no
different than if they moved to an affluent suburban neighborhood and
went to the public schools there (actually, probably significantly
less). Is this enough to make it sensible to run the rest of the city
schools into the ground? None of these reports produce any evidence that
shows any benefit to the inner city schools form voucher kids leaving,
and me strong sense is that we will simlpy build up a bigger stack of
social problems from what is left behind.
William Clark
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 26 Jan 2007 20:54:53
From: Jack Hollis
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
On Fri, 26 Jan 2007 20:45:22 -0500, "William A. T. Clark"
<clark.31@osu.edu > wrote:
>>
>> However, he does admit that they do improve student performance.
>
>But "almost certainly less than claimed by pro-voucher researchers".
The author tries to minimize the benefits by providing possible
alternative explanations. However, what makes his explanations any
more valid that the original explanations?
In any case, the voucher programs are continuing and they will
continue to grow in popularity.
You've provided me with nothing other than the Stanford professors
study, which admits that the programs have benefits and your opinions.
Personally, I'll take the Harvard researchers' recommendation over
yours any day. These programs should be continued and expanded.
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 26 Jan 2007 21:45:02
From: William A. T. Clark
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
In article <jrblr2htgj5jqnrc5a89ub5a8d9a3fh4co@4ax.com >,
Jack Hollis <xsleeper@aol.com > wrote:
> On Fri, 26 Jan 2007 20:45:22 -0500, "William A. T. Clark"
> <clark.31@osu.edu> wrote:
>
> >>
> >> However, he does admit that they do improve student performance.
> >
> >But "almost certainly less than claimed by pro-voucher researchers".
>
> The author tries to minimize the benefits by providing possible
> alternative explanations. However, what makes his explanations any
> more valid that the original explanations?
>
> In any case, the voucher programs are continuing and they will
> continue to grow in popularity.
>
> You've provided me with nothing other than the Stanford professors
> study, which admits that the programs have benefits and your opinions.
> Personally, I'll take the Harvard researchers' recommendation over
> yours any day. These programs should be continued and expanded.
Well the Stanford study and my opinions are a lot further along towards
quantitative data than anything you have produced - Harvard included. So
please take your opinion and wallow in it. It seems to me that trying to
continue this discussion on the basis of verifiable information, as
opposed to that informed by political bias, is a waste of time.
William Clark
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 26 Jan 2007 22:42:35
From: Jack Hollis
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
On Fri, 26 Jan 2007 21:45:02 -0500, "William A. T. Clark"
<clark.31@osu.edu > wrote:
>Well the Stanford study and my opinions are a lot further along towards
>quantitative data than anything you have produced - Harvard included. So
>please take your opinion and wallow in it. It seems to me that trying to
>continue this discussion on the basis of verifiable information, as
>opposed to that informed by political bias, is a waste of time.
The Stanford study provided no new data and admitted that the programs
have some benefit, especially to AA students.
I would suggest the author go out and actually do some work in the
schools rather that sit around and try to minimize the effects of
other researchers because of his political agenda.
The study is the least impressive of any I've seen. I'll go with the
original research, which is always a sound approach.
BTW, no matter what we think, vouchers are here to stay and they will
continue to grow in popularity.
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 26 Jan 2007 15:48:43
From: Jack Hollis
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
On Fri, 26 Jan 2007 14:31:41 -0500, "William A. T. Clark"
<clark.31@nospamosu.edu > wrote:
>Sorry, but 9-12 is where it's at. That is college prep. time, ACTs,
>SATs, and the rest. You drop these kids after middle school, then they
>are no better off. But at least you now admit it can't be done from
>grades 9 - 12, so that's progress.
I never said any such thing. I have no idea where you got that idea.
I was simply pointing out that it's absurd not to use a program that
could improve the education of kids up until 8th grade because they
had to go back to public high schools.
I think you should do some research on the DC program which includes
high school kids. You're idea that these program can't work from 9-12
is not supported.
"About 1,700 low-income children in Washington, D.C. are now attending
independent schools with help from the first and (so far) only
federally-funded school voucher program. The Opportunity Scholarship
Program (OSP) is now in its second school year, and skeptics and
supporters are watching closely.
The program provides vouchers of up to $7,500 a year for tuition,
transportation, and related expenses to eligible students, who must be
from families with incomes no greater than 185 percent of the federal
poverty level. That works out to $28,990 for a family of three.
Passage of the voucher legislation in January of 2004 was a major
victory for proponents of vouchers and for broader school-choice
efforts involving charters, vouchers, and tuition tax credits.
Congress authorized $12 million a year for the program for five years.
Hear from Voucher Opponents
This year, there are 62 schools participating, and they cover a lot of
territory, from the tiny Academia de la Recta Porta, with 45 students
in grades K through 12, to the 900-student all-boys Gonzaga High
School, to elite independent schools such as former first daughter
Chelsea Clinton's alma mater, Sidwell Friends."
It's interesting to see that some elite schools, with tuition that is
well above the voucher, are willing to take these kids in. I suppose
that they also see the benefit of having inner city kids in their
schools to increase diversity.
I can't imagine how anyone could be against these programs. However,
people who are so blinded by ideology will fail to see what they don't
want to see.
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 26 Jan 2007 15:39:51
From: Jack Hollis
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
On Fri, 26 Jan 2007 14:31:41 -0500, "William A. T. Clark"
<clark.31@nospamosu.edu > wrote:
>So who chooses who will get "emptied out", when the demand exceeds the
>availability of places? Hmmmm.
That has never been a problem and if it was, I'd say that only the
most financially disadvantage families should get the vouchers.
It's a bogus argument,
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 26 Jan 2007 12:52:28
From: Jack Hollis
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
On Fri, 26 Jan 2007 09:03:42 -0500, "William A. T. Clark"
<clark.31@nospamosu.edu > wrote:
>Because it will not be available for all kids.
Of course not. The voucher program would only be available to poor
families who can't afford to send their kids to private schools, or
poor families who sacrafice everything to send their kids to private
schools.
>There is no way that
>these parochial schools could (or would want to) accommodate 14,000 DCPS
>students in grades 9-12, so the majority will be left behind to rot in
>an increasingly poor and run down system. You may think that is
>acceptable - I think it is a recipe for social disaster.
>
>William Clark
Here's an evaluation from the Cleveland Public School system after the
second year of the voucher program conducted by the John F. Kennedy
School of Government and the Center for American Political Studies
Department of Government Harvard University. As you will see your
concerns are unfounded.
I'll cut to the chase, here's the last paragraph,
"Based on the information contained in this report, the authors
recommend that the Cleveland Scholarship Program should be continued
and expanded by the State of Ohio."
In addition, just in case you don't read the whole report, here's a
description of who actually took advantage of the program. Basically,
poorer but ster parents.
"Voucher recipients were more likely to be African American. They also
were economically more disadvantaged than the average public-school
family; they had lower incomes, were more likely to be single parent
families, and less likely to have their children in a program for
gifted students. In other respects, however, voucher recipients were
more advantaged than most families in Cleveland public schools.
Mothers of voucher recipients had more education, attended religious
services more frequently, and were less likely to have a child in
a special education program."
"AN EVALUATION
OF THE CLEVELAND VOUCHER PROGRAM
AFTER TWO YEARS
by the
Program on Education Policy and Governance jointly sponsored by the
Taubman Center on State and Local Government
John F. Kennedy School of Government and the
Center for American Political Studies Department of Government
Harvard University
prepared by
Paul E. Peterson, Director
Program on Education Policy and Governance, Harvard University
William G. Howell, Stanford University
and
Jay P. Greene, University of Texas, Austin
June 1999
AN EVALUATION OF THE CLEVELAND
VOUCHER PROGRAM AFTER TWO YEARS
(Executive Sumy)
In 1996 the Cleveland Scholarship Program (CSP) provided scholarships
to 1,996 students in grades kindergarten through grade three who came
from low-income families. Students could use these scholarships at any
participating Cleveland private school, secular or religious. The
program continued into the 1996-97 and 1997-98 school years.
Approximately 3,000 students participated in the
program in its second year and 3,674 students in the third year. This
evaluation reports the results from a survey undertaken during the
summer and fall of 1998. This survey collected information from random
samples of two groups:
1. parents of children in grades 1 to 4 who previously had been
attending a public school but switched to a private school with a CSP
scholarship;
2. parents of children who had attended public schools in grades 1-4
during the 1997-98 school year.
The evaluation also reports test-score results for students attending
the Hope schools, two private schools established in response to the
creation of CSP.
The main findings from the evaluation are as follows:
Parents of voucher recipients were more satisfied with many aspects of
their school than were parents of students in Cleveland public
schools. Nearly half of the parents in choice schools reported being
"very satisfied" with the academic program of their child’s school, as
compared to less than 30 percent of public-school parents. Half of the
scholarship parents were "very satisfied" with school safety, as
compared to just over 30 percent of public-school parents. With
respect to school discipline, about half of the scholarship parents
were very satisfied, versus only a quarter of public-school parents.
The differences in satisfaction rates were also large when parents
were asked about the teachers’ skills, the teaching of
moral values, and class size.
Test score results in mathematics and reading show substantial gains
for CSP students attending the two Hope schools, which were
established in response to the creation of CSP.
Between the fall of 1996 and the spring of 1998, these students, on
average, gained relative to the national norm 7 percentile points on
the reading test and 15 percentile points in math.
The bulk of these improvements occurred during the program’s first
year although no incremental gains were observed in year two, initial
gains were maintained.
Parents of voucher recipients report lower levels of disruption in
their child’s school. For example, only 12 percent of the parents of
voucher recipients report fighting as a problem at their child’s
school, whereas 27 percent of public-school parents say this is a
problem. Racial conflict is said to be a problem by 10 percent of the
public-school parents but only 5 percent of the voucher parents.
Similarly, 13 percent of public-school parents, but just 3 percent of
voucher parents, claimed that vandalism was a problem at their child’s
school.
Public-school parents report just as high levels of involvement in
school activities and the education of their children at home as do
the parents of scholarship recipients.
School mobility rates among voucher recipients and students in
Cleveland public schools were statistically indistinguishable from one
another. Ninety-six per cent of the parents of public-school students,
and 92 percent of parents of voucher recipients, reported that their
children had remained in the same school throughout the 1997-98 school
year. Seventy- nine percent of the scholarship parents and 77 percent
of the public-school parents said their children would attend the same
school next year.
Voucher recipients were more likely to be African American. They also
were economically more disadvantaged than the average public-school
family; they had lower incomes, were more likely to be single parent
families, and less likely to have their children in a program for
gifted students. In other respects, however, voucher recipients were
more advantaged than most families in Cleveland public schools.
Mothers of voucher recipients had more education, attended religious
services more frequently, and were less likely to have a child in
a special education program.
CSP is the first program in the country to offer state-funded
scholarships that can be used at both secular and religious private
schools. CSP scholarships covered up to 90 percent of a school's
tuition, or a maximum of $2,250, the balance coming from the child's
family or another private source. The maximum amount provided about a
third the per pupil cost of Cleveland public schools, which in
1997 was reported to be $6,507.
Based on the information contained in this report, the authors
recommend that the Cleveland
Scholarship Program should be continued and expanded by the State of
Ohio."
|
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 26 Jan 2007 14:33:39
From: William A. T. Clark
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
In article <pmekr2lre98mioumvasjpdr06f1o72lf45@4ax.com >,
Jack Hollis <xsleeper@aol.com > wrote:
> On Fri, 26 Jan 2007 09:03:42 -0500, "William A. T. Clark"
> <clark.31@nospamosu.edu> wrote:
>
> >Because it will not be available for all kids.
>
> Of course not. The voucher program would only be available to poor
> families who can't afford to send their kids to private schools, or
> poor families who sacrafice everything to send their kids to private
> schools.
>
>
> >There is no way that
> >these parochial schools could (or would want to) accommodate 14,000 DCPS
> >students in grades 9-12, so the majority will be left behind to rot in
> >an increasingly poor and run down system. You may think that is
> >acceptable - I think it is a recipe for social disaster.
> >
> >William Clark
>
> Here's an evaluation from the Cleveland Public School system after the
> second year of the voucher program conducted by the John F. Kennedy
> School of Government and the Center for American Political Studies
> Department of Government Harvard University. As you will see your
> concerns are unfounded.
>
> I'll cut to the chase, here's the last paragraph,
>
> "Based on the information contained in this report, the authors
> recommend that the Cleveland Scholarship Program should be continued
> and expanded by the State of Ohio."
>
>
> In addition, just in case you don't read the whole report, here's a
> description of who actually took advantage of the program. Basically,
> poorer but ster parents.
>
> "Voucher recipients were more likely to be African American. They also
> were economically more disadvantaged than the average public-school
> family; they had lower incomes, were more likely to be single parent
> families, and less likely to have their children in a program for
> gifted students. In other respects, however, voucher recipients were
> more advantaged than most families in Cleveland public schools.
> Mothers of voucher recipients had more education, attended religious
> services more frequently, and were less likely to have a child in
> a special education program."
>
> "AN EVALUATION
> OF THE CLEVELAND VOUCHER PROGRAM
> AFTER TWO YEARS
> by the
>
> Program on Education Policy and Governance jointly sponsored by the
>
> Taubman Center on State and Local Government
> John F. Kennedy School of Government and the
> Center for American Political Studies Department of Government
> Harvard University
>
> prepared by
>
> Paul E. Peterson, Director
> Program on Education Policy and Governance, Harvard University
> William G. Howell, Stanford University
> and
> Jay P. Greene, University of Texas, Austin
>
> June 1999
>
> AN EVALUATION OF THE CLEVELAND
> VOUCHER PROGRAM AFTER TWO YEARS
> (Executive Sumy)
>
> In 1996 the Cleveland Scholarship Program (CSP) provided scholarships
> to 1,996 students in grades kindergarten through grade three who came
> from low-income families. Students could use these scholarships at any
> participating Cleveland private school, secular or religious. The
> program continued into the 1996-97 and 1997-98 school years.
> Approximately 3,000 students participated in the
> program in its second year and 3,674 students in the third year. This
> evaluation reports the results from a survey undertaken during the
> summer and fall of 1998. This survey collected information from random
> samples of two groups:
>
> 1. parents of children in grades 1 to 4 who previously had been
> attending a public school but switched to a private school with a CSP
> scholarship;
> 2. parents of children who had attended public schools in grades 1-4
> during the 1997-98 school year.
>
> The evaluation also reports test-score results for students attending
> the Hope schools, two private schools established in response to the
> creation of CSP.
>
> The main findings from the evaluation are as follows:
>
> Parents of voucher recipients were more satisfied with many aspects of
> their school than were parents of students in Cleveland public
> schools. Nearly half of the parents in choice schools reported being
> "very satisfied" with the academic program of their child’s school, as
> compared to less than 30 percent of public-school parents. Half of the
> scholarship parents were "very satisfied" with school safety, as
> compared to just over 30 percent of public-school parents. With
> respect to school discipline, about half of the scholarship parents
> were very satisfied, versus only a quarter of public-school parents.
>
> The differences in satisfaction rates were also large when parents
> were asked about the teachers’ skills, the teaching of
> moral values, and class size.
>
> Test score results in mathematics and reading show substantial gains
> for CSP students attending the two Hope schools, which were
> established in response to the creation of CSP.
> Between the fall of 1996 and the spring of 1998, these students, on
> average, gained relative to the national norm 7 percentile points on
> the reading test and 15 percentile points in math.
> The bulk of these improvements occurred during the program’s first
> year although no incremental gains were observed in year two, initial
> gains were maintained.
>
> Parents of voucher recipients report lower levels of disruption in
> their child’s school. For example, only 12 percent of the parents of
> voucher recipients report fighting as a problem at their child’s
> school, whereas 27 percent of public-school parents say this is a
> problem. Racial conflict is said to be a problem by 10 percent of the
> public-school parents but only 5 percent of the voucher parents.
> Similarly, 13 percent of public-school parents, but just 3 percent of
> voucher parents, claimed that vandalism was a problem at their child’s
> school.
>
> Public-school parents report just as high levels of involvement in
> school activities and the education of their children at home as do
> the parents of scholarship recipients.
> School mobility rates among voucher recipients and students in
> Cleveland public schools were statistically indistinguishable from one
> another. Ninety-six per cent of the parents of public-school students,
> and 92 percent of parents of voucher recipients, reported that their
> children had remained in the same school throughout the 1997-98 school
> year. Seventy- nine percent of the scholarship parents and 77 percent
> of the public-school parents said their children would attend the same
> school next year.
>
> Voucher recipients were more likely to be African American. They also
> were economically more disadvantaged than the average public-school
> family; they had lower incomes, were more likely to be single parent
> families, and less likely to have their children in a program for
> gifted students. In other respects, however, voucher recipients were
> more advantaged than most families in Cleveland public schools.
> Mothers of voucher recipients had more education, attended religious
> services more frequently, and were less likely to have a child in
> a special education program.
>
> CSP is the first program in the country to offer state-funded
> scholarships that can be used at both secular and religious private
> schools. CSP scholarships covered up to 90 percent of a school's
> tuition, or a maximum of $2,250, the balance coming from the child's
> family or another private source. The maximum amount provided about a
> third the per pupil cost of Cleveland public schools, which in
> 1997 was reported to be $6,507.
>
> Based on the information contained in this report, the authors
> recommend that the Cleveland
> Scholarship Program should be continued and expanded by the State of
> Ohio."
See previous reference that addresses the Cleveland (and Milwaukee) dat
too.
William Clark
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 26 Jan 2007 16:11:41
From: Jack Hollis
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
On Fri, 26 Jan 2007 14:33:39 -0500, "William A. T. Clark"
<clark.31@nospamosu.edu > wrote:
>
>See previous reference that addresses the Cleveland (and Milwaukee) dat
>too.
>
>William Clark
Got it, thanks very much. You should have read it more carefully
because it clearly indicated that voucher programs are supported by
the parents in the inner city communities and that they have benefits.
I think you better find a less intellectually honest researcher.
Believe me, they're out there if you look hard enough. I'm not doing
your work for. However, I will say that I could do a lot better job
at defending your position than you are doing.
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 26 Jan 2007 20:36:14
From: William A. T. Clark
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
In article <nbrkr297d2v10sabtlr50ul0mnrgfl1qor@4ax.com >,
Jack Hollis <xsleeper@aol.com > wrote:
> On Fri, 26 Jan 2007 14:33:39 -0500, "William A. T. Clark"
> <clark.31@nospamosu.edu> wrote:
>
> >
> >See previous reference that addresses the Cleveland (and Milwaukee) dat
> >too.
