Politics

NY Daily News Writer Bashes Trump’s Cabinet For Being Not Educated Or Black Enough

264 Comments

“Those who can, do; those who can’t, teach.” Originally attributed to George Bernard Shaw, this maxim has hung around for a hundred years in various forms (my brother likes to append “and those who can’t teach, teach PE” to it) and it does a good job of describing the working man’s disdain for academia. However, it is now more true than ever as we head into the Trump presidency due to the political split between Marxist academics and capitalist titans of industry.

Today we will talk about some of Trump’s cabinet picks, and what their educational level may or may not have to do with predicting their performance.

New York Daily News writer and “activist” Shaun King recently wrote an article starting with a review of Ta-Nehisi Coates’ book “My President Was Black” and, after the required virtue signaling of institutionalized racism still being a thing, segued over to bashing Trump’s cabinet picks for being white and not educated to a level he would prefer. It’s an OK read that we can obtain a few salient points from to start a discussion.

Obama was helped by being black, not hindered

We are leaving two terms of the first black President in the USA, but, somehow, that’s not enough for some people, like Coates, who think that he faced undue hurdles due to his race. I wholeheartedly believe that Obama was helped by his race, as black Americans got behind him and voted in large numbers. Hillary, on the other hand, tried to marshal the women’s vote, but a large amount of women made the call “yes, we need a woman President, but, no, not her”.

The narrative from the black left has progressed from “if you don’t vote for Obama, you’re racist” to “you don’t like the job Obama is doing because you’re racist” and finally to “if you don’t think Trump cheated his way into the White House because he’s a white man, you’re racist.”

To be President, you need to be at least 35, not a felon, a native born American, and win the election (and 8th grade Civics class is thataway for the leftists who refuse to understand the Electoral College.) Race, gender, or creed has nothing to do with it. Trump won the election just as fairly as Obama did, and one could speculate that Obama had an advantage due to his Senate career over Trump being an outsider.

I am surprised that black America is not yet distancing themselves from Obama, as he is arguably the worst President of modern times. One way to do that would be to denounce him as “not black enough,” being biracial, but I don’t think Mr. King will be leading that charge as he is in the same boat and it would trash his street cred. I do think that “Remember the last one?” will be shutting down any discussion of a future black President for at least a generation, however, it is just as wrong to vote against someone for their race as it is to vote for them because of it.

Education versus real world experience

King moves on to discuss Trump’s cabinet picks, their race, and their education level. He seems to consider being white a detriment to their suitability for their position, which is, on its face, a racist statement which only gets a pass as it is against whites. He then negates Dr. Ben Carson, who is black, a doctor, highly accomplished, and arguably brilliant by saying he had to accomplish all that to get a spot on the cabinet to offset his “blackness.”

Before we go on, it’s nice to finally see someone on the left acknowledge Dr. Carson’s race, as he is universally discounted by them for not fitting their definition of black which is “someone of African heritage who votes Democrat.” However, it’s tiring to assume that everything is racially motivated. I presume that Dr. Carson is on the Cabinet because he is a capable person who can do his assigned job and has a conservative political outlook.

This is what brings us to what may actually be King’s problem. I don’t believe he actually cares about the education level of Trump’s cabinet; he cares about the political leanings of the appointees, and he can make his objection more palatable if he calls it “education level,” as there is a marked difference between the politics of academia and industry resulting in a progressively (pun somewhat intended) leftist shift the longer you stay in academia before leaving for industry (if you do actually leave.)

As Reagan said, “the trouble with our liberal friends is not that they’re ignorant, it’s just that they know so much that isn’t so.” The election of Trump, with a large bolstering of the Republican control of both sides of Congress, lots of Republican victories in governors’ elections, and tons of state level Congressional victories as well points to a rejection of Obama and all things left by the majority of states. Of course a leftist is not going to like the cabinet picks, but trying to hang it on race and educational level is stupid.

Allow me to explain. There exists a certain phenomenon when one either cannot find the career they want, or does not really want a career outside education of “going to school forever.” People accrue degrees that sound impressive, but may not be needed, or even apply, to whatever they end up doing. I hold a Master of Science degree in my field, but I do not use it in my current career. I went to graduate school as the jobs available at that time and place were a little lacking, and I found my current career afterwards. Do I need the degree? Not now, but I am glad I have it. Does it make me a better engineer? Sure, but there are my equals (and betters) who do not possess one.

One needs to evaluate real world performance in a given field over educational level. Do I want you to read Mr. King’s article? Yes, I do. Do I want you to read mine before jumping to our always-enticing comments section? Yes, that as well. However, do I want you to take my article as better and of a higher level than Mr. King’s because I possess a graduate degree and he only holds an undergraduate degree? No, and that is my point, but, by Mr. King’s logic, that would be acceptable instead of evaluating each piece on merit.

The only thing that works is meritocracy

Trump seems to be taking a businessman’s approach to government, and, in doing so, he hearkens back to the original idea of American politics in which an accomplished man would step away from his endeavors for a few terms as a public servant in a governmental position to represent his people. He would lend his expertise from his experiences in commerce or the military or whatever his field might be, help steer the nation as his civic duty, then return to his labors once done.

I’m not interested in right versus left, I doubt Trump and his people are either, and I think that is why he does not fit the classic conservative ideological mold. I am far more interested in right versus wrong, and, while morality is indeed important, I refer to the right way versus the wrong way of doing things, by which I mean it is totally results oriented.

Obama’s government has been a failure, and I could write an entire article, listing by line item, each failure that occurs to me, but, suffice to say that much needs to be fixed, and I care about that a whole lot more than I care about the race or the educational level of Trump’s cabinet. To attack someone based on their demographics smacks of an ad hominem logical fallacy as well.

Conclusion

At this point, I can look back on Obama’s Presidency and condemn it for him being black, or being a lawyer, or I could evaluate it on its merits (or lack thereof) and judge it fairly. Trump has yet to take office, so, while I understand the left’s attacks being race and level of education based at this time (as they really have nothing else to go on at the moment), I would bet that the party of “tolerance and respect” will continue with character assassination instead of critiquing performance of Trump’s administration in the future because, even if he’s a great President, to them, he (and his people) will always be bad men and women.