> >
> >William Clark
>
>
> Got it, thanks very much. You should have read it more carefully
> because it clearly indicated that voucher programs are supported by
> the parents in the inner city communities and that they have benefits.
>
> I think you better find a less intellectually honest researcher.
> Believe me, they're out there if you look hard enough. I'm not doing
> your work for. However, I will say that I could do a lot better job
> at defending your position than you are doing.
Well, experience in this exchange indicates that you aren't likely to
find too many honest researchers for me. You see, there is something
about academic integrity that just won't let go.
While you might interpret this as saying that parents favor voucher
programs (why not - grass is always greener), there is no data to
indicate that they achieve anything significant academically, as Mssrs.
Greene and co would have you believe.
William Clark
|
| | | | | | | | | |
Date: 25 Jan 2007 14:42:29
From: sfb
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
Anyone is the teacher's unions and their lackeys in Congress and state
legislatures. A voucher program would soon empty public schools and then we
might fire idle teachers just like any private business might do.
Public education is the only enterprise in our society where there is no
accountability for quality. If your new car won't start, you hold the
manufacturer responsible. If your kid can't add, tough shit.
"Jack Hollis" <xsleeper@aol.com > wrote in message
news:bh0ir25c2hfv19l8io5k2bbaikh8739o5g@4ax.com...
> On 23 Jan 2007 10:52:18 -0800, "John B." <johnb505@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>Actually, Jack, it's the former. My daughter attends Potomac School in
>>McLean Va., a DC suburb. Tuition: $25,400. My niece attends Sidwell
>>Friend School in Washington DC. Tuition: $26,000. I am quite familiar
>>with the tuition level at the various private schools in this area.
>>They are all in that range, except the Catholic schools, which run
>>about $15K.
>
>
> John, above is exactly what you said. And, as we all know, there are
> close to 100 Catholic K-8 Schools in DC, or the DC area, that are
> under $10K. In fact about 3/4 of those Catholic Schools are under $5K.
>
> In addition there are 7 Catholic High Schools that have tuition at
> $10.5K or below.
>
> There is also an existing "scholarship" program in DC and there are 50
> private schools that are participating.
>
> So there's nothing to stop a voucher program. I have no idea why
> anyone would want to limit the choices of inner city kids. They often
> attend schools that are total failures and this would give them a
> chance to improve their education.
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 26 Jan 2007 13:31:04
From: Jack Hollis
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
On Thu, 25 Jan 2007 14:42:29 -0500, "sfb" <sfb@spam.net > wrote:
>Anyone is the teacher's unions and their lackeys in Congress and state
>legislatures. A voucher program would soon empty public schools and then we
>might fire idle teachers just like any private business might do.
I wouldn't go as far as saying that the unions are the problem,
However, they certainly contribute to the problem.
The school administrations are also contributing to the problem as
well. There's the practice of automatic promotions. The theory is
that if you leave a kid back that it will be a blow to his.her
"self-esteem." So kids are sent up the grades despite not being able
to do the work. What happens is that you have kids, who can't do
first grade work, in advance grades where they have absolutely no idea
what's going on. Imagine a kid in fifth grade math trying to master
division and multiplication of fractions and percentage math when
he/she can't add or subtract. It's absurd.
In NYC, they used to have 600 schools where students with intractable
behavior problems were sent. In effect, these became custodial
institutions. However, it allowed the majority of students to attend
classes where the teachers could focus on teaching rather than
spending most of their time trying to control disorderly students.
Back in the early 1970s the 600 schools were closed because the school
board felt that it was unfair to give up on these kids. Of course,
they never thought that it might be unfair for the majority of
students who can't get proper education because of disruptive students
in their classes.
So the unions do contribute to the problem, but the school boards also
have practices that make it very difficult for teachers to do their
job. The entire system breed failure and even the most motivated
teacher soon becomes discouraged.
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 25 Jan 2007 14:47:48
From: the Moderator
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
"sfb" <sfb@spam.net > wrote in message
news:atmdnXGyVp-5lSTYnZ2dnUVZ_u-unZ2d@comcast.com...
> Anyone is the teacher's unions and their lackeys in Congress and state
> legislatures. A voucher program would soon empty public schools and then
we
> might fire idle teachers just like any private business might do.
>
> Public education is the only enterprise in our society where there is no
> accountability for quality. If your new car won't start, you hold the
> manufacturer responsible. If your kid can't add, tough shit.
>
You can track the decline of education proportionally to the growth of the
American Federation of Teachers (FTA).
|
| | | | | | | | |
Date: 23 Jan 2007 21:49:55
From: Jack Hollis
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
On 23 Jan 2007 10:52:18 -0800, "John B." <johnb505@gmail.com > wrote:
>Jack Hollis wrote:
>> On 22 Jan 2007 19:24:09 -0800, "John B." <johnb505@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >> I fell sorry for the kids stuck in inner city schools with no other
>> >> choice.
>> >
>> >If there's a private school in DC that charges only $9k in tuition, I
>> >sure haven't heard about it. They all run in the $25k range.
>>
>>
>> John, why do you do this to yourself. Where exactly did you get this
>> $25K figure? Did you actually take the time to look up the tuition at
>> DC area private schools or did you just pull it out of the air?
>
>Actually, Jack, it's the former. My daughter attends Potomac School in
>McLean Va., a DC suburb. Tuition: $25,400. My niece attends Sidwell
>Friend School in Washington DC. Tuition: $26,000. I am quite familiar
>with the tuition level at the various private schools in this area.
>They are all in that range, except the Catholic schools, which run
>about $15K.
I'm sure that there are some schools that charge exorbitant tuition,
but the fact is that there are plenty of private schools that a poor
DC kid could go to with 10K.
Here are is the actual data on tuition and private schools. Just a
word of advice for you John, one should never generalize from your own
experience.
"Schools and Students
There are 27,000 private schools in the United States, serving 6
million students. Just about one in four of the nation's schools is a
private school; eleven percent of all students attend them.
Most private school students (84 percent) attend
religiously-affiliated schools, and most of those schools are small
(80 percent have fewer than 300 students).
Tuition: Average Private School Tuition: 1999-00
All Schools
All Levels
$4,689
Elementary
$3,267
Secondary
$6,053
K-12 Schools
$6,779
Catholic
All Levels
$3,236
Elementary
$2,451
Secondary
$4,845
K-12 Schools
$6,780
Other Religious
All Levels
$4,063
Elementary
$3,503
Secondary
$6,536
K-12
$4,260
Non-Sectarian
All Levels
$10,992
Elementary
$7,884
Secondary
$14,638
K-12
$12,363
Source: Table 61, Digest of Education Statistics 2002, National Center
for Education Statistics.
As you can see it shouldn't be hard for a DC kid with 10K per year to
go to a private school until college. Not only that, many of these
kids would qualify for federal Title 1 grants to the schools that
admit them.
Not only that, if you look at the performance graphs in the article,
you will see that the private schools outperform the public schools in
every measure of performance and if they used the data from Washington
DC you would see an even greater difference.
http://www.capenet.org/facts.html
|
| | | | | | | | | |
Date: 24 Jan 2007 03:40:27
From: Chris Bellomy
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
Jack Hollis <xsleeper@aol.com > wrote:
: On 23 Jan 2007 10:52:18 -0800, "John B." <johnb505@gmail.com > wrote:
:
: >Jack Hollis wrote:
: >> On 22 Jan 2007 19:24:09 -0800, "John B." <johnb505@gmail.com> wrote:
: >>
: >> >> I fell sorry for the kids stuck in inner city schools with no other
: >> >> choice.
: >> >
: >> >If there's a private school in DC that charges only $9k in tuition, I
: >> >sure haven't heard about it. They all run in the $25k range.
: >>
: >>
: >> John, why do you do this to yourself. Where exactly did you get this
: >> $25K figure? Did you actually take the time to look up the tuition at
: >> DC area private schools or did you just pull it out of the air?
: >
: >Actually, Jack, it's the former. My daughter attends Potomac School in
: >McLean Va., a DC suburb. Tuition: $25,400. My niece attends Sidwell
: >Friend School in Washington DC. Tuition: $26,000. I am quite familiar
: >with the tuition level at the various private schools in this area.
: >They are all in that range, except the Catholic schools, which run
: >about $15K.
:
: I'm sure that there are some schools that charge exorbitant tuition,
: but the fact is that there are plenty of private schools that a poor
: DC kid could go to with 10K.
The rules of the ket dictate that when the poor kids have
10K to spend on school, the prices will go up to exclude them.
What those schools are selling in the first place is exclusion,
after all.
--
Chris Bellomy
C-List Charter Member
http://clist.org/
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 24 Jan 2007 10:31:59
From: Jack Hollis
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
On Wed, 24 Jan 2007 03:40:27 GMT, Chris Bellomy
<puevf@tbbqfubj.arg.invalid > wrote:
>The rules of the ket dictate that when the poor kids have
>10K to spend on school, the prices will go up to exclude them.
>What those schools are selling in the first place is exclusion,
>after all.
Not really, the private schools are chomping at the bit in the hopes
that they can get a voucher program. For them it's business and what
business doesn't want new customers. I think it would be good for the
suburban kids to have a bit more diversity in their school and good
for the inner city kids to see what it's like to go to a school where
there's order and discipline.
There might be some elite schools that would prefer not to have inner
city kids but most of them are priced too high already anyway. I was
reading a few months back that there's an exclusive K-8 school in
Manhattan that's $45K a year.
|
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 24 Jan 2007 18:47:21
From: Chris Bellomy
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
Jack Hollis <xsleeper@aol.com > wrote:
: On Wed, 24 Jan 2007 03:40:27 GMT, Chris Bellomy
: <puevf@tbbqfubj.arg.invalid > wrote:
:
: >The rules of the ket dictate that when the poor kids have
: >10K to spend on school, the prices will go up to exclude them.
: >What those schools are selling in the first place is exclusion,
: >after all.
:
: Not really, the private schools are chomping at the bit in the hopes
: that they can get a voucher program.
Yes, for the reasons I just stated.
: For them it's business and what
: business doesn't want new customers.
The business that can increase revenue by 40% *without* having
to add new customers.
: I think it would be good for the
: suburban kids to have a bit more diversity in their school and good
: for the inner city kids to see what it's like to go to a school where
: there's order and discipline.
I agree, but that isn't going to happen because that isn't what
the customers (parents) want. If American parents were groovy with
ethnic diversity, urban school districts would still be as good as
they were in 1954. It's an ugly truth but it's just how it is.
--
Chris Bellomy
C-List Charter Member
http://clist.org/
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 24 Jan 2007 16:29:38
From: Jack Hollis
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
On Wed, 24 Jan 2007 18:47:21 GMT, Chris Bellomy
<puevf@tbbqfubj.arg.invalid > wrote:
>I agree, but that isn't going to happen because that isn't what
>the customers (parents) want. If American parents were groovy with
>ethnic diversity, urban school districts would still be as good as
>they were in 1954. It's an ugly truth but it's just how it is.
I'm sure that there would be some parents that would not be
enthusiastic about an influx of inner city kids, but screw them.
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 24 Jan 2007 22:38:58
From: Chris Bellomy
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
Jack Hollis <xsleeper@aol.com > wrote:
: On Wed, 24 Jan 2007 18:47:21 GMT, Chris Bellomy
: <puevf@tbbqfubj.arg.invalid > wrote:
:
: >I agree, but that isn't going to happen because that isn't what
: >the customers (parents) want. If American parents were groovy with
: >ethnic diversity, urban school districts would still be as good as
: >they were in 1954. It's an ugly truth but it's just how it is.
:
: I'm sure that there would be some parents that would not be
: enthusiastic about an influx of inner city kids, but screw them.
That's a nice sentiment, Jack, really, but it doesn't actually
solve anything. Those parents are still going to move their kids
to exclusive schools and the inclusive ones will still suffer as
a result.
--
Chris Bellomy
C-List Charter Member
http://clist.org/
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 24 Jan 2007 20:56:00
From: Jack Hollis
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
On Wed, 24 Jan 2007 22:38:58 GMT, Chris Bellomy
<puevf@tbbqfubj.arg.invalid > wrote:
>: I'm sure that there would be some parents that would not be
>: enthusiastic about an influx of inner city kids, but screw them.
>
>That's a nice sentiment, Jack, really, but it doesn't actually
>solve anything. Those parents are still going to move their kids
>to exclusive schools and the inclusive ones will still suffer as
>a result.
>
>--
>Chris Bellomy
It's possible, but that assumes that they have the money.
I just ran across this and it seems that a voucher program already
exists in DC.
"By Justin Blum
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, June 11, 2004; Page A01
"The D.C. voucher program did not receive enough applicants from
public schools to fill all the slots available, and some of the
children who will receive the federally funded tuition grants already
attend private school, officials said yesterday.
In all, about 1,200 low-income children will be given the private
school scholarships this fall, of whom roughly 200 are already in
private school. Officials with the Washington Scholarship Fund, the
nonprofit group running the program, also announced that 50 private
schools have agreed to participate.
The $14 million initiative, the nation's first federally funded
voucher plan, provides grants of up to $7,500 per child toward tuition
and other education expenses at private or religious schools."
Pleas note John that 50 private schools are participating with grants
of 7.5K.
For the most part the voucher programs have been very successful. The
parents love them. The people who don't love them are the city
bureaucrats and the UFT.
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 23 Jan 2007 23:48:05
From: Joe
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
Chris Bellomy wrote:
> Jack Hollis <xsleeper@aol.com> wrote:
> : On 23 Jan 2007 10:52:18 -0800, "John B." <johnb505@gmail.com> wrote:
> :
> :>Jack Hollis wrote:
> :>> On 22 Jan 2007 19:24:09 -0800, "John B." <johnb505@gmail.com> wrote:
> :>>
> :>> >> I fell sorry for the kids stuck in inner city schools with no other
> :>> >> choice.
> :>> >
> :>> >If there's a private school in DC that charges only $9k in tuition, I
> :>> >sure haven't heard about it. They all run in the $25k range.
> :>>
> :>>
> :>> John, why do you do this to yourself. Where exactly did you get this
> :>> $25K figure? Did you actually take the time to look up the tuition at
> :>> DC area private schools or did you just pull it out of the air?
> :>
> :>Actually, Jack, it's the former. My daughter attends Potomac School in
> :>McLean Va., a DC suburb. Tuition: $25,400. My niece attends Sidwell
> :>Friend School in Washington DC. Tuition: $26,000. I am quite familiar
> :>with the tuition level at the various private schools in this area.
> :>They are all in that range, except the Catholic schools, which run
> :>about $15K.
> :
> : I'm sure that there are some schools that charge exorbitant tuition,
> : but the fact is that there are plenty of private schools that a poor
> : DC kid could go to with 10K.
>
> The rules of the ket dictate that when the poor kids have
> 10K to spend on school, the prices will go up to exclude them.
> What those schools are selling in the first place is exclusion,
> after all.
>
I can't pretend to speak for the nation but I can state categorically
that at least in one neighborhood in a borough of New York they
practiced only one form of exclusion, kids whose parent were not
motivated to participate with the school in educating the kids.
I had four kids go through the parochial system in a basically white
anglo and Mediterranean neighborhood. The typical class make up was at
least 50% minorities and that percentage grew over the 20 year span that
they were there, while the neighborhood was pretty static.
If the parents did not participate in teacher student meetings, PTA or
extracurricular programs they would be invited to find another school.
The tuition ranged between $3,500 to about 7K over time.
Joe
|
| | | | | | | | | |
Date: 23 Jan 2007 21:17:34
From: frankross
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
Jack Hollis wrote:
/clip/
> I'm sure that there are some schools that charge exorbitant tuition,
> but the fact is that there are plenty of private schools that a poor
> DC kid could go to with 10K.
>
Where does a poor kid get $10,000??
Frank
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 23 Jan 2007 22:51:09
From: Jack Hollis
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
On Tue, 23 Jan 2007 21:17:34 -0600, frankross <fross@net.net > wrote:
>Jack Hollis wrote:
>/clip/
>> I'm sure that there are some schools that charge exorbitant tuition,
>> but the fact is that there are plenty of private schools that a poor
>> DC kid could go to with 10K.
>>
>Where does a poor kid get $10,000??
>Frank
Washington DC spends over $10K a years per pupil. The proposal would
be to attach that money to the kid rather than the school.
Accordingly, the kid could go to any school he/she wants to attend
that would accept that amount of money or less. The $10K would be
more than enough for most K-8 schools, so the kid could bank the
difference. This would provide extra money for 9-12 because they tend
to be more expensive that K-8.
|
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 23 Jan 2007 22:34:43
From: frankross
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
Jack Hollis wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Jan 2007 21:17:34 -0600, frankross <fross@net.net> wrote:
>
>> Jack Hollis wrote:
>> /clip/
>>> I'm sure that there are some schools that charge exorbitant tuition,
>>> but the fact is that there are plenty of private schools that a poor
>>> DC kid could go to with 10K.
>>>
>> Where does a poor kid get $10,000??
>> Frank
>
> Washington DC spends over $10K a years per pupil. The proposal would
> be to attach that money to the kid rather than the school.
> Accordingly, the kid could go to any school he/she wants to attend
> that would accept that amount of money or less. The $10K would be
> more than enough for most K-8 schools, so the kid could bank the
> difference. This would provide extra money for 9-12 because they tend
> to be more expensive that K-8.
Are you serious? That ten grand spent on each kid includes salaries,
books, equipment, utilities, etc., etc., etc. So, what percentage of
kids taking a 10k "coupon" would cripple the public school system,
putting all of the employes of that district out of work? Not a big
percentgage.
Sound thinking....not!
Frank.
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 24 Jan 2007 10:57:06
From: Jack Hollis
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
On Tue, 23 Jan 2007 22:34:43 -0600, frankross <fross@net.net > wrote:
>> Washington DC spends over $10K a years per pupil. The proposal would
>> be to attach that money to the kid rather than the school.
>> Accordingly, the kid could go to any school he/she wants to attend
>> that would accept that amount of money or less. The $10K would be
>> more than enough for most K-8 schools, so the kid could bank the
>> difference. This would provide extra money for 9-12 because they tend
>> to be more expensive that K-8.