Read More: Donald Trump Is The Candidate For Americans, Not Special Interests

264 thoughts on “NY Daily News Writer Bashes Trump’s Cabinet For Being Not Educated Or Black Enough”

      1. There was a hot redhead on the Weather Ch, but she seems to have disappeared

        1. This one is great. She might just be traffic…not weather. WHo knows. She lives a few blocks away from me. I haven’t bumped into her, but her Instagram shows we go to a lot of the same places. Kneeman is on this one.

        3. Did you ever get a call back from that girl on the train after you left her your card?

  2. It’s a strange and cruel world we live in, when a guy who pretends to be black can take a fluff job of “Senior Justice Writer” and we’re led to believe it pays enough to support his large brood of 5 children, sky-high Brooklyn rent, and family vacations to Jamaica among other things. Oh and then he has the gaul to complain about “white privilege” and “white supremacy” all the time.
    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/51b8cded50b97c14dcf73a110d6320c052f555ed9bbdbbd4c95625e8a24a980a.jpg

        1. I meant I’d be ready to fuk that BS “Senior Justice Writer” up if I were black.
          But generally I try to always be ready to fuk shit up if the need arises.

    2. I really dislike him. The craziest thing though is I think deep down he honestly thinks he’s black

        1. I’ve read articles where they dug up his birth record and all that jazz. he’s white as fuck

        3. Dudes be thinking because they get an edge up and a mexi stache they’re black nowadays hahah

  3. We have conclusive evidence that academia isn’t all it’s cracked up to be. Obama’s appointments over the past eight years were largely theoreticians with zero experience building or running businesses. And what was the result? The worst economic depression in a generation, stagnant wages, 80 million-plus jobless, and a never-ending stream of inefficient pork barrel projects that will still be rearing their heads decades from now.
    This is not to disparage all of academia, because research clearly leads to breakthroughs that advance humankind. But putting these people in charge of economic and foreign policy is unequivocally and provably disastrous.
    Edit: Forgot to point out the obvious irony in a “journalist” presuming to judge anyone else’s intelligence/credentials.

  4. Not educated or black enough? Bitch, please. Almost half of the founders who attended the constitutional convention never went to college, and they were all as white as the driven snow. Yet, they wrote the Constitution and created a revolutionary form of republican government out of thin air. Oh, and they were all founding “fathers.” Muh triggers. Patriarchy is a bitch!

    1. When not working meant starving, most people in those days didn’t have the luxury of wasting time or wealth to endure the amount of stupidity that exists today.
      One EMP blast above Kansas would have us resetting a few pririoties after the smoke cleared.

  5. It’s been strange watching the media and everyone else dissect Trump’s cabinet picks, especially when you remember they are the losers of the election. I’m not at all surprised that Shaun King, who I hear on the radio a few times a week and I think honestly might be one of the dumbest people I’ve ever heard in my life, decided to get in on it too. At least he took a break from basically trying to start a race war though, right?

        1. Yes, this guy is still number one troll. No one has knocked him down yet. As for a gig in the trump admin….meh, poor guy deserves better than that.

        1. The fact that the names were actually given to the new station by an NTSB intern and that they just threw them up on the teleprompter like trained seals is really the best part.

        3. I just saw it. It doesn’t phase me. I have never taken Donald Trump seriously. The American Presidency really hasn’t meant dick in a long time and I don’t think he will do any harm, but the words and ideas of clowns never really struck me as anything to either seriously consider or be outraged by. He is the latest host of the tv show we call a government. I am totally indifferent. If anything maybe he will give us some yuks and I am glad that it wasn’t that Dr. Evil clone just because I enjoy watching celebrities go bat shit and fat girls and fags cry, but other than that meh

        5. I enjoy watching celebrities go bat shit and fat girls and fags cry
          If you ever do online dating, this would be an excellent starting point in your dating profile.

        6. lol.
          My one foray into online dating which lasted one day and one girl ended spectacularly bad. The cool thing about living on a 22 mile island with 6 million people is that it isn’t hard to find. However, I may use that line in my approaches from now on.

        7. I’ve often considered what I’d put on a dating site…
          “….seeking 20-something nymphomaniac with a penchant for overweight, immature men. Must like Family Guy and dressing like a slut….”

    2. This is a classic example of Michael Crichton’s The Murray Gell-Mann Amnesia effect. The media should never be given a presumption of credibility.

  8. I don’t care of they are black or not, I want Trump to nominate more banksters. He’s been doing not too bad so far:
    1. Steven Mnuchin, a 17-year veteran of Goldman Sachs is nominated to be his Treasury Secretary.
    2. Stephen Bannon, another former Goldman Sachs banker, was named by Trump as his Chief Strategist in the White House.
    3. The sitting President of Goldman Sachs, Gary Cohn, has been named by Trump as Director of the National Economic Council, which, according to its website, coordinates “policy-making for domestic and international economic issues.”
    4. Trump nominated a Goldman Sachs outside lawyer, Jay Clayton of Sullivan & Cromwell, to serve as Wall Street’s top cop as Chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission. Clayton’s wife currently works as a Vice President at Goldman Sachs.
    5. Another former Goldman Sachs banker, Anthony Scaramucci, who sits on Trump’s transition team.

    3. All (((Goldman Sachs))) and (((Kushner))) as his advisor. Best USrael government ever.
      Thanks, goyim.

    4. Bankster. I have never heard a non-Leftist use that term.

        1. I’ve never been partial to it. In all the history of the world, it’s governments that legally launch wars, holocausts and massacres. Guess I’m tired of the whole Marx “hate corporations!” thing that’s been going on since at least the time when Rollerball was released. Governments do the damage, private enterprise may stand to profit from it or try to persuade politicians towards one path or another, but they don’t make laws and they can’t start wars. About time to lay blame where it’s due, imo.

        2. I think financial interests have far more sway over government policy than you admit. Enter the lobbyist.

        3. Lobbyists can only ask for a law, they cannot pass a law. Giving moneyed private interests more power than they possess while absolving government politicians from responsibility (or minimizing it) always seemed like the wrong path. Yes, lobbyists and monied interests, but not one of them can vote for war or regulations, only politicians can.

        4. True, it’s the elected official that pulls the trigger.
          It’s like junkies – if they weren’t junkies to begin with, then the pushers wouldn’t have any power over them!

  9. Those who can, do.
    Those who can’t do, teach.
    Those who can’t teach, become journalists.
    I’ve gotten to the point where I ask of leftist propaganda mills such as the NY Daily News what is their qualifications to ask any questions of Trump’s cabinet? These frauds were telling us that Monica Lewinsky’s ex-boyfriend’s wife’s cabinet would be confirmed by now, why do we give them any presumed intellectual credibility here?

    1. Left or right, has anyone under the age of 70 really taken the media, either print, network or cable, seriously in any way shape or form in the last 15 years? Doesn’t matter which side of the spectrum it is on, the media is a total joke.

      1. I am routinely told by people older than me (I’m in my 40s now) that there was supposedly some “golden age” of media during which it held government accountable.
        The problem is when I see things like the New York Times defending Joseph Stalin, or Walter Cronkite using his newscast as a pulput to sow sentiment against winning the Vietnam War, or other examples in which the media was trying to make news rather than report it, I can’t help but conclude that this is just rose-colored nostalgia on the part of my older peers.

        1. I can’t say for sure, but my guess is that the “golden age” of news media had to do with the entire narrative being controlled and the script being closed. The Journal was right wing script. The Times was left wing script. The News was the dumbed down times and the post was the dumbed down journal. Everyone one picked one of two sides and followed their script. It was virtually impossible to investigate any of the information that came at you from Cronkite or the times or whatnot unless you were willing to quite your job and devote your entire life to investigative journalism and even if you did you wouldn’t be able to convince any one. One thing I will say is that the writing was much better so if you want to call it a golden age because of the talent of the bullshit artists then ok, fine. Meanwhile, it seems like you had an age where the bullshit artists had no one to call them on their bullshit (then) and an age where bullshit artists get called out by every piss ant 14 year old with an internet connection.
          The only think that has changed, I feel, is that instead of there being two bullshit narratives to pick from there are a million now so you can pick whichever you want to be true and fight to the death saying it is accurate.
          One thing I will say about “golden age” is that I am not so sure it was bad to have the bullshit narrative controlled to only two teams. YEah, it was still bullshit but it was Our American Bullshit (the name of one of the novels I will never write) and it simplified the world quite a bit.

        3. The list of books I should write is astronomical. The 23 volume work on Thales simply entitled Water is up there with my cookbook, my children’s book, a book of philosophy explaining why black people walk so slowly and why gays lisp when they talk, my history of pop culture book, my Gatsby-esq biography of a former friend of mine and the great American novel. Maybe one day.

        5. btw just as a preview…black people walk slowly in major metropolitan areas because it fucks up foot traffic and they are exacting reparations through petty annoyance. Fags lisp as a mating call…the “gay accent” simulates what ones voice would sound like if their mouth was filled with cocks. I suspect that one day evolution will take care of this and faggots will develop bright plumage and will no longer need to talk like that.

        6. That age predates you and I, and even our grandparents. Yellow Journalism was rife in the mid to late 1800’s. I think that you can probably count on the media being earnest and at least trying to be honest prior to the Civil War, maybe.

        7. “they are exacting reparations through petty annoyance.”
          Aptly put!!!!! I could never categorize this behavior – which takes many forms.

        8. you have no idea but. I have dozens of pages of written research on this. I will send to you. I think a lot of black behavior is to exact reparations through petty annoyance. Playing music too loud on the subway, pretending they know each other, Tyler Perry’s inexplicable fame — the slow walking is just the topper. One black person on 34th street is enough to throw off foot traffic patterns by about 30 minutes. It is the most frustrating thing in the world when you are walking shoulder to shoulder dense with a few hundred people towards a train and one black guy is just ambling around throwing it all off. There is no way that this isn’t retroactive reparations.

        9. I absolutely do have an idea. Remember where I live – much higher percentage of blacks AND narrower sidewalks! .
          I’ve recognized everything your saying here. I’d like to see your work on this.

      2. The last election showed that an awful lot of people took the media seriously with it’s constant stream of triumphant “Hillary will win!” segments, stories and “statistics and polls”.

        2. Not sure. I feel there was some confirmation bias going on there. People who wanted Hilary to win read polls that said Hillary would win and were shocked to find out they were wrong. Whatever extant remnants remained where people took this stuff seriously has to be dead by now. My hope is that the trump presidency will do that for how seriously people take the office of president. In four years I hope everyone comes around to where I am and sees it as an absurd clown show,

        3. Confirmation bias sure, but they took the news and polls as Gospel. This is why we had the Snowflake Meltdown post election. They literally couldn’t grasp that everything they’d been told to believe and believed, was false.

        4. That is true….however, I don’t think they believed it because the media told them. I think they believed it because they were in one of three camps
          1) Ideologues
          2) Morons
          3) Isolated bubbles (like me)
          I don’t think any of them ever thought “i wonder who will win this, let me check what dan rather and the times have to say…oh, they say Hilary, must be true”
          The media has been at the same level as sportsball and poplar movies in terms of how it is viewed for a long time by most people. I think it was yesterday or the day before where I predicted that with the death of the boomers the MSM will simply wither and die. Can you seriously think of one person (not old person) who watches the news and thinks they aren’t being lied to?

        5. funny thing, I think Obama was close to getting this one right. Back during the primaries when a lot of people didn’t think Trump would go very far Obama was asked about him and said something to the effect of “trump can’t be president because the presidency is not a reality show” Obama was so close to being right there only he had is bass ackwards. Trump will be the best choice for president because the presidency IS a reality show. Might have been the closest to right that ‘bama has been in the last 8 years.

        6. I’ve always viewed politics as a national form of The Jerry Springer Show.
          The fact that Jerry Springer was a politician before and after his TV career underlines my hypothesis.

  10. President Barack O-who?
    It must suck for Obama to realize that we’ll pretend from now on that his presidency never happened. Historians a few centuries from now will notice an eight-year gap in American chronology in the early 21st Century, and the conspiracy theorists of the era will get busy to try to fill that mysterious void in time.

  11. Personally, I’d rather click on a link to “The Best (and Worst) Dressed of Walmart”, than a link to a mainstream media news article. It’s all entertainment. Might as well be marginally entertained.