>
>Are you serious? That ten grand spent on each kid includes salaries,
>books, equipment, utilities, etc., etc., etc. So, what percentage of
>kids taking a 10k "coupon" would cripple the public school system,
>putting all of the employes of that district out of work? Not a big
>percentgage.
>
>Sound thinking....not!
>Frank.
Not at all. Obviously, if there were less kids in the public schools
they would need less teachers and everything else associated with
educating a child. They might be able to close down some of the
schools and sell the real estate. At the same time, the private
schools would have to hire new teachers. It all works out in the end.
One of the main problems with the public schools is that they don't
have to compete with the private schools. Put some competition in the
system and they will have to improve or perish.
|
| | | | | | | |
Date: 22 Jan 2007 19:17:41
From: John B.
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
Bert Robbins wrote:
> William A. T. Clark wrote:
> > In article <98aar29t7rvbbck8chd231i0993jn1dgeo@4ax.com>,
> > Jack Hollis <xsleeper@aol.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On 22 Jan 2007 09:52:09 -0800, "John B." <johnb505@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> What differentiates DC public schools from those in other cities is
> >>> that DC is not part of a state and therefore does not share in a
> >>> state's tax base. Your assertion that DC public schools have more than
> >>> adequate funding is laughable. Come visit us here in the DC area
> >>> sometime and take a look at some of the DC high schools. They most
> >>> certainly do not have adequate funding or anything close to it.
> >> The DC schools have better funding than all but two US states.
> >
> > Yes, but DC is not a state - it is a small district with an abnormally
> > large number of socially disadvantaged inhabitants. That makes schooling
> > very expensive.
>
> If they don't like it they can move.
Yeah, right, Bert. They can just pick up and move to Chevy Chase and
send their kids to Landon and Holton-Arms, right?
|
| | | | | | | |
Date: 22 Jan 2007 10:57:15
From: the Moderator
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
"William A. T. Clark" <clark.31@osu.edu > wrote in message
news:clark.31-923238.12021720012007@charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu...
>
> Oh, Canadians could - it's the Americans that couldn't. You see, the
> Canadians have an educational system modeled after the British one.
>
> William Clark
You are right. The US education system is modeled after the Teamsters. The
Teachers Union has destroyed our education system.
|
| | | | | | | | |
Date: 22 Jan 2007 12:37:51
From: William A. T. Clark
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
In article <KLudnS9w--hscSnYnZ2dnUVZ_uuqnZ2d@centurytel.net >,
"the Moderator" <sparky@no_spam_engineer.com > wrote:
> "William A. T. Clark" <clark.31@osu.edu> wrote in message
> news:clark.31-923238.12021720012007@charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu...
> >
> > Oh, Canadians could - it's the Americans that couldn't. You see, the
> > Canadians have an educational system modeled after the British one.
> >
> > William Clark
>
> You are right. The US education system is modeled after the Teamsters. The
> Teachers Union has destroyed our education system.
Care to explain (with supporting evidence)? Not, I thought not.
William Clark
|
| | | | | | | |
Date: 20 Jan 2007 15:03:45
From: Jack Hollis
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
On Sat, 20 Jan 2007 12:02:17 -0500, "William A. T. Clark"
<clark.31@osu.edu > wrote:
>Oh, Canadians could - it's the Americans that couldn't. You see, the
>Canadians have an educational system modeled after the British one.
>
>William Clark
If the Canadian education system is so good, why is such and esteemed
scholar like yourself in the US rather than Canada or Britain?
|
| | | | | | | | |
Date: 20 Jan 2007 16:39:28
From: William A. T. Clark
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
In article <78t4r21phf1t7bv0q1rcchi53rgktn4lvk@4ax.com >,
Jack Hollis <xsleeper@aol.com > wrote:
> On Sat, 20 Jan 2007 12:02:17 -0500, "William A. T. Clark"
> <clark.31@osu.edu> wrote:
>
> >Oh, Canadians could - it's the Americans that couldn't. You see, the
> >Canadians have an educational system modeled after the British one.
> >
> >William Clark
>
> If the Canadian education system is so good, why is such and esteemed
> scholar like yourself in the US rather than Canada or Britain?
To help raise standards,of course ;-)
William Clark
|
| | | | | | | | | |
Date: 20 Jan 2007 21:44:44
From: Jack Hollis
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
On Sat, 20 Jan 2007 16:39:28 -0500, "William A. T. Clark"
<clark.31@osu.edu > wrote:
>> >Oh, Canadians could - it's the Americans that couldn't. You see, the
>> >Canadians have an educational system modeled after the British one.
>> >
>> >William Clark
>>
>> If the Canadian education system is so good, why is such and esteemed
>> scholar like yourself in the US rather than Canada or Britain?
>
>To help raise standards,of course ;-)
>
>William Clark
That would make sense if you actually got your degrees in Canada or
Britain and then came to the US to impart your knowledge.
All kidding aside, I'm sure you agree that the US attracts many top
scholars from around the world. This is especially true in the
sciences and medicine. If you look at the Nobel laureates in these
areas, you will see that there are more Americans than any other
nationality and that a lot of the non-Americans are working in the US.
Now, if you want to study subjects like languages, history, literature
or philosophy, the universities in Europe are every bit as good as the
US, if not better. What could sound better than having a Ph.D, in
philosophy from the University of Paris?
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 23 Jan 2007 13:19:23
From: The_Professor
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
William A. T. Clark wrote:
> In article <silcr29ldcn56truk0q3r7tt01chthmvr9@4ax.com>,
> Jack Hollis <xsleeper@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 23 Jan 2007 06:59:24 -0500, "William A. T. Clark"
> > <clark.31@osu.edu> wrote:
> >
> > >Oh, very clever. Tell me, where did your alma mater rank this year (or
> > >any other)? Better to have loved and lost than never to have loved at
> > >all.
> >
> > My Alma Mater holds the all time NCAA D1 football record for
> > consecutive losses. Better to have lost and lost than to have ever
> > won at all :)
>
> So the school clearly was not giving educational opportunities to
> underprivileged minorities via athletic scholarships.
>
> Shame on them!
>
> William CLark
...and how important it is to dole out educational opportunites to
minorites based on their ability to play some game. Heaven forbid we
base such opportunities on scholarly ability; wouldn't want to develop
the notion amongst minorities that the path to success is through
education...keep 'em thinking it's through playing some game...after
all , we need a good supply of gladiators for our amusement!
|
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 23 Jan 2007 16:39:32
From: William A. T. Clark
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
In article <1169587163.085664.251020@k78g2000cwa.googlegroups.com >,
"The_Professor" <dbid@att.net > wrote:
> William A. T. Clark wrote:
> > In article <silcr29ldcn56truk0q3r7tt01chthmvr9@4ax.com>,
> > Jack Hollis <xsleeper@aol.com> wrote:
> >
> > > On Tue, 23 Jan 2007 06:59:24 -0500, "William A. T. Clark"
> > > <clark.31@osu.edu> wrote:
> > >
> > > >Oh, very clever. Tell me, where did your alma mater rank this year (or
> > > >any other)? Better to have loved and lost than never to have loved at
> > > >all.
> > >
> > > My Alma Mater holds the all time NCAA D1 football record for
> > > consecutive losses. Better to have lost and lost than to have ever
> > > won at all :)
> >
> > So the school clearly was not giving educational opportunities to
> > underprivileged minorities via athletic scholarships.
> >
> > Shame on them!
> >
> > William CLark
>
> ...and how important it is to dole out educational opportunites to
> minorites based on their ability to play some game. Heaven forbid we
> base such opportunities on scholarly ability; wouldn't want to develop
> the notion amongst minorities that the path to success is through
> education...keep 'em thinking it's through playing some game...after
> all , we need a good supply of gladiators for our amusement!
OK, next time I'll remember to turn on the irony sign.
Whooosh.
William Clark
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 20 Jan 2007 23:19:08
From: William A. T. Clark
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
In article <p1k5r2lt6e0dcb8fijg269c3bssg1pcvbb@4ax.com >,
Jack Hollis <xsleeper@aol.com > wrote:
> On Sat, 20 Jan 2007 16:39:28 -0500, "William A. T. Clark"
> <clark.31@osu.edu> wrote:
>
> >> >Oh, Canadians could - it's the Americans that couldn't. You see, the
> >> >Canadians have an educational system modeled after the British one.
> >> >
> >> >William Clark
> >>
> >> If the Canadian education system is so good, why is such and esteemed
> >> scholar like yourself in the US rather than Canada or Britain?
> >
> >To help raise standards,of course ;-)
> >
> >William Clark
>
>
> That would make sense if you actually got your degrees in Canada or
> Britain and then came to the US to impart your knowledge.
>
> All kidding aside, I'm sure you agree that the US attracts many top
> scholars from around the world. This is especially true in the
> sciences and medicine. If you look at the Nobel laureates in these
> areas, you will see that there are more Americans than any other
> nationality and that a lot of the non-Americans are working in the US.
>
> Now, if you want to study subjects like languages, history, literature
> or philosophy, the universities in Europe are every bit as good as the
> US, if not better. What could sound better than having a Ph.D, in
> philosophy from the University of Paris?
Anything from the University of Oxford.
WIlliam Clark
|
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 22 Jan 2007 12:05:27
From: Jack Hollis
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
On Sat, 20 Jan 2007 23:19:08 -0500, "William A. T. Clark"
<clark.31@osu.edu > wrote:
> What could sound better than having a Ph.D, in
>> philosophy from the University of Paris?
>
>Anything from the University of Oxford.
No way. The University of Paris has mystique. Oxford has boat races
watched by stuffy people.
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 22 Jan 2007 12:36:57
From: William A. T. Clark
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
In article <hdr9r215gefqijoo2bh4rcott8obshttdq@4ax.com >,
Jack Hollis <xsleeper@aol.com > wrote:
> On Sat, 20 Jan 2007 23:19:08 -0500, "William A. T. Clark"
> <clark.31@osu.edu> wrote:
>
> > What could sound better than having a Ph.D, in
> >> philosophy from the University of Paris?
> >
> >Anything from the University of Oxford.
>
> No way. The University of Paris has mystique. Oxford has boat races
> watched by stuffy people.
Watched by close to 1M stuffy people - not to mention TV. Beats the hell
out of "American Idol".
William Clark
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 22 Jan 2007 18:20:44
From: Bert Robbins
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
William A. T. Clark wrote:
> In article <hdr9r215gefqijoo2bh4rcott8obshttdq@4ax.com>,
> Jack Hollis <xsleeper@aol.com> wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 20 Jan 2007 23:19:08 -0500, "William A. T. Clark"
>> <clark.31@osu.edu> wrote:
>>
>>> What could sound better than having a Ph.D, in
>>>> philosophy from the University of Paris?
>>> Anything from the University of Oxford.
>> No way. The University of Paris has mystique. Oxford has boat races
>> watched by stuffy people.
>
> Watched by close to 1M stuffy people - not to mention TV. Beats the hell
> out of "American Idol".
Let's see, guys paddling a row boat up and down a river or tens of
thousands of people making a fool of themselves?
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 22 Jan 2007 20:35:54
From: William A. T. Clark
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
In article <F4KdnWmgHoJW2yjYnZ2dnUVZ_tDinZ2d@comcast.com >,
Bert Robbins <screw@you.com > wrote:
> William A. T. Clark wrote:
> > In article <hdr9r215gefqijoo2bh4rcott8obshttdq@4ax.com>,
> > Jack Hollis <xsleeper@aol.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On Sat, 20 Jan 2007 23:19:08 -0500, "William A. T. Clark"
> >> <clark.31@osu.edu> wrote:
> >>
> >>> What could sound better than having a Ph.D, in
> >>>> philosophy from the University of Paris?
> >>> Anything from the University of Oxford.
> >> No way. The University of Paris has mystique. Oxford has boat races
> >> watched by stuffy people.
> >
> > Watched by close to 1M stuffy people - not to mention TV. Beats the hell
> > out of "American Idol".
>
> Let's see, guys paddling a row boat up and down a river or tens of
> thousands of people making a fool of themselves?
Yes, a bit like college football on a Saturday.
William Clark
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 22 Jan 2007 22:49:12
From: Jack Hollis
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
On Mon, 22 Jan 2007 20:35:54 -0500, "William A. T. Clark"
<clark.31@osu.edu > wrote:
>> Let's see, guys paddling a row boat up and down a river or tens of
>> thousands of people making a fool of themselves?
>
>Yes, a bit like college football on a Saturday.
Or, in the case of Ohio State, Monday Night and it wasn't just the
students who looked like fools :)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 23 Jan 2007 06:59:24
From: William A. T. Clark
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
In article <fb1br21md1749dvfghmkn2ru2t9c5f8mfp@4ax.com >,
Jack Hollis <xsleeper@aol.com > wrote:
> On Mon, 22 Jan 2007 20:35:54 -0500, "William A. T. Clark"
> <clark.31@osu.edu> wrote:
>
> >> Let's see, guys paddling a row boat up and down a river or tens of
> >> thousands of people making a fool of themselves?
> >
> >Yes, a bit like college football on a Saturday.
>
> Or, in the case of Ohio State, Monday Night and it wasn't just the
> students who looked like fools :)
Oh, very clever. Tell me, where did your alma mater rank this year (or
any other)? Better to have loved and lost than never to have loved at
all.
William Clark
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 23 Jan 2007 13:41:13
From: Jack Hollis
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
On Tue, 23 Jan 2007 06:59:24 -0500, "William A. T. Clark"
<clark.31@osu.edu > wrote:
>Oh, very clever. Tell me, where did your alma mater rank this year (or
>any other)? Better to have loved and lost than never to have loved at
>all.
My Alma Mater holds the all time NCAA D1 football record for
consecutive losses. Better to have lost and lost than to have ever
won at all :)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 23 Jan 2007 14:21:12
From: William A. T. Clark
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
In article <silcr29ldcn56truk0q3r7tt01chthmvr9@4ax.com >,
Jack Hollis <xsleeper@aol.com > wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Jan 2007 06:59:24 -0500, "William A. T. Clark"
> <clark.31@osu.edu> wrote:
>
> >Oh, very clever. Tell me, where did your alma mater rank this year (or
> >any other)? Better to have loved and lost than never to have loved at
> >all.
>
> My Alma Mater holds the all time NCAA D1 football record for
> consecutive losses. Better to have lost and lost than to have ever
> won at all :)
So the school clearly was not giving educational opportunities to
underprivileged minorities via athletic scholarships.
Shame on them!
William CLark
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 23 Jan 2007 22:37:51
From: Jack Hollis
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
On Tue, 23 Jan 2007 14:21:12 -0500, "William A. T. Clark"
<clark.31@nospamosu.edu > wrote:
>> My Alma Mater holds the all time NCAA D1 football record for
>> consecutive losses. Better to have lost and lost than to have ever
>> won at all :)
>
>So the school clearly was not giving educational opportunities to
>underprivileged minorities via athletic scholarships.
>
>Shame on them!
>
>William CLark
Ivy League Schools don't give out sports scholarships. I went to
Columbia and they do pretty much what every other University does to
attract minority students. Being in upper Manhattan, there's a lot of
minorities around. Without getting out my calculator, it looks like
about a bit over 20% of the undergraduate students are black and
Hispanic. The total undergraduate minority enrollment is 38%, if you
want to count Asians as minorities.
Here's a detailed abstract.
http://www.columbia.edu/cu/opir/abstract/enrollment_ethnicity_2005.html
Not sure how this compares to Ohio State.
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 24 Jan 2007 10:17:16
From: William A. T. Clark
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
In article <5tjdr296sfk6r3e2pnjmgnr9p9pghioaol@4ax.com >,
Jack Hollis <xsleeper@aol.com > wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Jan 2007 14:21:12 -0500, "William A. T. Clark"
> <clark.31@nospamosu.edu> wrote:
>
> >> My Alma Mater holds the all time NCAA D1 football record for
> >> consecutive losses. Better to have lost and lost than to have ever
> >> won at all :)
> >
> >So the school clearly was not giving educational opportunities to
> >underprivileged minorities via athletic scholarships.
> >
> >Shame on them!
> >
> >William CLark
>
>
> Ivy League Schools don't give out sports scholarships. I went to
> Columbia and they do pretty much what every other University does to
> attract minority students. Being in upper Manhattan, there's a lot of
> minorities around. Without getting out my calculator, it looks like
> about a bit over 20% of the undergraduate students are black and
> Hispanic. The total undergraduate minority enrollment is 38%, if you
> want to count Asians as minorities.
>
> Here's a detailed abstract.
>
> http://www.columbia.edu/cu/opir/abstract/enrollment_ethnicity_2005.html
>
> Not sure how this compares to Ohio State.
Well, Columbia would be the only place I know that gets away with
counting Asians as minorities. On that basis Berkeley would be almost
completely minority.
AA and hispanic enrollments are around 15% at undergraduate, 7% at
graduate, 8-9% professional, and 14% health care. As you say,
surrounding populations count for a lot, even more so in public land
grant schools. We have a significant AA population in Ohio, but
relatively few hispanics, so our AA enrollments are higher than this,
but hispanics a little lower.
William Clark
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 24 Jan 2007 16:15:11
From: Jack Hollis
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
On Wed, 24 Jan 2007 10:17:16 -0500, "William A. T. Clark"
<clark.31@nospamosu.edu > wrote:
>Well, Columbia would be the only place I know that gets away with
>counting Asians as minorities. On that basis Berkeley would be almost
>completely minority.
There's a large Asian community in NYC and the Asian students do so
well, it's hard not to end up with a lot of them.
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 24 Jan 2007 17:12:38
From: William A. T. Clark
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
In article <lvifr29rrcave9bbivvd6jomvh8akvmv6p@4ax.com >,
Jack Hollis <xsleeper@aol.com > wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Jan 2007 10:17:16 -0500, "William A. T. Clark"
> <clark.31@nospamosu.edu> wrote:
>
> >Well, Columbia would be the only place I know that gets away with
> >counting Asians as minorities. On that basis Berkeley would be almost
> >completely minority.
>
> There's a large Asian community in NYC and the Asian students do so
> well, it's hard not to end up with a lot of them.
Indeed, but they are very much at the top end of the socio-educational
ladder, so calling them minorities mixes apples with oranges as far as
educational objectives goes.
WIlliam Clark
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 22 Jan 2007 21:03:09
From: Bert Robbins
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
William A. T. Clark wrote:
> In article <F4KdnWmgHoJW2yjYnZ2dnUVZ_tDinZ2d@comcast.com>,
> Bert Robbins <screw@you.com> wrote:
>
>> William A. T. Clark wrote:
>>> In article <hdr9r215gefqijoo2bh4rcott8obshttdq@4ax.com>,
>>> Jack Hollis <xsleeper@aol.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Sat, 20 Jan 2007 23:19:08 -0500, "William A. T. Clark"
>>>> <clark.31@osu.edu> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> What could sound better than having a Ph.D, in
>>>>>> philosophy from the University of Paris?
>>>>> Anything from the University of Oxford.
>>>> No way. The University of Paris has mystique. Oxford has boat races
>>>> watched by stuffy people.
>>> Watched by close to 1M stuffy people - not to mention TV. Beats the hell
>>> out of "American Idol".
>> Let's see, guys paddling a row boat up and down a river or tens of
>> thousands of people making a fool of themselves?
>
> Yes, a bit like college football on a Saturday.
What do professional paddlers make these days?
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 22 Jan 2007 21:56:34
From: William A. T. Clark
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
In article <CY6dnfEA-5hB8SjYnZ2dnUVZ_rvinZ2d@comcast.com >,
Bert Robbins <screw@you.com > wrote:
> William A. T. Clark wrote:
> > In article <F4KdnWmgHoJW2yjYnZ2dnUVZ_tDinZ2d@comcast.com>,
> > Bert Robbins <screw@you.com> wrote:
> >
> >> William A. T. Clark wrote:
> >>> In article <hdr9r215gefqijoo2bh4rcott8obshttdq@4ax.com>,
> >>> Jack Hollis <xsleeper@aol.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> On Sat, 20 Jan 2007 23:19:08 -0500, "William A. T. Clark"
> >>>> <clark.31@osu.edu> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> What could sound better than having a Ph.D, in
> >>>>>> philosophy from the University of Paris?
> >>>>> Anything from the University of Oxford.
> >>>> No way. The University of Paris has mystique. Oxford has boat races
> >>>> watched by stuffy people.
> >>> Watched by close to 1M stuffy people - not to mention TV. Beats the hell
> >>> out of "American Idol".
> >> Let's see, guys paddling a row boat up and down a river or tens of
> >> thousands of people making a fool of themselves?
> >
> > Yes, a bit like college football on a Saturday.
>
> What do professional paddlers make these days?
Nothing, these guys have no athletic scholarships, and are expected to
maintain the full Oxbridge academic schedule while training several
hours a day for six months. The President of the Cambridge boat this
year is conducting PhD research in the origins of certain cancers, for
example.
William Clark
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 22 Jan 2007 23:20:49
From: Jack Hollis
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
On Mon, 22 Jan 2007 21:56:34 -0500, "William A. T. Clark"
<clark.31@osu.edu > wrote:
>The President of the Cambridge boat this
>year is conducting PhD research in the origins of certain cancers, for
>example.
Perhaps he should start with a sample of the water from the Thames.
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 23 Jan 2007 07:00:27
From: William A. T. Clark
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
In article <n73br2t07o0sit5v3nomtnjn1ckmqukpo9@4ax.com >,
Jack Hollis <xsleeper@aol.com > wrote:
> On Mon, 22 Jan 2007 21:56:34 -0500, "William A. T. Clark"
> <clark.31@osu.edu> wrote:
>
> >The President of the Cambridge boat this
> >year is conducting PhD research in the origins of certain cancers, for
> >example.
>
> Perhaps he should start with a sample of the water from the Thames.
This would be the same Thames in which salmon swim up as far as London?
Yes, I'd rather fall in there than in the Love canals around here.
William Clark
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 22 Jan 2007 16:12:08
From: Jack Hollis
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
On Mon, 22 Jan 2007 12:36:57 -0500, "William A. T. Clark"
<clark.31@nospamosu.edu > wrote:
>> No way. The University of Paris has mystique. Oxford has boat races
>> watched by stuffy people.
>
>Watched by close to 1M stuffy people - not to mention TV. Beats the hell
>out of "American Idol".
>
>William Clark
No thanks, I'll pass on both.
|
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 21 Jan 2007 17:30:11
From: Robert Hamilton
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
"William A. T. Clark" wrote:
> In article <p1k5r2lt6e0dcb8fijg269c3bssg1pcvbb@4ax.com>,
> Jack Hollis <xsleeper@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > On Sat, 20 Jan 2007 16:39:28 -0500, "William A. T. Clark"
> > <clark.31@osu.edu> wrote:
> >
> > >> >Oh, Canadians could - it's the Americans that couldn't. You see, the
> > >> >Canadians have an educational system modeled after the British one.
> > >> >
> > >> >William Clark
> > >>
> > >> If the Canadian education system is so good, why is such and esteemed
> > >> scholar like yourself in the US rather than Canada or Britain?
> > >
> > >To help raise standards,of course ;-)
> > >
> > >William Clark
> >
> >
> > That would make sense if you actually got your degrees in Canada or
> > Britain and then came to the US to impart your knowledge.
> >
> > All kidding aside, I'm sure you agree that the US attracts many top
> > scholars from around the world. This is especially true in the
> > sciences and medicine. If you look at the Nobel laureates in these
> > areas, you will see that there are more Americans than any other
> > nationality and that a lot of the non-Americans are working in the US.
> >
> > Now, if you want to study subjects like languages, history, literature
> > or philosophy, the universities in Europe are every bit as good as the
> > US, if not better. What could sound better than having a Ph.D, in
> > philosophy from the University of Paris?
>
> Anything from the University of Oxford.
>
Worn out old school. Last philosopher of any real general note was Karl
Popper...a native of where?
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 21 Jan 2007 12:57:08
From: William A. T. Clark
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
In article <45B3A0EC.E48B7E86@att.net >, Robert Hamilton <DBID@att.net>
wrote:
> "William A. T. Clark" wrote:
>
> > In article <p1k5r2lt6e0dcb8fijg269c3bssg1pcvbb@4ax.com>,
> > Jack Hollis <xsleeper@aol.com> wrote:
> >
> > > On Sat, 20 Jan 2007 16:39:28 -0500, "William A. T. Clark"
> > > <clark.31@osu.edu> wrote:
> > >
> > > >> >Oh, Canadians could - it's the Americans that couldn't. You see, the
> > > >> >Canadians have an educational system modeled after the British one.
> > > >> >
> > > >> >William Clark
> > > >>
> > > >> If the Canadian education system is so good, why is such and esteemed
> > > >> scholar like yourself in the US rather than Canada or Britain?
> > > >
> > > >To help raise standards,of course ;-)
> > > >
> > > >William Clark
> > >
> > >
> > > That would make sense if you actually got your degrees in Canada or
> > > Britain and then came to the US to impart your knowledge.
> > >
> > > All kidding aside, I'm sure you agree that the US attracts many top
> > > scholars from around the world. This is especially true in the
> > > sciences and medicine. If you look at the Nobel laureates in these
> > > areas, you will see that there are more Americans than any other
> > > nationality and that a lot of the non-Americans are working in the US.
> > >
> > > Now, if you want to study subjects like languages, history, literature
> > > or philosophy, the universities in Europe are every bit as good as the
> > > US, if not better. What could sound better than having a Ph.D, in
> > > philosophy from the University of Paris?
> >
> > Anything from the University of Oxford.
> >
>
> Worn out old school. Last philosopher of any real general note was Karl
> Popper...a native of where?
But probably one that still wouldn't admit you. Terrible thing, envy.
William Clark
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 21 Jan 2007 18:09:46
From: Robert Hamilton
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
"William A. T. Clark" wrote:
> In article <45B3A0EC.E48B7E86@att.net>, Robert Hamilton <DBID@att.net>
> wrote:
>
> > "William A. T. Clark" wrote:
> >
> > > In article <p1k5r2lt6e0dcb8fijg269c3bssg1pcvbb@4ax.com>,
> > > Jack Hollis <xsleeper@aol.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Sat, 20 Jan 2007 16:39:28 -0500, "William A. T. Clark"
> > > > <clark.31@osu.edu> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >> >Oh, Canadians could - it's the Americans that couldn't. You see, the
> > > > >> >Canadians have an educational system modeled after the British one.
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> >William Clark
> > > > >>
> > > > >> If the Canadian education system is so good, why is such and esteemed
> > > > >> scholar like yourself in the US rather than Canada or Britain?
> > > > >
> > > > >To help raise standards,of course ;-)
> > > > >
> > > > >William Clark
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > That would make sense if you actually got your degrees in Canada or
> > > > Britain and then came to the US to impart your knowledge.
> > > >
> > > > All kidding aside, I'm sure you agree that the US attracts many top
> > > > scholars from around the world. This is especially true in the
> > > > sciences and medicine. If you look at the Nobel laureates in these
> > > > areas, you will see that there are more Americans than any other
> > > > nationality and that a lot of the non-Americans are working in the US.
> > > >
> > > > Now, if you want to study subjects like languages, history, literature
> > > > or philosophy, the universities in Europe are every bit as good as the
> > > > US, if not better. What could sound better than having a Ph.D, in
> > > > philosophy from the University of Paris?
> > >
> > > Anything from the University of Oxford.
> > >
> >
> > Worn out old school. Last philosopher of any real general note was Karl
> > Popper...a native of where?
>
> But probably one that still wouldn't admit you. Terrible thing, envy.
>
> William Clark
If I plopped down the tuition, I'd be in. Ain't worth it to me though. You don't
see me going on and on about it endlessly like your sort does with respect to the
US...speaking of envy......
Actually the Univeristy of Arkansas at Fayetteville has a program I'd be
interested in if I ever got the chance and the motivation. I guess you have to
wonder at that, but it's something that has contemporary relevance, a concept well
beyond Oxbridge.
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 21 Jan 2007 22:59:31
From: William A. T. Clark
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
In article <45B3AA33.977FC8C2@att.net >, Robert Hamilton <DBID@att.net>
wrote:
> "William A. T. Clark" wrote:
>
> > In article <45B3A0EC.E48B7E86@att.net>, Robert Hamilton <DBID@att.net>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > "William A. T. Clark" wrote:
> > >
> > > > In article <p1k5r2lt6e0dcb8fijg269c3bssg1pcvbb@4ax.com>,
> > > > Jack Hollis <xsleeper@aol.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > On Sat, 20 Jan 2007 16:39:28 -0500, "William A. T. Clark"
> > > > > <clark.31@osu.edu> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > >> >Oh, Canadians could - it's the Americans that couldn't. You see,
> > > > > >> >the
> > > > > >> >Canadians have an educational system modeled after the British
> > > > > >> >one.
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> >William Clark
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> If the Canadian education system is so good, why is such and
> > > > > >> esteemed
> > > > > >> scholar like yourself in the US rather than Canada or Britain?
> > > > > >
> > > > > >To help raise standards,of course ;-)
> > > > > >
> > > > > >William Clark
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > That would make sense if you actually got your degrees in Canada or
> > > > > Britain and then came to the US to impart your knowledge.
> > > > >
> > > > > All kidding aside, I'm sure you agree that the US attracts many top
> > > > > scholars from around the world. This is especially true in the
> > > > > sciences and medicine. If you look at the Nobel laureates in these
> > > > > areas, you will see that there are more Americans than any other
> > > > > nationality and that a lot of the non-Americans are working in the
> > > > > US.
> > > > >
> > > > > Now, if you want to study subjects like languages, history,
> > > > > literature
> > > > > or philosophy, the universities in Europe are every bit as good as
> > > > > the
> > > > > US, if not better. What could sound better than having a Ph.D, in
> > > > > philosophy from the University of Paris?
> > > >
> > > > Anything from the University of Oxford.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Worn out old school. Last philosopher of any real general note was Karl
> > > Popper...a native of where?
> >
> > But probably one that still wouldn't admit you. Terrible thing, envy.
> >
> > William Clark
>
> If I plopped down the tuition, I'd be in. Ain't worth it to me though. You
> don't
> see me going on and on about it endlessly like your sort does with respect to
> the
> US...speaking of envy......
>
> Actually the Univeristy of Arkansas at Fayetteville has a program I'd be
> interested in if I ever got the chance and the motivation. I guess you have
> to
> wonder at that, but it's something that has contemporary relevance, a concept
> well
> beyond Oxbridge.
Sorry, but you wouldn't. But perhaps if you could, then you might
understand the point. For know you seem to be restricted to silly
cliches, and trite cartoons of what goes on there.
Oh, well.
William Clark
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 22 Jan 2007 05:22:19
From: Robert Hamilton
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
"William A. T. Clark" wrote:
> In article <45B3AA33.977FC8C2@att.net>, Robert Hamilton <DBID@att.net>
> wrote:
>
> > "William A. T. Clark" wrote:
> >
> > > In article <45B3A0EC.E48B7E86@att.net>, Robert Hamilton <DBID@att.net>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > "William A. T. Clark" wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > In article <p1k5r2lt6e0dcb8fijg269c3bssg1pcvbb@4ax.com>,
> > > > > Jack Hollis <xsleeper@aol.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > On Sat, 20 Jan 2007 16:39:28 -0500, "William A. T. Clark"
> > > > > > <clark.31@osu.edu> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >> >Oh, Canadians could - it's the Americans that couldn't. You see,
> > > > > > >> >the
> > > > > > >> >Canadians have an educational system modeled after the British
> > > > > > >> >one.
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> >William Clark
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> If the Canadian education system is so good, why is such and
> > > > > > >> esteemed
> > > > > > >> scholar like yourself in the US rather than Canada or Britain?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >To help raise standards,of course ;-)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >William Clark
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > That would make sense if you actually got your degrees in Canada or
> > > > > > Britain and then came to the US to impart your knowledge.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > All kidding aside, I'm sure you agree that the US attracts many top
> > > > > > scholars from around the world. This is especially true in the
> > > > > > sciences and medicine. If you look at the Nobel laureates in these
> > > > > > areas, you will see that there are more Americans than any other
> > > > > > nationality and that a lot of the non-Americans are working in the
> > > > > > US.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Now, if you want to study subjects like languages, history,
> > > > > > literature
> > > > > > or philosophy, the universities in Europe are every bit as good as
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > US, if not better. What could sound better than having a Ph.D, in
> > > > > > philosophy from the University of Paris?
> > > > >
> > > > > Anything from the University of Oxford.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Worn out old school. Last philosopher of any real general note was Karl
> > > > Popper...a native of where?
> > >
> > > But probably one that still wouldn't admit you. Terrible thing, envy.
> > >
> > > William Clark
> >
> > If I plopped down the tuition, I'd be in. Ain't worth it to me though. You
> > don't
> > see me going on and on about it endlessly like your sort does with respect to
> > the
> > US...speaking of envy......
> >
> > Actually the Univeristy of Arkansas at Fayetteville has a program I'd be
> > interested in if I ever got the chance and the motivation. I guess you have
> > to
> > wonder at that, but it's something that has contemporary relevance, a concept
> > well
> > beyond Oxbridge.
>
> Sorry, but you wouldn't. But perhaps if you could, then you might
> understand the point. For know you seem to be restricted to silly
> cliches, and trite cartoons of what goes on there.
>
You are wrong there, but we can argue possibilities all day long. The issue to me
is not wanting to, regardless. If I wanted a first rate research school in my field
I'd take Michigan, Florida, Cornell or UCLA and day. Mo better money, mo better
scholars, mo better facilities, mo better degree when you look for a job. What's
Oxford got? Listening to people like Dawkins rant all day? How's that for trite?
Maybe if I wanted a job at some uptight all talk no walk stuck up college I'd go
for Obxbridge, but if I were to go to a high powered program I'd want something
that would pay off with real connections.
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 22 Jan 2007 08:01:35
From: William A. T. Clark
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
In article <45B447CF.43A772D5@att.net >, Robert Hamilton <DBID@att.net>
wrote:
> "William A. T. Clark" wrote:
>
> > In article <45B3AA33.977FC8C2@att.net>, Robert Hamilton <DBID@att.net>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > "William A. T. Clark" wrote:
> > >
> > > > In article <45B3A0EC.E48B7E86@att.net>, Robert Hamilton <DBID@att.net>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > "William A. T. Clark" wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > In article <p1k5r2lt6e0dcb8fijg269c3bssg1pcvbb@4ax.com>,
> > > > > > Jack Hollis <xsleeper@aol.com> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Sat, 20 Jan 2007 16:39:28 -0500, "William A. T. Clark"
> > > > > > > <clark.31@osu.edu> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >> >Oh, Canadians could - it's the Americans that couldn't. You
> > > > > > > >> >see,
> > > > > > > >> >the
> > > > > > > >> >Canadians have an educational system modeled after the
> > > > > > > >> >British
> > > > > > > >> >one.
> > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > >> >William Clark
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> If the Canadian education system is so good, why is such and
> > > > > > > >> esteemed
> > > > > > > >> scholar like yourself in the US rather than Canada or Britain?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >To help raise standards,of course ;-)
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >William Clark
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > That would make sense if you actually got your degrees in Canada
> > > > > > > or
> > > > > > > Britain and then came to the US to impart your knowledge.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > All kidding aside, I'm sure you agree that the US attracts many
> > > > > > > top
> > > > > > > scholars from around the world. This is especially true in the
> > > > > > > sciences and medicine. If you look at the Nobel laureates in
> > > > > > > these
> > > > > > > areas, you will see that there are more Americans than any other
> > > > > > > nationality and that a lot of the non-Americans are working in
> > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > US.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Now, if you want to study subjects like languages, history,
> > > > > > > literature
> > > > > > > or philosophy, the universities in Europe are every bit as good
> > > > > > > as
> > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > US, if not better. What could sound better than having a Ph.D,
> > > > > > > in
> > > > > > > philosophy from the University of Paris?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Anything from the University of Oxford.
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Worn out old school. Last philosopher of any real general note was
> > > > > Karl
> > > > > Popper...a native of where?
> > > >
> > > > But probably one that still wouldn't admit you. Terrible thing, envy.
> > > >
> > > > William Clark
> > >
> > > If I plopped down the tuition, I'd be in. Ain't worth it to me though.
> > > You
> > > don't
> > > see me going on and on about it endlessly like your sort does with
> > > respect to
> > > the
> > > US...speaking of envy......
> > >
> > > Actually the Univeristy of Arkansas at Fayetteville has a program I'd be
> > > interested in if I ever got the chance and the motivation. I guess you
> > > have
> > > to
> > > wonder at that, but it's something that has contemporary relevance, a
> > > concept
> > > well
> > > beyond Oxbridge.