    2. Not that I disagree with the overall sentiment, but can we please stop propping them up with misnomer of mainstream? They’re a dead media walking.

  12. The scariest thing about his picks is the fact they’re almost all oil and gas. I’m afraid national parks are going to be drilled in and ruined. Might be a good time to visit Yosemite.

    1. Don’t be afraid. The oil industry is dead and the oiligarchs know this hence the transition into government posts.
      Battery powered cars are the future whether anybody likes it or not.

      1. Battery technology has barely improved since the start of the millennium, so I doubt the battery powered car will replace the gasoline powered car any time soon.
        Besides, Lithium-ion batteries explode on rupture. Half the weight of the batteries on the Tesla are shielding to prevent minor collisions from blowing you to kingdom come.

        1. It’s the inevitability that makes time a subsequent factor in terms of importance. Irony seems to make for the best logic.

        2. It’s still early days on that. Somewhere right now, a 10-yr-old autistic genius is having a tiny little idea in his father’s garage workshop that will improve global battery life by a factor of at least seven.

        4. Having studied electronics and the trends thereof, I can assure you that this is both possible and highly unlikely.
          The primary problem is that a battery that directly produces electrical discharge has limited power. In a very real sense, gasoline is a battery because it stores energy and can be made to release it, but the power produced is heat and expansion related to the shattering of bonds. All the most efficient power sources and supplies we have (including, but not limited to, nuclear power) operate in much the same way.
          The classic lead-acid battery in gas vehicles is able to discharge and recharge because the chemical reaction inside the battery produces excess electrons, and it can be reversed with excess electrons. Lithium-ion batteries operate in much the same way and can store and discharge more power, but with chemicals much more dangerous when exposed to oxygen.
          It stands to reason that, if a battery can be found that is more efficient, it will consequently be more dangerous. Or, if a battery is found which is in less danger of explosion, it will be a weaker battery.
          I do not, as yet, see a way this can be averted. And, if the past fifty or so years of battery development is any indication, neither does the industry.

        5. Funny you mention this. I know of a private company that directly produces battery additives that increase a car battery’s life 25%. Problem is it is more expensive than the lead based and hence few car battery manufactures want to buy it.
          Even with a good idea turned into a productive solution, you may not get it known due to lack of potential financial interest.

        6. So many things seem inevitable, but in the end it’s just not so.
          Take, for example, the implicit assumption that technology will continue to improve at the rate it has since the 1970’s. The fact of the matter is, we got those improvements by making things smaller (so electrons don’t have to go so far, switches can switch faster, etc.), but we can’t go any smaller without losing all the properties that make computers work (already we lose parts of devices faster because fractions of a microvolt shift one atom and ruin a switch).
          There are bottlenecks well-known in the tech industry. The two best known are the memory bottleneck (processor speed improvements far outpace memory access speed improvements, and the gap is only growing) and the battery bottleneck (battery technology increases very, very slowly, so the amount of power we can draw on a mobile device is more or less constant).
          (Of course, all this analysis ignores the very real possibility that “progress” is reversed due to wars and the like. It has happened many times throughout history that technologies are lost because a society is destroyed, and it remains possible that this could happen to us.)

        7. Even then, it’s only a 25% improvement. This is actually amazing, but it’s not big enough for the dreamers’ dreams to become reality.
          The world runs on three basic types of people. There are the dreamers who come up with wild ideas, there are the planners who can translate dreams into possible routes to reality, and there are engineers who step through the plan and either make it work or identify why it can’t.
          Without dreamers, the planners would have no guidance on what to plan. Without planners, the engineers would have no guidance on what tasks to perform and what theories to test. And without engineers, the dreamers’ dreams and the planners’ plans would never become product.

        8. Interesting. But people probably said similar things in 1895 while Tesla was performing his radio wave experiments.

        10. Like I said, it is possible that some reality-shattering notion will come forth. I simply find it unlikely, especially considering what we’re working with.
          If we’re looking for batteries in the way we think of batteries (devices to store and release electrical energy), we’re trapped by the physics. We know much about how electricity works and how materials work. Using all we have learned, we have arrived at the technologies we have today, and they are not enough to make these dreams reality.
          Now, if we find some new way to think about storing energy, or some new type of energy, or some new way to produce energy, this change could be possible. Tesla wasn’t working with the impossible – he was working with the unknown. He wasn’t trying to instantly transmit letters, but he was working with a whole new idea. It is this kind of shift in thinking that’s required to leap beyond what we can currently achieve.
          The battery-powered electric car almost certainly won’t happen, based on what we know about batteries. But an electric car without what we think of as a battery could be possible, though it seems unlikely we’ll discover something that makes this happen.

        11. You’re a little late to the ball. Breakthroughs are already emerging and technology has been “discovered” allowing today’s cellphone battery to last a whole week on a single charge and it takes only 10 minutes to fully charge. How long until this will trickle down to the plebs is anyone’s guess.
          One of the world’s greatest scientist was once quoted as saying that imagination is more important than knowledge. Can you imagine that? That amounts to blasphemy to those who do not understand his genius.

        12. Anything capable of producing electricity from chemical interaction is volatile. The more power you can get, the more volatile the composition is likely to be. This is why lead-acid batteries need to be so big and heavy to start a car but lithium ion batteries do not, yet lithium ion explodes into flame when exposed to oxygen. It is this problem with the technologies I have observed which leads to my wall hypothesis, and I do not as yet have evidence to contradict the hypothesis.
          Now, it is possible to store power in a non-volatile fashion. Gasoline stores a tremendous amount of energy, but without the right conditions it doesn’t release that energy (and none of it is electricity). If we could find a way to translate, say, solar power into such a form, easy to transport and less volatile, it would open the door to a great many advances.
          All this said, changes to how we charge batteries or discharge them have their own potential (e.g. “fast chargers” which draw more power than standard for USB, or more efficient software and hardware). Without having seen evidence as yet for the breakthroughs you mention, I am biased toward assuming this is the sort of advancement that could produce those results.
          But I would be interested to see the evidence for such a breakthrough. If it passes the sniff-test, that battery wall I speak of is further off than I thought (tech-wise, not necessarily time-wise).

      2. Yeah, that will happen. After the year 2200. Currently batteries, aka coal powered cars, are highly inefficient compared to carbon base fueled cars.

    2. I’m too busy working to visit national parks. Besides, the massive federal lands currently off-limits to economic development are collateral for the massive federal debt, and this must be dealt with.

      1. Looks like the Chinese will own massive chunks of the US west of the Mississippi

    3. What’s scary about oil and gas? You don’t like an economy run efficiently and devoid of 1,000 idiotic and unconstitutional Green Party regulations?
      The national parks used to be called “free American soil” and anybody could claim or live on them and turns out, they managed to not perish or even be irreversibly harmed even during the height of the Industrial Revolution.
      Your emo hand wringing is silly, at best.

  13. “I am surprised that black America is not yet distancing themselves from Obama, as he is arguably the worst President of modern times. ”
    Luke, listen up. If you’re gonna be a published writer, follow the rules of Persuasion 101: Make a claim, and present evidence. In this article, all I see are claims. Could you provide some proof for your assertions?
    For example, were you in a coma for the eight years between 2000 to 2008? Do you remember the president whom 97 of 100 surveyed history professors — both conservative and liberal — rated a D on the presidential scale?
    Let’s use three economic metrics to judge. Obama’s terms have seen
    1) A net increase of private sector jobs. 11.4 million, to be precise. (Bush? A net loss of half a million. WSJ declared it the worst track record in modern presidency for job creation.)
    2) A decreased unemployment rate. Bush pushed it up from 4.2 to 7.8. Obama pushed it back down to 5.0.
    3) An increased median household income. Bush pushed it down $2400. Obama raised it $1200.
    If you’re an engineer with a graduate degree, you should know better. By the way, here’s my source: https://ourfuture.org/20141208/bush-vs-obama-on-the-economy-in-3-simple-charts. It took me five seconds to find it.

    1. So…net -2400+1200 means we’re still down 1200 over the Bush through Obama years. Minus inflation in the stuff people actually buy (the Consumer Price Index is a crock when they improve numbers by excluding things from the index).

    2. Complete bullocks Chip.
      Your source is a known leftist propganda site.
      Just pointing one out for you (by mostly for the Readers) – Point 2.
      If you use the U6 Report at it’s broadest measurement unemployement is currently 10%, but if you utilize the old U6 measurement pre 94′ the current US unemployment rate (and more accurate) is 23%.
      You can dismiss those 93 million Americans who are out of work or undermployed, but good luck trying to cram them into that 5%

      1. I dont blame O for everything, but he hasnt done much to improve the situation- shadow stats.com has UE peaking in 2012 at 23-24%, and its still 23-24% four years later…

        2. No one is blaming him for everything, just the policies he advocated and his Party that made them law. And just like all lefitist beta male fags, he is lying and squirming to avoid responsibility.
          The only people who benefited the last 8 years are democrat top donors (Soros, Buffet, etc..) and public service employees (especially in the DC bubble). Everyone else has been living on the brink.

      2. @disqus_zul4rz2p30:disqus
        “If you use the U6 Report at it’s broadest measurement unemployement is currently 10%, but if you utilize the old U6 measurement pre 94′ the current US unemployment rate (and more accurate) is 23% – quote made by John Galt”
        Ok, so what is the old U6 measurement for unemployment in the “Bush II” years versus the “Obamacare” years?
        jammyjaybird’s comment doesn’t sound leftist, its just pointing out a source for people to “check out”, whereas the reader can do some leg work and sort their way through the various reports which used to create the article. After studying it all, at least a little, only THEN, can they decide, for themselves, what conclusions they believe are most factual.

        1. Exactly. I love putting facts out into clearly bullshit opinion-based discussion. It gets everybody on the same footing.
          In his excellent farewell speech last night, Obama made this same point. Because of fragmented media, too many people hold opinions, then find “facts” to reinforce that opinion. This is called confirmation bias, and it’s backwards. He urged everybody to find the facts first, and then form opinions from that.
          The next few years I’m going to just provide people with facts. That’s probably the best way we can improve the current public debate.

        2. The statistis can be found a US Labor govt sites and shadow stats and I would encoursage to discover for yourself for comparisons.
          “jammyjaybird’s comment doesn’t sound leftist”
          Chip is a self-proclaimed leftist if you read his political ramblings.
          His source is a leftist front that is “The strategy center for the progressive movement” and has been known to take liberal license how they compile their data and has been exposed for bascially pulling numbers out of their ass. But yet, that’s his sole source for backing up his fabrications.

        3. “The next few years I’m going to just provide people with facts. ”
          You haven’t provided any so far.

        6. I just asked you to stop being a dick.
          My disqus profile is public. Please go through my 1461 comments and show me where I have lied. I’ll be here waiting.

        7. It’s my nature. Dicks fuck pussies and assholes. Which are you?
          /rimshot
          You keep rehashing the same talking points which I have debunked and you have not provided any rebuttal or additional sources regarding your assertions. Ourfuture. org is decredited. If you insist to keep lying, than I am asking you to provide other valid sources to back up your claims.

    3. When you stop counting people who no longer look for work as unemployed, of course the unemployment rate drops. And when obamacare forces millions from full time to multiple part time jobs because employers can’t afford to pay for their healthcare, you get a spike in number of jobs. It doesn’t mean your hero did anything good or worthwhile. If you split a pile of shit in two, you can then say “hey the piles of shit are lower now!”.

      1. Not denying any of that… but how then did median income rise? If everyone’s working more part-time jobs, are we earning higher wages? Doubtful. I’m not an economist, but would like to know.

        2. Yep. If you pump 40 billion a month into the economy out of thin air from the printing presses, that causes….inflation.

        3. Top that with cranking down personal savings to 0% interest via the fed, exclude food and energy costs from personal income government tabulations, etc…
          Only the willing blind refuse to see.

    4. I don’t think anyone is saying that Bush II was a good president. I think it’s safe to say everyone here can agree that Bush was, if not terrible, certainly a below average president.

      1. “I don’t think anyone is saying that Bush II was a good president.”
        Bush the Younger was a likeable Hillary.

    5. 94 million eligible people out of work. He created *shit* for jobs in real numbers. The “unemployment rate” is a crap statistic as well and you know it, there probably isn’t a phonier statistic outside of a P.T. Barnum circus arena.
      Household income is also down, that was reported directly in the paper this last Sunday.