> >
> > Sorry, but you wouldn't. But perhaps if you could, then you might
> > understand the point. For know you seem to be restricted to silly
> > cliches, and trite cartoons of what goes on there.
> >
>
> You are wrong there, but we can argue possibilities all day long. The issue
> to me
> is not wanting to, regardless. If I wanted a first rate research school in my
> field
> I'd take Michigan, Florida, Cornell or UCLA and day. Mo better money, mo
> better
> scholars, mo better facilities, mo better degree when you look for a job.
> What's
> Oxford got? Listening to people like Dawkins rant all day? How's that for
> trite?
> Maybe if I wanted a job at some uptight all talk no walk stuck up college I'd
> go
> for Obxbridge, but if I were to go to a high powered program I'd want
> something
> that would pay off with real connections.
Just FYI - total Nobel Laureates. Cornell 40, Michigan 19, UCLA 10,
Florida 0, Oxford 49, Cambridge 83.
Yup, they just talk the talk alright.
William Clark
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 22 Jan 2007 07:49:27
From: William A. T. Clark
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
In article <45B447CF.43A772D5@att.net >, Robert Hamilton <DBID@att.net>
wrote:
> "William A. T. Clark" wrote:
>
> > In article <45B3AA33.977FC8C2@att.net>, Robert Hamilton <DBID@att.net>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > "William A. T. Clark" wrote:
> > >
> > > > In article <45B3A0EC.E48B7E86@att.net>, Robert Hamilton <DBID@att.net>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > "William A. T. Clark" wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > In article <p1k5r2lt6e0dcb8fijg269c3bssg1pcvbb@4ax.com>,
> > > > > > Jack Hollis <xsleeper@aol.com> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Sat, 20 Jan 2007 16:39:28 -0500, "William A. T. Clark"
> > > > > > > <clark.31@osu.edu> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >> >Oh, Canadians could - it's the Americans that couldn't. You
> > > > > > > >> >see,
> > > > > > > >> >the
> > > > > > > >> >Canadians have an educational system modeled after the
> > > > > > > >> >British
> > > > > > > >> >one.
> > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > >> >William Clark
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> If the Canadian education system is so good, why is such and
> > > > > > > >> esteemed
> > > > > > > >> scholar like yourself in the US rather than Canada or Britain?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >To help raise standards,of course ;-)
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >William Clark
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > That would make sense if you actually got your degrees in Canada
> > > > > > > or
> > > > > > > Britain and then came to the US to impart your knowledge.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > All kidding aside, I'm sure you agree that the US attracts many
> > > > > > > top
> > > > > > > scholars from around the world. This is especially true in the
> > > > > > > sciences and medicine. If you look at the Nobel laureates in
> > > > > > > these
> > > > > > > areas, you will see that there are more Americans than any other
> > > > > > > nationality and that a lot of the non-Americans are working in
> > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > US.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Now, if you want to study subjects like languages, history,
> > > > > > > literature
> > > > > > > or philosophy, the universities in Europe are every bit as good
> > > > > > > as
> > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > US, if not better. What could sound better than having a Ph.D,
> > > > > > > in
> > > > > > > philosophy from the University of Paris?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Anything from the University of Oxford.
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Worn out old school. Last philosopher of any real general note was
> > > > > Karl
> > > > > Popper...a native of where?
> > > >
> > > > But probably one that still wouldn't admit you. Terrible thing, envy.
> > > >
> > > > William Clark
> > >
> > > If I plopped down the tuition, I'd be in. Ain't worth it to me though.
> > > You
> > > don't
> > > see me going on and on about it endlessly like your sort does with
> > > respect to
> > > the
> > > US...speaking of envy......
> > >
> > > Actually the Univeristy of Arkansas at Fayetteville has a program I'd be
> > > interested in if I ever got the chance and the motivation. I guess you
> > > have
> > > to
> > > wonder at that, but it's something that has contemporary relevance, a
> > > concept
> > > well
> > > beyond Oxbridge.
> >
> > Sorry, but you wouldn't. But perhaps if you could, then you might
> > understand the point. For know you seem to be restricted to silly
> > cliches, and trite cartoons of what goes on there.
> >
>
> You are wrong there, but we can argue possibilities all day long. The issue
> to me
> is not wanting to, regardless. If I wanted a first rate research school in my
> field
> I'd take Michigan, Florida, Cornell or UCLA and day. Mo better money, mo
> better
> scholars, mo better facilities, mo better degree when you look for a job.
> What's
> Oxford got? Listening to people like Dawkins rant all day? How's that for
> trite?
> Maybe if I wanted a job at some uptight all talk no walk stuck up college I'd
> go
> for Obxbridge, but if I were to go to a high powered program I'd want
> something
> that would pay off with real connections.
QED.
William Clark
|
| | | | | | | |
Date: 20 Jan 2007 17:16:43
From: Robert Hamilton
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
"William A. T. Clark" wrote:
> In article <45B2331C.79473BAC@att.net>, Robert Hamilton <DBID@att.net>
> wrote:
>
> > "William A. T. Clark" wrote:
> >
> > > In article <51cmmeF1jqh21U1@mid.individual.net>,
> > > "MnMikew" <mnmiikkew@aol.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > "William A. T. Clark" <clark.31@nospamosu.edu> wrote in message
> > > > news:clark.31-5D5D0B.14054019012007@charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu...
> > > > > In article <51c8khF1jgoqtU1@mid.individual.net>,
> > > > > "MnMikew" <mnmiikkew@aol.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >> "William A. T. Clark" <clark.31@osu.edu> wrote in message
> > > > >> news:clark.31-62EF99.19145518012007@charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu...
> > > > >> > In article <45B00750.98C72206@att.net>, Robert Hamilton
> > > > >> > <DBID@att.net>
> > > > >> > wrote:
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> >> 38% Bush; 33% Pelosi.
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > Nice try, but Dubya is President, and Pelosi is the obscure Leader
> > > > >> > of
> > > > >> > the House - apples and oranges. Most people, outside of you rabid
> > > > >> > smear
> > > > >> > mongers, have barely heard of her.
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> OBSCURE?????????? Now that's funny.
> > > > >
> > > > > OK, without going to Google or otherwise looking it up, name the last
> > > > > ten Presidents and the last ten Leaders of the House.
> > > > >
> > > > > Now do you understand?
> > > > >
> > > > You either don't read newspapers or watch TV.
> > >
> > > I do, but the majority of our fellow countrymen do not (at least the
> > > news portions). You know, the same people that cannot find Canada on a
> > > map.
> > >
> > > William Clark
> >
> > I think that it is unfair to chide the Irish for generally not being able to
> > find
> > Canada on a map. Most Canadians couldn't find Ireland either.
>
> Oh, Canadians could - it's the Americans that couldn't. You see, the
> Canadians have an educational system modeled after the British one.
>
>
I'm a Canadian, so don't tell me about Canadian education. Most Canadians would not
be able to find Ireland on a map...unless it were labeled! I also see no difference
in the structure of the Canadian system and that of the US system; and both are
kedly different than the tired old British system. The US has consistently
produced the vast majority of the best scholars in the world since WWII despite
representing less than 5% of the total world's population.
For sure, American post secondary education is vastly superior to that in Canada.
My take on the US public system is rural areas get screwed because they have low
tax bases, but get no support. Education money is redistributed into big cities
(areas with high tax bases BTW) to serve purely political rationale. They money is
then wasted on PC white elephant boodoggles in the big cites. The result is that
rural and inner city education in the US stink, but if you live in a nice suburb,
you can get a very good education from the public system in the US.
|
| | | | | | | | |
Date: 20 Jan 2007 16:51:31
From: William A. T. Clark
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
In article <45B24C45.1DC44703@att.net >, Robert Hamilton <DBID@att.net>
wrote:
> "William A. T. Clark" wrote:
>
> > In article <45B2331C.79473BAC@att.net>, Robert Hamilton <DBID@att.net>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > "William A. T. Clark" wrote:
> > >
> > > > In article <51cmmeF1jqh21U1@mid.individual.net>,
> > > > "MnMikew" <mnmiikkew@aol.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > "William A. T. Clark" <clark.31@nospamosu.edu> wrote in message
> > > > > news:clark.31-5D5D0B.14054019012007@charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu...
> > > > > > In article <51c8khF1jgoqtU1@mid.individual.net>,
> > > > > > "MnMikew" <mnmiikkew@aol.com> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >> "William A. T. Clark" <clark.31@osu.edu> wrote in message
> > > > > >> news:clark.31-62EF99.19145518012007@charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu
> > > > > >> ...
> > > > > >> > In article <45B00750.98C72206@att.net>, Robert Hamilton
> > > > > >> > <DBID@att.net>
> > > > > >> > wrote:
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> >> 38% Bush; 33% Pelosi.
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> > Nice try, but Dubya is President, and Pelosi is the obscure
> > > > > >> > Leader
> > > > > >> > of
> > > > > >> > the House - apples and oranges. Most people, outside of you
> > > > > >> > rabid
> > > > > >> > smear
> > > > > >> > mongers, have barely heard of her.
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> OBSCURE?????????? Now that's funny.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > OK, without going to Google or otherwise looking it up, name the
> > > > > > last
> > > > > > ten Presidents and the last ten Leaders of the House.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Now do you understand?
> > > > > >
> > > > > You either don't read newspapers or watch TV.
> > > >
> > > > I do, but the majority of our fellow countrymen do not (at least the
> > > > news portions). You know, the same people that cannot find Canada on a
> > > > map.
> > > >
> > > > William Clark
> > >
> > > I think that it is unfair to chide the Irish for generally not being able
> > > to
> > > find
> > > Canada on a map. Most Canadians couldn't find Ireland either.
> >
> > Oh, Canadians could - it's the Americans that couldn't. You see, the
> > Canadians have an educational system modeled after the British one.
> >
> >
>
> I'm a Canadian, so don't tell me about Canadian education. Most Canadians
> would not
> be able to find Ireland on a map...unless it were labeled! I also see no
> difference
> in the structure of the Canadian system and that of the US system; and both
> are
> kedly different than the tired old British system. The US has consistently
> produced the vast majority of the best scholars in the world since WWII
> despite
> representing less than 5% of the total world's population.
Well, firstly a large number of the scholars are immigrants from other
countries, especially immediately after WWII, so there is a slight
distortion there. Secondly, if we look at, say, Nobel Prizes in
Chemistry, since 1945 52 winners have been from the US (although many of
them were not born and educated here), and 19 were from just the UK.
On a population ratio, the US would have to have produced almost 100
winners to be as productive as just the UK in that time period. Numbers
can be deceptive.
The US has traditionally built (quite rightly) much of its intellectual
capital by welcoming scholars and researchers born and educated
elsewhere. This supply is rapidly drying up, as Asian and European
economies grow stronger, and investment in research and scholarships
diminishes in the US. We will continue to struggle as technology emerges
in China and other countries that previously relied on the US to provide
them with expertise. They are getting to the point of no longer needing
us.
William Clark
|
| | | | | | | | | |
Date: 21 Jan 2007 01:01:04
From: Robert Hamilton
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
"William A. T. Clark" wrote:
> In article <45B24C45.1DC44703@att.net>, Robert Hamilton <DBID@att.net>
> wrote:
>
> > "William A. T. Clark" wrote:
> >
> > > In article <45B2331C.79473BAC@att.net>, Robert Hamilton <DBID@att.net>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > "William A. T. Clark" wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > In article <51cmmeF1jqh21U1@mid.individual.net>,
> > > > > "MnMikew" <mnmiikkew@aol.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > "William A. T. Clark" <clark.31@nospamosu.edu> wrote in message
> > > > > > news:clark.31-5D5D0B.14054019012007@charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu...
> > > > > > > In article <51c8khF1jgoqtU1@mid.individual.net>,
> > > > > > > "MnMikew" <mnmiikkew@aol.com> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> "William A. T. Clark" <clark.31@osu.edu> wrote in message
> > > > > > >> news:clark.31-62EF99.19145518012007@charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu
> > > > > > >> ...
> > > > > > >> > In article <45B00750.98C72206@att.net>, Robert Hamilton
> > > > > > >> > <DBID@att.net>
> > > > > > >> > wrote:
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> >> 38% Bush; 33% Pelosi.
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> > Nice try, but Dubya is President, and Pelosi is the obscure
> > > > > > >> > Leader
> > > > > > >> > of
> > > > > > >> > the House - apples and oranges. Most people, outside of you
> > > > > > >> > rabid
> > > > > > >> > smear
> > > > > > >> > mongers, have barely heard of her.
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> OBSCURE?????????? Now that's funny.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > OK, without going to Google or otherwise looking it up, name the
> > > > > > > last
> > > > > > > ten Presidents and the last ten Leaders of the House.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Now do you understand?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > You either don't read newspapers or watch TV.
> > > > >
> > > > > I do, but the majority of our fellow countrymen do not (at least the
> > > > > news portions). You know, the same people that cannot find Canada on a
> > > > > map.
> > > > >
> > > > > William Clark
> > > >
> > > > I think that it is unfair to chide the Irish for generally not being able
> > > > to
> > > > find
> > > > Canada on a map. Most Canadians couldn't find Ireland either.
> > >
> > > Oh, Canadians could - it's the Americans that couldn't. You see, the
> > > Canadians have an educational system modeled after the British one.
> > >
> > >
> >
> > I'm a Canadian, so don't tell me about Canadian education. Most Canadians
> > would not
> > be able to find Ireland on a map...unless it were labeled! I also see no
> > difference
> > in the structure of the Canadian system and that of the US system; and both
> > are
> > kedly different than the tired old British system. The US has consistently
> > produced the vast majority of the best scholars in the world since WWII
> > despite
> > representing less than 5% of the total world's population.
>
> Well, firstly a large number of the scholars are immigrants from other
> countries, especially immediately after WWII, so there is a slight
> distortion there. Secondly, if we look at, say, Nobel Prizes in
> Chemistry, since 1945 52 winners have been from the US (although many of
> them were not born and educated here), and 19 were from just the UK.
>
> On a population ratio, the US would have to have produced almost 100
> winners to be as productive as just the UK in that time period. Numbers
> can be deceptive.
>
> The US has traditionally built (quite rightly) much of its intellectual
> capital by welcoming scholars and researchers born and educated
> elsewhere. This supply is rapidly drying up, as Asian and European
> economies grow stronger, and investment in research and scholarships
> diminishes in the US. We will continue to struggle as technology emerges
> in China and other countries that previously relied on the US to provide
> them with expertise. They are getting to the point of no longer needing
> us.
>
>
You need to change your name to Pangloss. The US picked up a large number of people,
especially from Germany, however most Nobel winning work since WWI was done in the
US, and little in England. England is the one who imported a tlot of scholars,
especially from Germany. Watson, for example, was an American, educated in the US.
Crick was (is) a flake and Wilkins didn't really do anything to deserve the award
other than employ Rosalind Franklin. Others like Sharp, McClintock, Beadle and
Tatum, Morgan, and many many others were Americans.
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 20 Jan 2007 23:18:13
From: William A. T. Clark
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
In article <45B2B8B6.BD710DE5@att.net >, Robert Hamilton <DBID@att.net>
wrote:
> "William A. T. Clark" wrote:
>
> > In article <45B24C45.1DC44703@att.net>, Robert Hamilton <DBID@att.net>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > "William A. T. Clark" wrote:
> > >
> > > > In article <45B2331C.79473BAC@att.net>, Robert Hamilton <DBID@att.net>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > "William A. T. Clark" wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > In article <51cmmeF1jqh21U1@mid.individual.net>,
> > > > > > "MnMikew" <mnmiikkew@aol.com> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > "William A. T. Clark" <clark.31@nospamosu.edu> wrote in message
> > > > > > > news:clark.31-5D5D0B.14054019012007@charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.ed
> > > > > > > u...
> > > > > > > > In article <51c8khF1jgoqtU1@mid.individual.net>,
> > > > > > > > "MnMikew" <mnmiikkew@aol.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >> "William A. T. Clark" <clark.31@osu.edu> wrote in message
> > > > > > > >> news:clark.31-62EF99.19145518012007@charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state
> > > > > > > >> .edu
> > > > > > > >> ...
> > > > > > > >> > In article <45B00750.98C72206@att.net>, Robert Hamilton
> > > > > > > >> > <DBID@att.net>
> > > > > > > >> > wrote:
> > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > >> >> 38% Bush; 33% Pelosi.
> > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > >> > Nice try, but Dubya is President, and Pelosi is the obscure
> > > > > > > >> > Leader
> > > > > > > >> > of
> > > > > > > >> > the House - apples and oranges. Most people, outside of you
> > > > > > > >> > rabid
> > > > > > > >> > smear
> > > > > > > >> > mongers, have barely heard of her.
> > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > >> OBSCURE?????????? Now that's funny.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > OK, without going to Google or otherwise looking it up, name
> > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > last
> > > > > > > > ten Presidents and the last ten Leaders of the House.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Now do you understand?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > You either don't read newspapers or watch TV.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I do, but the majority of our fellow countrymen do not (at least
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > news portions). You know, the same people that cannot find Canada
> > > > > > on a
> > > > > > map.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > William Clark
> > > > >
> > > > > I think that it is unfair to chide the Irish for generally not being
> > > > > able
> > > > > to
> > > > > find
> > > > > Canada on a map. Most Canadians couldn't find Ireland either.
> > > >
> > > > Oh, Canadians could - it's the Americans that couldn't. You see, the
> > > > Canadians have an educational system modeled after the British one.
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > I'm a Canadian, so don't tell me about Canadian education. Most Canadians
> > > would not
> > > be able to find Ireland on a map...unless it were labeled! I also see no
> > > difference
> > > in the structure of the Canadian system and that of the US system; and
> > > both
> > > are
> > > kedly different than the tired old British system. The US has
> > > consistently
> > > produced the vast majority of the best scholars in the world since WWII
> > > despite
> > > representing less than 5% of the total world's population.
> >
> > Well, firstly a large number of the scholars are immigrants from other
> > countries, especially immediately after WWII, so there is a slight
> > distortion there. Secondly, if we look at, say, Nobel Prizes in
> > Chemistry, since 1945 52 winners have been from the US (although many of
> > them were not born and educated here), and 19 were from just the UK.
> >
> > On a population ratio, the US would have to have produced almost 100
> > winners to be as productive as just the UK in that time period. Numbers
> > can be deceptive.