    6. And the national debt was doubled from 10 trillion to 20 trillion.
      We, our children, grand children will be paying for this for the rest of our lives. It’s easy to live on credit when you don’t have to worry about paying it back.

      1. Yep. A president could raise taxes on the ultrawealthy to pay off this debt, because the ultrawealthy have benefitted from virtually all new growth in the last fifteen years. But that would require NOT appointing 6 different Goldman Sachs people to the president’s cabinet.
        Drain the swamp? What a fucking liar.

        1. If you raise the taxes on the ulrawealthy, they will just migrate to a country or state that offers them the best tax advantage. I’ve seen this trend in NY state where the high taxes causes the unintended consequences of high income earners leaving the state. I do not disagree with your assessment of the ultra-wealthy benefiting the most. The middle class continues to bear the burden and the ultra-wealthy benefited considerably under Obama’s watch. Anyways, it just seems more complex to me then the solution of “you just raise taxes on the rich” since the rich can easily move to any location that benefits them.

        3. You could confiscate the entire wealth of the “ultrawealthy” and not put a dent in the debt. That’s a socialist pipe dream.
          In fact, you can put the entire U.S. on confiscatory 100% taxation and we’d still not pay that shit off for years and years.

  14. I’m still hung up on the whole Meryl Streep thing.
    The left has been creating all these stories to slander Trump, and at least in a number of cases the claims are within the realm of possibility… But Meryl just said some shit that is verifiably not true and got rounds of applause and adulation on Facebook…
    So Trump worked with Russia to rig the election? Or Trump used to pee on hookers in hotels? Supposedly there is evidence… It’s just not gonna be revealed to the public… Ok then… So we’ll never see evidence, but apparently evidence exists… so this is still within the realm of possibly being true, even if there is no way to really know.
    But Meryl Streep accusing Trump of insulting a person’s disability is verifiably not true, and yet her speech is “courageous”. So many left-leaning people that I know were cheering for her great speech but it was clearly nonsense. And who cares what an actress thinks anyways? And then the left has the audacity of accusing Trump supporters of consuming and creating “fake news”.
    I don’t even know if labelling them as “the left” really makes sense anymore… The phrase “the left” should carry more seriousness than just refer to morons who care what Meryl Streep has to say… This situation struck me as categorically different than what I’m used to because unlike other accusations, the proof of its falseness is freely available and easy to understand. The Wikileaks thing was at least a little complex and required that one can read… But this is like watching retards trying to blow bubbles.

    1. The problem, Clark, really starts with JFK and televised debates. This is the death of statesman birth of celebrity. Once the presidency became a celebrity role it morphed into something different. The culmination of this is Clinton. While I consider the sickness to have started with JFK I think that Bush Sr was the last real president we had. Clinton, Dubya, ‘Bama and now Trump are post shark jump celebrity guest stars. The thing is, since there is no meaningful thing as a presidency and it is all just celebrity than presidents and actors are given the same amount of gravity in terms of meaningfulness.
      Trump: The president of the country that made kim Kardashian rich and famous.

      1. I don’t know enough about American history to have made that connection with JFK, but I started to realize the celebrity/politician/entertainer connection the first time I saw a Youtube video compilation of Dubya saying stupid shit, and loving it.
        I guess we’re getting to the point in politics where it’s really just about whether you prefer this celebrity or that celebrity, for the general public in particular.
        Can’t believe I’m saying it but I think Kanye West was onto something…

        1. “I guess we’re getting to the point in politics where it’s really just about whether you prefer this celebrity or that celebrity, for the general public in particular.”
          Exactly correct. The reason I point to JFK as the start of this is that a very handsome and dapper JFK beat the socks off of a far smarter and far more qualified candidate in Richard Nixon because JFK had celebrity appeal. In the televised debates (some say Nixon was ill…but it doesn’t matter, Kennedy was charming) Nixon looked like a sweaty used car sales man and JFK looked like he should have been walking a golden age of Hollywood red carpet. Kennedy’s presidency was a presidency of superficiality where the only thing that mattered is how dreamy and how smooth and how debonair the young president was….That was the top of the hill where the ball started rolling.

        3. I think Nixon refused when it was recommended he apply some makeup(In a Nixon voice: “Makeup? Im no damned queer!)

        4. That is a story I have heard too. Too much time and too many people for me to buy into any of those old stories. Who knows. Could be true. Could be after the fact reputation making. But make up or no, when it came to looking like a handsome celebrity JFK had it in spades. Take away the television and Kennedy never gets elected.

        5. Nixon ran an awful campaign on many facets. He never even solicited Ike’s endorsement! There’s plenty of mistakes outside of JFK being a better communicator.

        6. from what my history professor told me. The people who listened to the radio said nixon won and the people who watched the debate on television said kennedy won

        7. Kennedy was an Adonis next to Nixon, but he wasn’t all that hot. I’ve dated better-looking. His wife, Jackie, looked like a GD alien. I don’t know everyone acted like she was some great beauty. No wonder he played around.
          And that Canadian Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau? Come ON, ladieezz! He looks like he cries after he busts a nut.

        8. My grandparents couldn’t stand JFK or Jackie and made no bones about telling you so if you asked, and sometimes even if you didn’t ask. They came over AFTER the cult of FDR was installed so they were never infected with that, which I guess helped inoculate them against JFK and his clown show as well.

        14. Whenever someone goes in to renew their driver’s, they should also have to pass a civics test.

    2. Oh fuuuuck actors and their political rantings. Although, they did a good job getting Hillary Clinton into The Whi….oh wait.

        1. Which brings up an interesting point…if Meryl Streep is soo passionate about politics, why doesn’t she give up her acting career and try to become a politician??

        3. Politicians are allowed to voice opinions about actors. Actors are allowed to voice opinions about politicians.
          Opinions are like assholes. We’ve all got them. And they’re all occasionally heard.

        4. Except politicians aren’t allowed to voice opinions about actors… huge media blowback.

        5. Yeah, I’ll keep that in mind the next time I’m on a nationally televised show with a giant megaphone supplied to me at the cost of millions of dollars.

    3. Meryl Atention Whoring Streep. Hollywood is a cancer, you can count a few decent celebs on the fingers of one hand. Mel Gibson and John Voit being some of them.

  15. Gee wiz,
    People with worthless Ivy League grad school degrees who have never had a real job in their lives – like Lurch. Or, people who went to college then went out into the world and made millions or billions in their careers.
    I think I would prefer to hire the dumb billionaires.

    1. Lurch made his money the easy way– -he married it. His success as a gigalo was his only only one in life.

    2. @Bram
      Don’t know what rock you’ve been living under, but an Ivy education is almost mandatory to work in Wallstreet and DC politics:
      -Steven Mnuchin, Secretary of the Treasury in the coming administration of President-elect Donald Trump, graduated from Yale University in 1985.
      -Stephen Bannon has a Master of Business Administration degree from Harvard Business School
      -Anthony Scaramucci, was added to Trumps transition Team Executive Committee, he has a J.D. from Harvard Law School

  16. “it does a good job of describing the working man’s disdain for academia.”
    Some of the working mans disdain of academia stems from the contempt that some academics and self proclaimed intellectuals have for us. We knew it was there but, it has become more obvious since the Internet came along, it’s right there in comments sections all over. Just because someone doesn’t have an advanced education doesn’t mean they are a moron.
    Education doesn’t make you smart, you’re born with that(or without it) it only makes you more knowledgeable in your field. I think some of the reason the left isn’t more powerful in the US than it is comes from what they say about all us heathens in the press and on the Internet. It’s no wonder we don’t like them.

    1. I think most good men will realize this. Are there douchenozzles in academia? You bet your bippy. I think it is pretty much the same percentage as total jackass police officers. With cops you basically have a bunch of regular guys in the middle and a small percentage of real heros on one side and total cunts on the other. With academia it is pretty much the same. In fact, it is pretty much the same with all trades I would think — at least all of the ones I have ever encountered.

        1. I don’t really know. I know a bunch of cops and most of them seem like decent sorts but that is anecdotal evidence at best. My general feeling is that the heros and the cunts taken collectively get 95% of the press so the large swath of guys who are just doing their jobs are generally ignored. That said, I am working off of personal experience here.

        2. Nope. I know a lot of cops and a lot of academics. Not even close on which group has the most assholes. Academics.

        3. I’be encountered around 20, and three were quite close, all but one firmly in the cunt section.

        5. I have never been convicted of any crime, but of the four close ones in the C-section one was an uncle and two were friends, they did all sorts of shit….. Bribes, false evidence, violent, etc. They generally were worse than the people they arrested. (sorry 4, forgot brother in law is a Captain now).

        6. Anyone who is not a charter boat captain doesn’t know shit about anything.

      2. Yes I was just musing in generalitys (is that a word?), it’s like any group some are ok some ain’t.

        1. You know what I always find funny. Have you ever sat in a restaurant or at a bar next to a group of people who all work at the same job. I don’t care which. EMS guys? Firemen? Electricians? McDonald’s Cashiers? Service Men? Janitors? Surgeons? Professors? Bartenders? If you ever sit next to a group of people who all have the same job and just listen to what they are saying you would get the impression that they are partaking in the noblest of all professions, that they know things that the outsiders just don’t. Drug dealers, whores, professional pool players, building superintendents — it doesn’t matter…put 3 of them at a table together and all of a sudden you get the sense that they have the most important, most difficult job in the world and everyone else is just fucking around being lazy and doing their shit.
          My sister is a nurse. She is always on about how nurses can do everything that doctors do and just don’t get paid enough. She hates it when I ask her how being a “doctor’s secretary” is. But she has this massive online presence where it is just like you would think if one nurse took one day off it would take on biblical proportions. Fire and brimstone coming down from the skies! Rivers and seas boiling! Forty years of darkness! Earthquakes, volcanoes. The dead rising from the grave! Human sacrifice, dogs and cats living together… mass hysteria!
          The reality of things is that it would be a much nicer place if people could take themselves a little less seriously and step back and see how silly everything really is.

        3. I HATE that so much. You round up a bunch of co-workers for some sort of social gathering, and all they want to talk about is WORK. Seriously??

        4. if you want to change the subject to anything other than their job they give you the smug “you wouldn’t understand” look. The inflated sense of importance that people have smh

        5. How I see it, unless I am on company time being paid to talk about work, I don’t want to hear about it.

        6. I actually have a similar line. I tell people “I will talk about work if you want but it won’t be cheap”

        7. “My sister is a nurse. She is always on about how nurses can do everything that doctors do and just don’t get paid enough.”
          Et tu, Knee? I have 4 retired ones in my immediate family and my younger sis is one now. I asked her if one of the first requirements to become a nurse is to get fat?

        8. lol! It is really something. I was trying to have a conversation with my sister over Christmas (she lives in Texas so we only see each other once a year). I was telling her that in a lot of ways I envy her. As an (emergency) nurse she leaves a set of problems and another shift of nurses pick up where she left off. She will come in to a whole new set of problems. When she walks out of work, work is over. As a corporate guy I essentially work 24 hours a day. I never stop thinking about what I have to do next, never stop getting text messages, emails all which need to be addressed immediately. When I leave work I take it with me and when she leaves work she leaves it there. I wasn’t putting down nursing, just telling her that there are some aspects of it I envy. She went ballistic explaining how I don’t understand the kind of stress and pressure she is under. She eventually mentioned the long hours and I told her that they were only for like 3 days a week and then she essentially has a mini vacation. Anger palpable I finally dropped the “doctor’s secretary” and got a quick “hospital waitress” in and that got me out of the conversation. What a strange group of people those medical stewardesses are

        9. Everytime I sit at a bar with three or more fellows from my profession, I make it a point to NOT talk about the job or technicalities involved in work. I take them *way* out of their comfort zone and will sometimes even get some nearby girls to come over and talk if I can. My field is filled with shut in weenies to whom the sun is a theoretical concept only, and women nothing less than myth or video game art.
          I fucking *hate* talking shop when I’m at lunch or out at a bar. If it’s an official “working lunch” that’s one thing, but if it’s a social activity the last thing I want to do is sit and listen to some dweeb rattle on about the latest DOTNET framework.