> >
> > The US has traditionally built (quite rightly) much of its intellectual
> > capital by welcoming scholars and researchers born and educated
> > elsewhere. This supply is rapidly drying up, as Asian and European
> > economies grow stronger, and investment in research and scholarships
> > diminishes in the US. We will continue to struggle as technology emerges
> > in China and other countries that previously relied on the US to provide
> > them with expertise. They are getting to the point of no longer needing
> > us.
> >
> >
>
> You need to change your name to Pangloss. The US picked up a large number of
> people,
> especially from Germany, however most Nobel winning work since WWI was done
> in the
> US, and little in England. England is the one who imported a tlot of
> scholars,
> especially from Germany. Watson, for example, was an American, educated in
> the US.
> Crick was (is) a flake and Wilkins didn't really do anything to deserve the
> award
> other than employ Rosalind Franklin. Others like Sharp, McClintock, Beadle
> and
> Tatum, Morgan, and many many others were Americans.
Really? England "imported a lot of scholars" did it? Rekable - I
suppose von Braun and all the others were really living in Brighton.
Your revisionist view may fit your rosy view of the world, but you need
to at least try to make it gybe with the facts. Check the chemistry
laureates since 1945, for example, and with the possible exception of
Perutz, tell me which are "imported".
I thought not.
William Clark
|
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 21 Jan 2007 17:28:58
From: Robert Hamilton
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
"William A. T. Clark" wrote:
> In article <45B2B8B6.BD710DE5@att.net>, Robert Hamilton <DBID@att.net>
> wrote:
>
> > "William A. T. Clark" wrote:
> >
> > > In article <45B24C45.1DC44703@att.net>, Robert Hamilton <DBID@att.net>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > "William A. T. Clark" wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > In article <45B2331C.79473BAC@att.net>, Robert Hamilton <DBID@att.net>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > "William A. T. Clark" wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > In article <51cmmeF1jqh21U1@mid.individual.net>,
> > > > > > > "MnMikew" <mnmiikkew@aol.com> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > "William A. T. Clark" <clark.31@nospamosu.edu> wrote in message
> > > > > > > > news:clark.31-5D5D0B.14054019012007@charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.ed
> > > > > > > > u...
> > > > > > > > > In article <51c8khF1jgoqtU1@mid.individual.net>,
> > > > > > > > > "MnMikew" <mnmiikkew@aol.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >> "William A. T. Clark" <clark.31@osu.edu> wrote in message
> > > > > > > > >> news:clark.31-62EF99.19145518012007@charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state
> > > > > > > > >> .edu
> > > > > > > > >> ...
> > > > > > > > >> > In article <45B00750.98C72206@att.net>, Robert Hamilton
> > > > > > > > >> > <DBID@att.net>
> > > > > > > > >> > wrote:
> > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > >> >> 38% Bush; 33% Pelosi.
> > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > >> > Nice try, but Dubya is President, and Pelosi is the obscure
> > > > > > > > >> > Leader
> > > > > > > > >> > of
> > > > > > > > >> > the House - apples and oranges. Most people, outside of you
> > > > > > > > >> > rabid
> > > > > > > > >> > smear
> > > > > > > > >> > mongers, have barely heard of her.
> > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > >> OBSCURE?????????? Now that's funny.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > OK, without going to Google or otherwise looking it up, name
> > > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > last
> > > > > > > > > ten Presidents and the last ten Leaders of the House.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Now do you understand?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > You either don't read newspapers or watch TV.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I do, but the majority of our fellow countrymen do not (at least
> > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > news portions). You know, the same people that cannot find Canada
> > > > > > > on a
> > > > > > > map.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > William Clark
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I think that it is unfair to chide the Irish for generally not being
> > > > > > able
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > find
> > > > > > Canada on a map. Most Canadians couldn't find Ireland either.
> > > > >
> > > > > Oh, Canadians could - it's the Americans that couldn't. You see, the
> > > > > Canadians have an educational system modeled after the British one.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > I'm a Canadian, so don't tell me about Canadian education. Most Canadians
> > > > would not
> > > > be able to find Ireland on a map...unless it were labeled! I also see no
> > > > difference
> > > > in the structure of the Canadian system and that of the US system; and
> > > > both
> > > > are
> > > > kedly different than the tired old British system. The US has
> > > > consistently
> > > > produced the vast majority of the best scholars in the world since WWII
> > > > despite
> > > > representing less than 5% of the total world's population.
> > >
> > > Well, firstly a large number of the scholars are immigrants from other
> > > countries, especially immediately after WWII, so there is a slight
> > > distortion there. Secondly, if we look at, say, Nobel Prizes in
> > > Chemistry, since 1945 52 winners have been from the US (although many of
> > > them were not born and educated here), and 19 were from just the UK.
> > >
> > > On a population ratio, the US would have to have produced almost 100
> > > winners to be as productive as just the UK in that time period. Numbers
> > > can be deceptive.
> > >
> > > The US has traditionally built (quite rightly) much of its intellectual
> > > capital by welcoming scholars and researchers born and educated
> > > elsewhere. This supply is rapidly drying up, as Asian and European
> > > economies grow stronger, and investment in research and scholarships
> > > diminishes in the US. We will continue to struggle as technology emerges
> > > in China and other countries that previously relied on the US to provide
> > > them with expertise. They are getting to the point of no longer needing
> > > us.
> > >
> > >
> >
> > You need to change your name to Pangloss. The US picked up a large number of
> > people,
> > especially from Germany, however most Nobel winning work since WWI was done
> > in the
> > US, and little in England. England is the one who imported a tlot of
> > scholars,
> > especially from Germany. Watson, for example, was an American, educated in
> > the US.
> > Crick was (is) a flake and Wilkins didn't really do anything to deserve the
> > award
> > other than employ Rosalind Franklin. Others like Sharp, McClintock, Beadle
> > and
> > Tatum, Morgan, and many many others were Americans.
>
> Really? England "imported a lot of scholars" did it? Rekable - I
> suppose von Braun and all the others were really living in Brighton.
> Your revisionist view may fit your rosy view of the world, but you need
> to at least try to make it gybe with the facts. Check the chemistry
> laureates since 1945, for example, and with the possible exception of
> Perutz, tell me which are "imported".
>
> I thought not.
Whatever, Dr. Pangloss. I made a general statement that is a *FACT*; more
*AMERICANS* have won Nobel Prizes than any other nationality, despite the fact that
less than 5% of the world's population are Americans. This not only continues, but
accelerates. Whether it's art or science, or just plain old humanitarianism,
Americans actually invest far far more than anyone else, perhaps more than the
entire rest of the world combined. People come from around the world to learn what
Americans know because they can't do so anywhere else, certainly not in England,
that's for sure...not to mention Ireland.
You are so anti American one wonders what you are doing here? Why don't you go help
your hero Hugo create a socialist paradise down in Venezuela. Chance to make up for
the opportunity missed in Cuba!
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 22 Jan 2007 13:04:25
From: Jack Hollis
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
On Sun, 21 Jan 2007 17:28:58 GMT, Robert Hamilton <DBID@att.net >
wrote:
>You are so anti American one wonders what you are doing here?
He came here for a better life than he could have in the UK.
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 22 Jan 2007 20:35:03
From: Alan Murphy
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
"Jack Hollis" <xsleeper@aol.com > wrote in message
news:74v9r2p4huvshd753np8e4pq0cglr8s5e0@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 21 Jan 2007 17:28:58 GMT, Robert Hamilton <DBID@att.net>
> wrote:
>
>>You are so anti American one wonders what you are doing here?
>
> He came here for a better life than he could have in the UK.
You must be joking. I lived in Potomac, Md., from
1982 to 1986, probably one of the more desirable
locations and still couldn't wait for the contract to finish to
get back to civilisation in Europe. It's so one-dimensional
in the States, but that's what you are used to and you
probably don't see it that way. That said, I've worked
with Americans all my life and loved every minute of the
experience. You really are a pleasure to work with.
But you've got to get rid of the bunch of fascist thugs
currently lodged in the White House. Once that's done
it'll probably take just a few generations to rehabilitate
yourselves with the rest of humanity :-)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 22 Jan 2007 20:16:03
From: Jack Hollis
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
On Mon, 22 Jan 2007 20:35:03 -0000, "Alan Murphy"
<afmccl@btinternet.com > wrote:
>"Jack Hollis" <xsleeper@aol.com> wrote in message
>news:74v9r2p4huvshd753np8e4pq0cglr8s5e0@4ax.com...
>> On Sun, 21 Jan 2007 17:28:58 GMT, Robert Hamilton <DBID@att.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>You are so anti American one wonders what you are doing here?
>>
>> He came here for a better life than he could have in the UK.
>
>You must be joking. I lived in Potomac, Md., from
>1982 to 1986, probably one of the more desirable
>locations and still couldn't wait for the contract to finish to
>get back to civilisation in Europe.
I suppose I could think of a few places in Europe that I'd prefer to
live than Potomac, MD.
Nevertheless, there are a lot more Europeans who come to the US to
live than the other way around. I assume that because they find life
here better than they do in Europe. If that wasn't the case, why
would they stay here?
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 23 Jan 2007 19:12:55
From: Alan Murphy
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
"Jack Hollis" <xsleeper@aol.com > wrote in message
news:f8oar21jh5nsar62arbledc2jtgn5canq7@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 22 Jan 2007 20:35:03 -0000, "Alan Murphy"
> <afmccl@btinternet.com> wrote:
>
>>"Jack Hollis" <xsleeper@aol.com> wrote in message
>>news:74v9r2p4huvshd753np8e4pq0cglr8s5e0@4ax.com...
>>> On Sun, 21 Jan 2007 17:28:58 GMT, Robert Hamilton <DBID@att.net>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>You are so anti American one wonders what you are doing here?
>>>
>>> He came here for a better life than he could have in the UK.
>>
>>You must be joking. I lived in Potomac, Md., from
>>1982 to 1986, probably one of the more desirable
>>locations and still couldn't wait for the contract to finish to
>>get back to civilisation in Europe.
>
> I suppose I could think of a few places in Europe that I'd prefer to
> live than Potomac, MD.
>
Exactly my point, Jack. BTW. Do you play golf?
Or tennis. Or football. Do you have a bicycle?
Alan
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 23 Jan 2007 22:05:16
From: Jack Hollis
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
On Tue, 23 Jan 2007 19:12:55 -0000, "Alan Murphy"
<afmccl@btinternet.com > wrote:
>Do you play golf?
>Or tennis. Or football. Do you have a bicycle?
>
>Alan
Where I grew up, they didn't play golf or tennis.
I played golf for a couple of years back in my early 20s, but really
never did better than a rank amateur. I could hit the ball a long way
but seldom did it go very straight. My 12 year old son is a gifted
golfer, but I can't get him to play that much. For whatever reason,
he likes to shoot pool and play football. He's a pretty good pool
player, but not nearly as good as he plays golf. Hopefully he'll take
a renewed interest in the sport.
I used to ride a bike until my back gave out a few years ago. I used
to ride about 60 to 80 miles a week. I loved bike riding but never got
to the point of joining a club.
My favorite sport, although I never played it, is soccer. I caught
the bug while I was living in the Netherlands in the early 1970s.
Obviously, during those years Eddy Merckx was a minor deity in Holland
so I follow bike racing as well.
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 24 Jan 2007 14:20:48
From: Alan Murphy
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
"Jack Hollis" <xsleeper@aol.com > wrote in message
news:dbidr25i0ln7183m1dikmthiu134gukeuo@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 23 Jan 2007 19:12:55 -0000, "Alan Murphy"
> <afmccl@btinternet.com> wrote:
>
>>Do you play golf?
>>Or tennis. Or football. Do you have a bicycle?
>>
>>Alan
>
> Where I grew up, they didn't play golf or tennis.
>
> I played golf for a couple of years back in my early 20s, but really
> never did better than a rank amateur. I could hit the ball a long way
> but seldom did it go very straight. My 12 year old son is a gifted
> golfer, but I can't get him to play that much. For whatever reason,
> he likes to shoot pool and play football. He's a pretty good pool
> player, but not nearly as good as he plays golf. Hopefully he'll take
> a renewed interest in the sport.
>
> I used to ride a bike until my back gave out a few years ago. I used
> to ride about 60 to 80 miles a week. I loved bike riding but never got
> to the point of joining a club.
>
> My favorite sport, although I never played it, is soccer. I caught
> the bug while I was living in the Netherlands in the early 1970s.
> Obviously, during those years Eddy Merckx was a minor deity in Holland
> so I follow bike racing as well.
I wondered where we'd met. I lived in Amsterdam
in the early seventies :-)
Alan
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 24 Jan 2007 16:13:02
From: Jack Hollis
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
On Wed, 24 Jan 2007 14:20:48 -0000, "Alan Murphy"
<afmccl@btinternet.com > wrote:
>> My favorite sport, although I never played it, is soccer. I caught
>> the bug while I was living in the Netherlands in the early 1970s.
>> Obviously, during those years Eddy Merckx was a minor deity in Holland
>> so I follow bike racing as well.
>
>I wondered where we'd met. I lived in Amsterdam
>in the early seventies :-)
>
>Alan
Were you the guy smoking that chillum full of Afghan hash in the
Vondelpark.
There are some special places and special times in this world, and
Amsterdam in the early 1970s was one of them.
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 24 Jan 2007 21:59:23
From: Alan Murphy
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
"Jack Hollis" <xsleeper@aol.com > wrote in message
news:5oifr2tp8v9rj5ki2j96ptjstnkg7lhuh7@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 24 Jan 2007 14:20:48 -0000, "Alan Murphy"
> <afmccl@btinternet.com> wrote:
>
>>> My favorite sport, although I never played it, is soccer. I caught
>>> the bug while I was living in the Netherlands in the early 1970s.
>>> Obviously, during those years Eddy Merckx was a minor deity in Holland
>>> so I follow bike racing as well.
>>
>>I wondered where we'd met. I lived in Amsterdam
>>in the early seventies :-)
>>
>>Alan
>
> Were you the guy smoking that chillum full of Afghan hash in the
> Vondelpark.
>
> There are some special places and special times in this world, and
> Amsterdam in the early 1970s was one of them.
>
Never touched the stuff unfortunately. I was the
guy hanging out with the straight (and not so straight)
babes in the Sherry Bodega :-)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 24 Jan 2007 09:57:23
From: William A. T. Clark
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
In article <I8ydnX7xtb_c9irYnZ2dnUVZ8qCqnZ2d@bt.com >,
"Alan Murphy" <afmccl@btinternet.com > wrote:
> "Jack Hollis" <xsleeper@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:dbidr25i0ln7183m1dikmthiu134gukeuo@4ax.com...
> > On Tue, 23 Jan 2007 19:12:55 -0000, "Alan Murphy"
> > <afmccl@btinternet.com> wrote:
> >
> >>Do you play golf?
> >>Or tennis. Or football. Do you have a bicycle?
> >>
> >>Alan
> >
> > Where I grew up, they didn't play golf or tennis.
> >
> > I played golf for a couple of years back in my early 20s, but really
> > never did better than a rank amateur. I could hit the ball a long way
> > but seldom did it go very straight. My 12 year old son is a gifted
> > golfer, but I can't get him to play that much. For whatever reason,
> > he likes to shoot pool and play football. He's a pretty good pool
> > player, but not nearly as good as he plays golf. Hopefully he'll take
> > a renewed interest in the sport.
> >
> > I used to ride a bike until my back gave out a few years ago. I used
> > to ride about 60 to 80 miles a week. I loved bike riding but never got
> > to the point of joining a club.
> >
> > My favorite sport, although I never played it, is soccer. I caught
> > the bug while I was living in the Netherlands in the early 1970s.
> > Obviously, during those years Eddy Merckx was a minor deity in Holland
> > so I follow bike racing as well.
Indeed, but Eddy Merckx was from Belgium, and is a French speaker.
William Clark
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 24 Jan 2007 11:26:50
From: Jack Hollis
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
On Wed, 24 Jan 2007 09:57:23 -0500, "William A. T. Clark"
<clark.31@nospamosu.edu > wrote:
>Indeed, but Eddy Merckx was from Belgium, and is a French speaker.
>
>William Clark
Eddy Merckx may very well speak French, but he is Flemish. The Dutch,
who usually don't have a high opinion of the Flemish (they're too
reserved and have a funny accent) are more than happy to welcome a
Flemish athlete into the fold if he's successful.
This is similar to the English when they talk about a successful
athlete from Scotland, Wales or NI. George Best, oh yes, he's
British.
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 21 Jan 2007 12:54:37
From: William A. T. Clark
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
In article <45B3A0A2.A231A369@att.net >, Robert Hamilton <DBID@att.net>
wrote:
> "William A. T. Clark" wrote:
>
> > In article <45B2B8B6.BD710DE5@att.net>, Robert Hamilton <DBID@att.net>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > "William A. T. Clark" wrote:
> > >
> > > > In article <45B24C45.1DC44703@att.net>, Robert Hamilton <DBID@att.net>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > "William A. T. Clark" wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > In article <45B2331C.79473BAC@att.net>, Robert Hamilton
> > > > > > <DBID@att.net>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > "William A. T. Clark" wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > In article <51cmmeF1jqh21U1@mid.individual.net>,
> > > > > > > > "MnMikew" <mnmiikkew@aol.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > "William A. T. Clark" <clark.31@nospamosu.edu> wrote in
> > > > > > > > > message
> > > > > > > > > news:clark.31-5D5D0B.14054019012007@charm.magnus.acs.ohio-stat
> > > > > > > > > e.ed
> > > > > > > > > u...
> > > > > > > > > > In article <51c8khF1jgoqtU1@mid.individual.net>,
> > > > > > > > > > "MnMikew" <mnmiikkew@aol.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >> "William A. T. Clark" <clark.31@osu.edu> wrote in message
> > > > > > > > > >> news:clark.31-62EF99.19145518012007@charm.magnus.acs.ohio-s
> > > > > > > > > >> tate
> > > > > > > > > >> .edu
> > > > > > > > > >> ...
> > > > > > > > > >> > In article <45B00750.98C72206@att.net>, Robert Hamilton
> > > > > > > > > >> > <DBID@att.net>
> > > > > > > > > >> > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > > >> >> 38% Bush; 33% Pelosi.
> > > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > > >> > Nice try, but Dubya is President, and Pelosi is the
> > > > > > > > > >> > obscure
> > > > > > > > > >> > Leader
> > > > > > > > > >> > of
> > > > > > > > > >> > the House - apples and oranges. Most people, outside of
> > > > > > > > > >> > you
> > > > > > > > > >> > rabid
> > > > > > > > > >> > smear
> > > > > > > > > >> > mongers, have barely heard of her.
> > > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > > >> OBSCURE?????????? Now that's funny.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > OK, without going to Google or otherwise looking it up,
> > > > > > > > > > name
> > > > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > last
> > > > > > > > > > ten Presidents and the last ten Leaders of the House.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Now do you understand?
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > You either don't read newspapers or watch TV.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I do, but the majority of our fellow countrymen do not (at
> > > > > > > > least
> > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > news portions). You know, the same people that cannot find
> > > > > > > > Canada
> > > > > > > > on a
> > > > > > > > map.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > William Clark
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I think that it is unfair to chide the Irish for generally not
> > > > > > > being
> > > > > > > able
> > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > find
> > > > > > > Canada on a map. Most Canadians couldn't find Ireland either.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Oh, Canadians could - it's the Americans that couldn't. You see,
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > Canadians have an educational system modeled after the British one.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > I'm a Canadian, so don't tell me about Canadian education. Most
> > > > > Canadians
> > > > > would not
> > > > > be able to find Ireland on a map...unless it were labeled! I also see
> > > > > no
> > > > > difference
> > > > > in the structure of the Canadian system and that of the US system;
> > > > > and
> > > > > both
> > > > > are
> > > > > kedly different than the tired old British system. The US has
> > > > > consistently
> > > > > produced the vast majority of the best scholars in the world since
> > > > > WWII
> > > > > despite
> > > > > representing less than 5% of the total world's population.
> > > >
> > > > Well, firstly a large number of the scholars are immigrants from other
> > > > countries, especially immediately after WWII, so there is a slight
> > > > distortion there. Secondly, if we look at, say, Nobel Prizes in
> > > > Chemistry, since 1945 52 winners have been from the US (although many
> > > > of
> > > > them were not born and educated here), and 19 were from just the UK.
> > > >
> > > > On a population ratio, the US would have to have produced almost 100
> > > > winners to be as productive as just the UK in that time period. Numbers
> > > > can be deceptive.
> > > >
> > > > The US has traditionally built (quite rightly) much of its intellectual
> > > > capital by welcoming scholars and researchers born and educated
> > > > elsewhere. This supply is rapidly drying up, as Asian and European
> > > > economies grow stronger, and investment in research and scholarships
> > > > diminishes in the US. We will continue to struggle as technology
> > > > emerges
> > > > in China and other countries that previously relied on the US to
> > > > provide
> > > > them with expertise. They are getting to the point of no longer needing
> > > > us.
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > You need to change your name to Pangloss. The US picked up a large number
> > > of
> > > people,
> > > especially from Germany, however most Nobel winning work since WWI was
> > > done
> > > in the
> > > US, and little in England. England is the one who imported a tlot of
> > > scholars,
> > > especially from Germany. Watson, for example, was an American, educated
> > > in
> > > the US.
> > > Crick was (is) a flake and Wilkins didn't really do anything to deserve
> > > the
> > > award
> > > other than employ Rosalind Franklin. Others like Sharp, McClintock,
> > > Beadle
> > > and
> > > Tatum, Morgan, and many many others were Americans.
> >
> > Really? England "imported a lot of scholars" did it? Rekable - I
> > suppose von Braun and all the others were really living in Brighton.
> > Your revisionist view may fit your rosy view of the world, but you need
> > to at least try to make it gybe with the facts. Check the chemistry
> > laureates since 1945, for example, and with the possible exception of
> > Perutz, tell me which are "imported".
> >
> > I thought not.
>
> Whatever, Dr. Pangloss. I made a general statement that is a *FACT*; more
> *AMERICANS* have won Nobel Prizes than any other nationality, despite the
> fact that
> less than 5% of the world's population are Americans. This not only
> continues, but
> accelerates. Whether it's art or science, or just plain old humanitarianism,
> Americans actually invest far far more than anyone else, perhaps more than
> the
> entire rest of the world combined. People come from around the world to learn
> what
> Americans know because they can't do so anywhere else, certainly not in
> England,
> that's for sure...not to mention Ireland.
Aaaah, well one would expect this to be true from a country this size,
wouldn't you? However, it does indicate that the US system is not as
productive at the highest level as it might be. And FYI, the investment
in research as a fraction of GDP in the US ranks very low on the world
table (and is dropping), so look a little closer at your numbers. The
rest of your paragraph is simply absurd jingoism.
>
> You are so anti American one wonders what you are doing here? Why don't you
> go help
> your hero Hugo create a socialist paradise down in Venezuela. Chance to make
> up for
> the opportunity missed in Cuba!
No I am not anti-American - this is a great country. I am, however, anti
far-right neocon, and the ridiculous and world-threatening policies that
they are implementing right now. Our children and beyond will pay for
this well beyond my lifetime, and it makes me really, really, angry.
So keep the childish name calling to yourself. It doesn't become you.
William Clark
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 21 Jan 2007 18:03:39
From: Robert Hamilton
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
"William A. T. Clark" wrote:
> In article <45B3A0A2.A231A369@att.net>, Robert Hamilton <DBID@att.net>
> wrote:
>
> > "William A. T. Clark" wrote:
> >
> > > In article <45B2B8B6.BD710DE5@att.net>, Robert Hamilton <DBID@att.net>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > "William A. T. Clark" wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > In article <45B24C45.1DC44703@att.net>, Robert Hamilton <DBID@att.net>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > "William A. T. Clark" wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > In article <45B2331C.79473BAC@att.net>, Robert Hamilton
> > > > > > > <DBID@att.net>
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > "William A. T. Clark" wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > In article <51cmmeF1jqh21U1@mid.individual.net>,
> > > > > > > > > "MnMikew" <mnmiikkew@aol.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > "William A. T. Clark" <clark.31@nospamosu.edu> wrote in
> > > > > > > > > > message
> > > > > > > > > > news:clark.31-5D5D0B.14054019012007@charm.magnus.acs.ohio-stat
> > > > > > > > > > e.ed
> > > > > > > > > > u...
> > > > > > > > > > > In article <51c8khF1jgoqtU1@mid.individual.net>,
> > > > > > > > > > > "MnMikew" <mnmiikkew@aol.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >> "William A. T. Clark" <clark.31@osu.edu> wrote in message
> > > > > > > > > > >> news:clark.31-62EF99.19145518012007@charm.magnus.acs.ohio-s
> > > > > > > > > > >> tate
> > > > > > > > > > >> .edu
> > > > > > > > > > >> ...
> > > > > > > > > > >> > In article <45B00750.98C72206@att.net>, Robert Hamilton
> > > > > > > > > > >> > <DBID@att.net>
> > > > > > > > > > >> > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > > > >> >> 38% Bush; 33% Pelosi.
> > > > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > > > >> > Nice try, but Dubya is President, and Pelosi is the
> > > > > > > > > > >> > obscure
> > > > > > > > > > >> > Leader
> > > > > > > > > > >> > of
> > > > > > > > > > >> > the House - apples and oranges. Most people, outside of
> > > > > > > > > > >> > you
> > > > > > > > > > >> > rabid
> > > > > > > > > > >> > smear
> > > > > > > > > > >> > mongers, have barely heard of her.
> > > > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > > > >> OBSCURE?????????? Now that's funny.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > OK, without going to Google or otherwise looking it up,
> > > > > > > > > > > name
> > > > > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > last
> > > > > > > > > > > ten Presidents and the last ten Leaders of the House.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Now do you understand?
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > You either don't read newspapers or watch TV.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I do, but the majority of our fellow countrymen do not (at
> > > > > > > > > least
> > > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > news portions). You know, the same people that cannot find
> > > > > > > > > Canada
> > > > > > > > > on a
> > > > > > > > > map.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > William Clark
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I think that it is unfair to chide the Irish for generally not
> > > > > > > > being
> > > > > > > > able
> > > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > find
> > > > > > > > Canada on a map. Most Canadians couldn't find Ireland either.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Oh, Canadians could - it's the Americans that couldn't. You see,
> > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > Canadians have an educational system modeled after the British one.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I'm a Canadian, so don't tell me about Canadian education. Most
> > > > > > Canadians
> > > > > > would not
> > > > > > be able to find Ireland on a map...unless it were labeled! I also see
> > > > > > no
> > > > > > difference
> > > > > > in the structure of the Canadian system and that of the US system;
> > > > > > and
> > > > > > both
> > > > > > are
> > > > > > kedly different than the tired old British system. The US has
> > > > > > consistently
> > > > > > produced the vast majority of the best scholars in the world since
> > > > > > WWII
> > > > > > despite
> > > > > > representing less than 5% of the total world's population.
> > > > >
> > > > > Well, firstly a large number of the scholars are immigrants from other
> > > > > countries, especially immediately after WWII, so there is a slight
> > > > > distortion there. Secondly, if we look at, say, Nobel Prizes in
> > > > > Chemistry, since 1945 52 winners have been from the US (although many
> > > > > of
> > > > > them were not born and educated here), and 19 were from just the UK.
> > > > >
> > > > > On a population ratio, the US would have to have produced almost 100
> > > > > winners to be as productive as just the UK in that time period. Numbers
> > > > > can be deceptive.
> > > > >
> > > > > The US has traditionally built (quite rightly) much of its intellectual
> > > > > capital by welcoming scholars and researchers born and educated
> > > > > elsewhere. This supply is rapidly drying up, as Asian and European
> > > > > economies grow stronger, and investment in research and scholarships
> > > > > diminishes in the US. We will continue to struggle as technology
> > > > > emerges
> > > > > in China and other countries that previously relied on the US to
> > > > > provide
> > > > > them with expertise. They are getting to the point of no longer needing
> > > > > us.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > You need to change your name to Pangloss. The US picked up a large number
> > > > of
> > > > people,
> > > > especially from Germany, however most Nobel winning work since WWI was
> > > > done
> > > > in the
> > > > US, and little in England. England is the one who imported a tlot of
> > > > scholars,
> > > > especially from Germany. Watson, for example, was an American, educated
> > > > in
> > > > the US.
> > > > Crick was (is) a flake and Wilkins didn't really do anything to deserve
> > > > the
> > > > award
> > > > other than employ Rosalind Franklin. Others like Sharp, McClintock,
> > > > Beadle
> > > > and
> > > > Tatum, Morgan, and many many others were Americans.
> > >
> > > Really? England "imported a lot of scholars" did it? Rekable - I
> > > suppose von Braun and all the others were really living in Brighton.
> > > Your revisionist view may fit your rosy view of the world, but you need
> > > to at least try to make it gybe with the facts. Check the chemistry
> > > laureates since 1945, for example, and with the possible exception of
> > > Perutz, tell me which are "imported".
> > >
> > > I thought not.
> >
> > Whatever, Dr. Pangloss. I made a general statement that is a *FACT*; more
> > *AMERICANS* have won Nobel Prizes than any other nationality, despite the
> > fact that
> > less than 5% of the world's population are Americans. This not only
> > continues, but
> > accelerates. Whether it's art or science, or just plain old humanitarianism,
> > Americans actually invest far far more than anyone else, perhaps more than
> > the
> > entire rest of the world combined. People come from around the world to learn
> > what
> > Americans know because they can't do so anywhere else, certainly not in
> > England,
> > that's for sure...not to mention Ireland.
>
> Aaaah, well one would expect this to be true from a country this size,
> wouldn't you? However, it does indicate that the US system is not as
> productive at the highest level as it might be. And FYI, the investment
> in research as a fraction of GDP in the US ranks very low on the world
> table (and is dropping), so look a little closer at your numbers. The
> rest of your paragraph is simply absurd jingoism.
> >
> > You are so anti American one wonders what you are doing here? Why don't you
> > go help
> > your hero Hugo create a socialist paradise down in Venezuela. Chance to make
> > up for
> > the opportunity missed in Cuba!
>
> No I am not anti-American - this is a great country. I am, however, anti
> far-right neocon, and the ridiculous and world-threatening policies that
> they are implementing right now. Our children and beyond will pay for
> this well beyond my lifetime, and it makes me really, really, angry.
>
> So keep the childish name calling to yourself. It doesn't become you.
>
>
I agree with you on that NATO, the UN and the like are a total waste of US
resources. Spend more on arts and sciences and forget about the world leadership
nonsense. They all want to kill each other anyways, and in the end they will. It's
why most of our ancestors ran very fast from the "old world".
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 21 Jan 2007 22:50:40
From: William A. T. Clark
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
In article <45B3A8C2.66C7BA99@att.net >, Robert Hamilton <DBID@att.net>
wrote:
> "William A. T. Clark" wrote:
>
> > In article <45B3A0A2.A231A369@att.net>, Robert Hamilton <DBID@att.net>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > "William A. T. Clark" wrote:
> > >
> > > > In article <45B2B8B6.BD710DE5@att.net>, Robert Hamilton <DBID@att.net>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > "William A. T. Clark" wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > In article <45B24C45.1DC44703@att.net>, Robert Hamilton
> > > > > > <DBID@att.net>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > "William A. T. Clark" wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > In article <45B2331C.79473BAC@att.net>, Robert Hamilton
> > > > > > > > <DBID@att.net>
> > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > "William A. T. Clark" wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > In article <51cmmeF1jqh21U1@mid.individual.net>,
> > > > > > > > > > "MnMikew" <mnmiikkew@aol.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > "William A. T. Clark" <clark.31@nospamosu.edu> wrote in
> > > > > > > > > > > message
> > > > > > > > > > > news:clark.31-5D5D0B.14054019012007@charm.magnus.acs.ohio-
> > > > > > > > > > > stat
> > > > > > > > > > > e.ed
> > > > > > > > > > > u...
> > > > > > > > > > > > In article <51c8khF1jgoqtU1@mid.individual.net>,
> > > > > > > > > > > > "MnMikew" <mnmiikkew@aol.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >> "William A. T. Clark" <clark.31@osu.edu> wrote in
> > > > > > > > > > > >> message
> > > > > > > > > > > >> news:clark.31-62EF99.19145518012007@charm.magnus.acs.oh
> > > > > > > > > > > >> io-s
> > > > > > > > > > > >> tate
> > > > > > > > > > > >> .edu
> > > > > > > > > > > >> ...
> > > > > > > > > > > >> > In article <45B00750.98C72206@att.net>, Robert
> > > > > > > > > > > >> > Hamilton
> > > > > > > > > > > >> > <DBID@att.net>
> > > > > > > > > > > >> > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > > > > >> >> 38% Bush; 33% Pelosi.
> > > > > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > > > > >> > Nice try, but Dubya is President, and Pelosi is the
> > > > > > > > > > > >> > obscure
> > > > > > > > > > > >> > Leader
> > > > > > > > > > > >> > of
> > > > > > > > > > > >> > the House - apples and oranges. Most people, outside
> > > > > > > > > > > >> > of
> > > > > > > > > > > >> > you
> > > > > > > > > > > >> > rabid
> > > > > > > > > > > >> > smear
> > > > > > > > > > > >> > mongers, have barely heard of her.
> > > > > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > > > > >> OBSCURE?????????? Now that's funny.
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > OK, without going to Google or otherwise looking it up,
> > > > > > > > > > > > name
> > > > > > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > > last
> > > > > > > > > > > > ten Presidents and the last ten Leaders of the House.
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Now do you understand?
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > You either don't read newspapers or watch TV.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > I do, but the majority of our fellow countrymen do not (at
> > > > > > > > > > least
> > > > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > news portions). You know, the same people that cannot find
> > > > > > > > > > Canada
> > > > > > > > > > on a
> > > > > > > > > > map.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > William Clark
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I think that it is unfair to chide the Irish for generally
> > > > > > > > > not
> > > > > > > > > being
> > > > > > > > > able
> > > > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > find
> > > > > > > > > Canada on a map. Most Canadians couldn't find Ireland either.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Oh, Canadians could - it's the Americans that couldn't. You
> > > > > > > > see,
> > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > Canadians have an educational system modeled after the British
> > > > > > > > one.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I'm a Canadian, so don't tell me about Canadian education. Most
> > > > > > > Canadians
> > > > > > > would not
> > > > > > > be able to find Ireland on a map...unless it were labeled! I also
> > > > > > > see
> > > > > > > no
> > > > > > > difference
> > > > > > > in the structure of the Canadian system and that of the US
> > > > > > > system;
> > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > both
> > > > > > > are
> > > > > > > kedly different than the tired old British system. The US has
> > > > > > > consistently
> > > > > > > produced the vast majority of the best scholars in the world
> > > > > > > since
> > > > > > > WWII
> > > > > > > despite
> > > > > > > representing less than 5% of the total world's population.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Well, firstly a large number of the scholars are immigrants from
> > > > > > other
> > > > > > countries, especially immediately after WWII, so there is a slight
> > > > > > distortion there. Secondly, if we look at, say, Nobel Prizes in
> > > > > > Chemistry, since 1945 52 winners have been from the US (although
> > > > > > many
> > > > > > of
> > > > > > them were not born and educated here), and 19 were from just the
> > > > > > UK.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On a population ratio, the US would have to have produced almost
> > > > > > 100
> > > > > > winners to be as productive as just the UK in that time period.
> > > > > > Numbers
> > > > > > can be deceptive.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The US has traditionally built (quite rightly) much of its
> > > > > > intellectual
> > > > > > capital by welcoming scholars and researchers born and educated
> > > > > > elsewhere. This supply is rapidly drying up, as Asian and European
> > > > > > economies grow stronger, and investment in research and
> > > > > > scholarships
> > > > > > diminishes in the US. We will continue to struggle as technology
> > > > > > emerges
> > > > > > in China and other countries that previously relied on the US to
> > > > > > provide
> > > > > > them with expertise. They are getting to the point of no longer
> > > > > > needing
> > > > > > us.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > You need to change your name to Pangloss. The US picked up a large
> > > > > number
> > > > > of
> > > > > people,
> > > > > especially from Germany, however most Nobel winning work since WWI
> > > > > was
> > > > > done
> > > > > in the
> > > > > US, and little in England. England is the one who imported a tlot of
> > > > > scholars,
> > > > > especially from Germany. Watson, for example, was an American,
> > > > > educated
> > > > > in
> > > > > the US.
> > > > > Crick was (is) a flake and Wilkins didn't really do anything to
> > > > > deserve
> > > > > the
> > > > > award
> > > > > other than employ Rosalind Franklin. Others like Sharp, McClintock,
> > > > > Beadle
> > > > > and
> > > > > Tatum, Morgan, and many many others were Americans.
> > > >
> > > > Really? England "imported a lot of scholars" did it? Rekable - I
> > > > suppose von Braun and all the others were really living in Brighton.
> > > > Your revisionist view may fit your rosy view of the world, but you need
> > > > to at least try to make it gybe with the facts. Check the chemistry
> > > > laureates since 1945, for example, and with the possible exception of
> > > > Perutz, tell me which are "imported".
> > > >
> > > > I thought not.
> > >
> > > Whatever, Dr. Pangloss. I made a general statement that is a *FACT*; more
> > > *AMERICANS* have won Nobel Prizes than any other nationality, despite the
> > > fact that
> > > less than 5% of the world's population are Americans. This not only
> > > continues, but
> > > accelerates. Whether it's art or science, or just plain old
> > > humanitarianism,
> > > Americans actually invest far far more than anyone else, perhaps more
> > > than
> > > the
> > > entire rest of the world combined. People come from around the world to
> > > learn
> > > what
> > > Americans know because they can't do so anywhere else, certainly not in
> > > England,
> > > that's for sure...not to mention Ireland.
> >
> > Aaaah, well one would expect this to be true from a country this size,
> > wouldn't you? However, it does indicate that the US system is not as
> > productive at the highest level as it might be. And FYI, the investment
> > in research as a fraction of GDP in the US ranks very low on the world
> > table (and is dropping), so look a little closer at your numbers. The
> > rest of your paragraph is simply absurd jingoism.
> > >
> > > You are so anti American one wonders what you are doing here? Why don't
> > > you
> > > go help
> > > your hero Hugo create a socialist paradise down in Venezuela. Chance to
> > > make
> > > up for
> > > the opportunity missed in Cuba!
> >
> > No I am not anti-American - this is a great country. I am, however, anti
> > far-right neocon, and the ridiculous and world-threatening policies that
> > they are implementing right now. Our children and beyond will pay for
> > this well beyond my lifetime, and it makes me really, really, angry.
> >
> > So keep the childish name calling to yourself. It doesn't become you.
> >
> >
>
> I agree with you on that NATO, the UN and the like are a total waste of US
> resources. Spend more on arts and sciences and forget about the world
> leadership
> nonsense. They all want to kill each other anyways, and in the end they will.
> It's
> why most of our ancestors ran very fast from the "old world".
The UN and NATO are not the ones turning the Middle East upside down -
it is the US that is managing to make itself the object of such virulent
hatred. We are.
But I agree. Just imagine what we could do for education with the $1BN a
day that is going down the drain that is Iraq.
William Clark
William Clark
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 22 Jan 2007 05:11:23
From: Robert Hamilton
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
"William A. T. Clark" wrote:
> >
> > I agree with you on that NATO, the UN and the like are a total waste of US
> > resources. Spend more on arts and sciences and forget about the world
> > leadership
> > nonsense. They all want to kill each other anyways, and in the end they will.
> > It's
> > why most of our ancestors ran very fast from the "old world".
>
> The UN and NATO are not the ones turning the Middle East upside down -
> it is the US that is managing to make itself the object of such virulent
> hatred. We are.
>
> But I agree. Just imagine what we could do for education with the $1BN a
> day that is going down the drain that is Iraq.
These characters would hate the US anyways. Earning the hatred of Slavic nations
with the foolishness in Serbia is another issue though. No way the US should have
become involved in any of that. IMHO, it is THE reason why relations between the US
and Russia have chilled so much.
|
| | | | | |
Date: 20 Jan 2007 04:09:25
From: Howard Brazee
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
On Fri, 19 Jan 2007 22:58:22 -0500, "William A. T. Clark"
<clark.31@osu.edu > wrote:
>I do, but the majority of our fellow countrymen do not (at least the
>news portions). You know, the same people that cannot find Canada on a
>map.
A map of what?
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 20 Jan 2007 09:51:31
From: William A. T. Clark
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
In article <af53r21aqohj24j91qujh9ahlgs2r15kaf@4ax.com >,
Howard Brazee <howard@brazee.net > wrote:
> On Fri, 19 Jan 2007 22:58:22 -0500, "William A. T. Clark"
> <clark.31@osu.edu> wrote:
>
> >I do, but the majority of our fellow countrymen do not (at least the
> >news portions). You know, the same people that cannot find Canada on a
> >map.
>
> A map of what?
Canada, of course.
William Clark
|
| | | | | |
Date: 19 Jan 2007 23:06:40
From: Head Shot
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
William A. T. Clark wrote:
> I do, but the majority of our fellow countrymen do not (at least the
> news portions). You know, the same people that cannot find Canada on a
> map.
There are Americans that live in Montana and cannot find Canada in a car
with a compass on the dash.
|
| | | | |
Date: 19 Jan 2007 13:22:29
From: Howard Brazee
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
On Fri, 19 Jan 2007 14:06:38 -0600, "MnMikew" <mnmiikkew@aol.com >
wrote:
>> OK, without going to Google or otherwise looking it up, name the last
>> ten Presidents and the last ten Leaders of the House.
>>
>> Now do you understand?
>>
>You either don't read newspapers or watch TV.
We're talking about the people who responded to the poll - who I
imagine are average voters.
What percentage of such people could name those Speakers?
Also - there is a difference in an approval rating and a disapproval
rating. Someone new in her job really hasn't done anything to
warrant either.
|
| | | | | |
Date: 19 Jan 2007 22:21:41
From: Robert Hamilton
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
Howard Brazee wrote:
> On Fri, 19 Jan 2007 14:06:38 -0600, "MnMikew" <mnmiikkew@aol.com>
> wrote:
>
> >> OK, without going to Google or otherwise looking it up, name the last
> >> ten Presidents and the last ten Leaders of the House.
> >>
> >> Now do you understand?
> >>
> >You either don't read newspapers or watch TV.
>
> We're talking about the people who responded to the poll - who I
> imagine are average voters.
>
> What percentage of such people could name those Speakers?
>
> Also - there is a difference in an approval rating and a disapproval
> rating. Someone new in her job really hasn't done anything to
> warrant either.
I dunno. We got a lot of rhetoric about "the war", and how congress wasn't
doing anything with respect to the war. OK. Fine. Now they are in and when
asked what they will do about the war er...uh...well...some say this...some
say that...maybe we'll do something...er it's up to the Commander in
Chief...we're just po' ol' congressional representatives...but hey, minimum
wage...that's good isn't it?
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 19 Jan 2007 22:59:54
From: William A. T. Clark
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
In article <45B141E1.6CEAE5CB@att.net >, Robert Hamilton <DBID@att.net>
wrote:
> Howard Brazee wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 19 Jan 2007 14:06:38 -0600, "MnMikew" <mnmiikkew@aol.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > >> OK, without going to Google or otherwise looking it up, name the last
> > >> ten Presidents and the last ten Leaders of the House.
> > >>
> > >> Now do you understand?
> > >>
> > >You either don't read newspapers or watch TV.
> >
> > We're talking about the people who responded to the poll - who I
> > imagine are average voters.
> >
> > What percentage of such people could name those Speakers?
> >
> > Also - there is a difference in an approval rating and a disapproval
> > rating. Someone new in her job really hasn't done anything to
> > warrant either.
>
> I dunno. We got a lot of rhetoric about "the war", and how congress wasn't
> doing anything with respect to the war. OK. Fine. Now they are in and when
> asked what they will do about the war er...uh...well...some say this...some
> say that...maybe we'll do something...er it's up to the Commander in
> Chief...we're just po' ol' congressional representatives...but hey, minimum
> wage...that's good isn't it?
Really? All I can hear is the stampede of GoP feet to dissociate
themselves from Dubya's latest Iraq "policy". Seems pretty conclusive to
me.
William Clark
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 19 Jan 2007 17:45:42
From: Bobby Knight
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
On Fri, 19 Jan 2007 22:21:41 GMT, Robert Hamilton <DBID@att.net >
wrote:
>I dunno. We got a lot of rhetoric about "the war", and how congress wasn't
>doing anything with respect to the war. OK. Fine. Now they are in and when
>asked what they will do about the war er...uh...well...some say this...some
>say that...maybe we'll do something...er it's up to the Commander in
>Chief...we're just po' ol' congressional representatives...but hey, minimum
>wage...that's good isn't it?
This congress is no different than any other. There are certain
things that they can, and can't do.
The war in Iraq is one that isn't in the power of Congress.
Even the things that Congress has addressed, like minimum wage,
student loan rates, and stem cell research are at risk of a
presidential veto.
--
___,
\o
|
| | | | | | | |
Date: 20 Jan 2007 00:15:01
From: Robert Hamilton
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
Bobby Knight wrote:
> On Fri, 19 Jan 2007 22:21:41 GMT, Robert Hamilton <DBID@att.net>
> wrote:
>
> >I dunno. We got a lot of rhetoric about "the war", and how congress wasn't
> >doing anything with respect to the war. OK. Fine. Now they are in and when
> >asked what they will do about the war er...uh...well...some say this...some
> >say that...maybe we'll do something...er it's up to the Commander in
> >Chief...we're just po' ol' congressional representatives...but hey, minimum
> >wage...that's good isn't it?
>
> This congress is no different than any other. There are certain
> things that they can, and can't do.
> The war in Iraq is one that isn't in the power of Congress.
>
> Even the things that Congress has addressed, like minimum wage,
> student loan rates, and stem cell research are at risk of a
> presidential veto.
>
> --
They weren't saying that before the election! They were going to be "oversight".
Remember? Don't hear much about that now!
|
| | | | | | | | |
Date: 19 Jan 2007 19:22:45
From: Bobby Knight
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
On Sat, 20 Jan 2007 00:15:01 GMT, Robert Hamilton <DBID@att.net >
wrote:
>
>
>Bobby Knight wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 19 Jan 2007 22:21:41 GMT, Robert Hamilton <DBID@att.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >I dunno. We got a lot of rhetoric about "the war", and how congress wasn't
>> >doing anything with respect to the war. OK. Fine. Now they are in and when
>> >asked what they will do about the war er...uh...well...some say this...some
>> >say that...maybe we'll do something...er it's up to the Commander in
>> >Chief...we're just po' ol' congressional representatives...but hey, minimum
>> >wage...that's good isn't it?
>>
>> This congress is no different than any other. There are certain
>> things that they can, and can't do.
>> The war in Iraq is one that isn't in the power of Congress.
>>
>> Even the things that Congress has addressed, like minimum wage,
>> student loan rates, and stem cell research are at risk of a
>> presidential veto.
>>
>> --
>
>They weren't saying that before the election! They were going to be "oversight".
>Remember? Don't hear much about that now!
>
It got them elected.
|
| | | | | | | | | |
Date: 22 Jan 2007 10:54:16
From: the Moderator
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
"Bobby Knight" <bknight@conramp.net > wrote in message
news:mmr2r25b3umlfkblvi3g0oe2i21mphluph@4ax.com...
> >
> >They weren't saying that before the election! They were going to be
"oversight".
> >Remember? Don't hear much about that now!
> >
> It got them elected.
At least you can admit they are a bunch of lying cowards.
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 22 Jan 2007 17:09:26
From: Bobby Knight
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
On Mon, 22 Jan 2007 10:54:16 -0600, "the Moderator"
<sparky@no_spam_engineer.com > wrote:
>
>"Bobby Knight" <bknight@conramp.net> wrote in message
>news:mmr2r25b3umlfkblvi3g0oe2i21mphluph@4ax.com...
>> >
>> >They weren't saying that before the election! They were going to be
>"oversight".
>> >Remember? Don't hear much about that now!
>> >
>> It got them elected.
>
>At least you can admit they are a bunch of lying cowards.
>
Silly.
--
___,
\o
|
| | | | | |
Date: 19 Jan 2007 15:23:03
From: MnMikew
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
"Howard Brazee" <howard@brazee.net > wrote in message
news:iv92r216vvfceajrpia5bgkb7rlpqjmful@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 19 Jan 2007 14:06:38 -0600, "MnMikew" <mnmiikkew@aol.com>
> wrote:
>
>>> OK, without going to Google or otherwise looking it up, name the last
>>> ten Presidents and the last ten Leaders of the House.
>>>
>>> Now do you understand?
>>>
>>You either don't read newspapers or watch TV.
>
> We're talking about the people who responded to the poll - who I
> imagine are average voters.
>
> What percentage of such people could name those Speakers?
>
> Also - there is a difference in an approval rating and a disapproval
> rating. Someone new in her job really hasn't done anything to
> warrant either.
Most polls are BS anyway.
|
| |
Date: 19 Jan 2007 04:03:13
From: Robert Hamilton
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
"William A. T. Clark" wrote:
> In article <45B00750.98C72206@att.net>, Robert Hamilton <DBID@att.net>
> wrote:
>
> > 38% Bush; 33% Pelosi.
>
> Nice try, but Dubya is President, and Pelosi is the obscure Leader of
> the House - apples and oranges. Most people, outside of you rabid smear
> mongers, have barely heard of her.
>
>
What a foolish response. Obscure leader of the house? Maybe in Ireland. How
is it smear to report the reulst of a poll? People who know her mostly
don't like her according the a poll that says they same thing about Bush.
Just a fact of life.
|
| | |
Date: 19 Jan 2007 06:55:06
From: William A. T. Clark
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
In article <45B04070.8B28CCCF@att.net >, Robert Hamilton <DBID@att.net>
wrote:
> "William A. T. Clark" wrote:
>
> > In article <45B00750.98C72206@att.net>, Robert Hamilton <DBID@att.net>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > 38% Bush; 33% Pelosi.
> >
> > Nice try, but Dubya is President, and Pelosi is the obscure Leader of
> > the House - apples and oranges. Most people, outside of you rabid smear
> > mongers, have barely heard of her.
> >
> >
>
> What a foolish response. Obscure leader of the house? Maybe in Ireland. How
> is it smear to report the reulst of a poll? People who know her mostly
> don't like her according the a poll that says they same thing about Bush.
> Just a fact of life.
It says nothing about the relative popularity of either. You don't apply
the same template (other than in the most superficial poll - and by the
way, which mighty organization is responsible for this?) to two people
with vastly different functions. It's like rating a Jaguar against a
sailboat and claiming there is a comparison.
William Clark
|
| | | |
Date: 19 Jan 2007 13:30:58
From: Robert Hamilton
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
"William A. T. Clark" wrote:
> In article <45B04070.8B28CCCF@att.net>, Robert Hamilton <DBID@att.net>
> wrote:
>
> > "William A. T. Clark" wrote:
> >
> > > In article <45B00750.98C72206@att.net>, Robert Hamilton <DBID@att.net>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > 38% Bush; 33% Pelosi.
> > >
> > > Nice try, but Dubya is President, and Pelosi is the obscure Leader of
> > > the House - apples and oranges. Most people, outside of you rabid smear
> > > mongers, have barely heard of her.
> > >
> > >
> >
> > What a foolish response. Obscure leader of the house? Maybe in Ireland. How
> > is it smear to report the reulst of a poll? People who know her mostly
> > don't like her according the a poll that says they same thing about Bush.
> > Just a fact of life.
>
> It says nothing about the relative popularity of either. You don't apply
> the same template (other than in the most superficial poll - and by the
> way, which mighty organization is responsible for this?) to two people
> with vastly different functions. It's like rating a Jaguar against a
> sailboat and claiming there is a comparison.
>
> William Clark
I'd make a different comparison. Comparing a Democrat politcal leader to a
Republican politcal leader is like comparing and acorn to the fruit of an Oak!
|
| | | | |
Date: 19 Jan 2007 10:50:00
From: William A. T. Clark
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
In article <45B0C57F.44686514@att.net >, Robert Hamilton <DBID@att.net>
wrote:
> "William A. T. Clark" wrote:
>
> > In article <45B04070.8B28CCCF@att.net>, Robert Hamilton <DBID@att.net>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > "William A. T. Clark" wrote:
> > >
> > > > In article <45B00750.98C72206@att.net>, Robert Hamilton <DBID@att.net>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > 38% Bush; 33% Pelosi.
> > > >
> > > > Nice try, but Dubya is President, and Pelosi is the obscure Leader of
> > > > the House - apples and oranges. Most people, outside of you rabid smear
> > > > mongers, have barely heard of her.
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > What a foolish response. Obscure leader of the house? Maybe in Ireland.
> > > How
> > > is it smear to report the reulst of a poll? People who know her mostly
> > > don't like her according the a poll that says they same thing about Bush.
> > > Just a fact of life.
> >
> > It says nothing about the relative popularity of either. You don't apply
> > the same template (other than in the most superficial poll - and by the
> > way, which mighty organization is responsible for this?) to two people
> > with vastly different functions. It's like rating a Jaguar against a
> > sailboat and claiming there is a comparison.
> >
> > William Clark
>
> I'd make a different comparison. Comparing a Democrat politcal leader to a
> Republican politcal leader is like comparing and acorn to the fruit of an
> Oak!
Good - now how about the origin of that "poll"?
William Clark
|
| | | | | |
Date: 19 Jan 2007 12:00:28
From: the Moderator
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
"William A. T. Clark" <clark.31@nospamosu.edu > wrote in message
news:clark.31-9C883A.10500019012007@charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu...
> >
> > I'd make a different comparison. Comparing a Democrat politcal leader to
a
> > Republican politcal leader is like comparing and acorn to the fruit of
an
> > Oak!
>
> Good - now how about the origin of that "poll"?
>
> William Clark
Right over his head.
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 19 Jan 2007 14:04:12
From: William A. T. Clark
Subject: Re: Bush more popular than Pelosi!
|
In article <f-WdnSlVI_vKmizYnZ2dnUVZ_vqpnZ2d@centurytel.net >,
"the Moderator" <sparky@no_spam_engineer.com > wrote:
> "William A. T. Clark" <clark.31@nospamosu.edu> wrote in message
> news:clark.31-9C883A.10500019012007@charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu...
> > >
> > > I'd make a different comparison. Comparing a Democrat politcal leader to
> a
> > > Republican politcal leader is like comparing and acorn to the fruit of
> an
> > > Oak!
> >
> > Good - now how about the origin of that "poll"?
> >
> > William Clark
>
> Right over his head.
How about "right out of his a***"?
William Clark
|
|