        10. It really is amazing isn’t it? I was at a greek coffee shop and sat next to a table of 6 ballet dancers. Listening to them it was impossible to assume anything other than that they felt that being a ballet dancer was the only “real” job and everyone else was a total waste of space.

        11. I like to blurt out a Seinfeldian non-sequitor, like “I’m buying a jetski!” or else dive right into “scar talk”

        16. You don’t get a choice sometimes, in the office. Well, not a choice that isn’t a CLM anyway. And most “after hours get togethers” are “optional” only in the sense that you can opt to get a bad review for lack of teamwork come raise time.

        17. Tell me about it. The worst are the fly by nighters. People who legitimately carry the badge just because. In sales I come across these types all too often. They use and dilute the profession with their toe-dipping and they don’t know jack about the field.
          At a corporate dinner party (ie fun times, no work) I offered one of these guys a seat next to me and he kept steering the conversation to work. He was so clueless he even loudly asked everybody why nobody was taking about work. I did what I do best and pissed in his beverage with everybody listening and left him with no other option but for him to gulp it all down.

        18. I can agree with nurses not being special and thinking they are (I’m not sure I think many doctors are all that special, maybe surgeons but the rest generally not that skilled). But drug dealers, hookers and gang members don’t appear to feel special, and I spend far too much time sitting and socializing with them.
          Schoolteachers and University lecturers ….. they KNOW they’re special.

        19. I thought nurses worked under instruction and supervision from doctors …… doesn’t sound hard, without much personal responsibility/liability, that’s all on the doctor. If that’s not the case, the nurse is working outside their remit and probably breaking the law.

        21. No one is special. Not one single person. No one is even remotely special

        22. Until recently, nursing was considered minimum wage work. I haven’t found any aspect of nursing that I couldn’t learn to do with around 1 hour of training. So I don’t really know how they can claim stress or expertise.

        23. That was the larger point though. Any group of people, from McDonalds cashiers to surgeons, when they are with each other, act like their lot in life is the most important fucking thing in the universe. I assume that bums, when they gather together and have their bum conversations, talk about how difficult being a bum is and how the non-bums just will never understand.

      3. Into the legal profession 90% of all lawyers, no matter the country or the time, are total cunts. Of that 90% a good percentage are sociopaths or outright psychopaths.

        1. Also not my experience. I deal with hundreds of lawyers in my job. I can think, off hand, of about 10 real cunts. Sociopath gets thrown around like an insult. It is just a personality trait. As for psychopath…I don’t think that word accurately describes any of the lawyers I have met and is another word that is used as a catchall for “bad guy”

    2. Few people have any sense of ‘noblisse oblige’.
      I’m an engineer who can fix a few things myself in a laboratory, but sure as hell appreciate the onsite machinist who can get a screw out of a piece of metal or the carpenter who has done enough jobs to put together a door on my house in a craftsmen like manner.

      1. Yes, they begin to get a little stuck on themselves and automatically think everyone else is an idiot. Thinking of this reminds me of that left wing commie asswipe Bill Maher. I can’t stomach watching his show but have heard more than one excerpt where he is forever exclaiming “Americans are so stupid!”.
        I would like to tell his fans, “Hey! He’s talking about YOU!”

        1. I know a couple tradespeople around 60 years old or so who came from that generation where you did your job right all the time. One is a carpenter and the other a diesel mechanic. They both have some of the common sense and decency toward others that many professionals lack these days. It’s going to be a sad day for this country when these people pass on, but even they see the lunacy of the 21st century workplace.

  17. Does donald get credit for ‘diversity’ if melania hooked up with black athletes before she married him?
    lol

  18. Hitler and the Zionists worked together to create a Jewish state and yet Judea declared a war on Germany. Trump has stated it on numerous occasions that he is going to be Israel’s best friend and yet Hollywood and the liberal secular Jews hate him.
    Point is, all these attacks on Trump are only designed to fool his supporters (and true enemies) that he is anti-establishment.
    Expect this circus to continue all throughout his presidency and expect Trump to be even more vocal and his tweets even more scandalous. In the meantime, the important deals will be sealed without public scrutiny and the caravan will go on.
    Trump will go down in history as the Twitter President.

  19. This is a simple case of Intellectuals (people who think they are smart but have never done anything to prove it) having a hissy fit when actual smart, accomplished people take over.
    It’s a form of inadequacy compensation. “Look at those degrees, I must be smarter than you!” say the academic loser to the billionaire.

    1. For the most part I agree with you. But there is a danger here. The fact that some very well educated people consider people without an advanced degree stupid is wrong, but the anti intellectualism that suggests everyone who has an advanced degree is dumb based on the fact that they are well educated is just as bad.
      Cunts gonna cunt. Some of those cunts are very well educated and some are not at all, some are total failures and some are colossal successes — what they have in common is that they are cunts. To run full tilt anti intellectual is just as bad as useless intellectuals going full tilt elitist cunt.

      1. Some of those degrees can be a bitch to get and you do have to prove you have the capacity for some intellectual rigor…as you know.

        1. they can. I do not want to minimize how fucking cunty many, many academics are…total fucking worthless shits….but that doesn’t mean one should equate educated with bad.

        2. I don’t automatically fault anyone for having received an advanced education, some of my best friends were still getting schooled long after I had started raising a family and many of the people I work with have advanced degrees. The majority of them are just regular folks with a few exceptions. Most of whom I speak of being dickheads are MSM types, upper level government types and the ever present, totally brilliant Internet professors who can never turn down a chance to explain how smart they are and how stupid everyone else is.

        3. Ha! So yeah. Assholes get on your nerves. I always have a feeling that those are the types of people who would have been cunts no matter how their lives played out. Like some bum on the street never missing a chance to tell you how bum life is more “real”

        4. You’re right, they get on my nerves no matter where they come from. I never really looked at it that way lol.
          When the internet first came along I thought I would have interesting and thought provoking dialogue with people from other areas and who have different views and experience than me.
          I have found that they mostly are interested in arguing and having the last word instead of good old BS sessions.
          I used to get caught up in trying to have the last word myself but now if it goes on very long I usually just let them have it.
          Maybe that’s why I like the comments section at ROK so much. Most disagreements here don’t seem to turn into arguments and trolls usually don’t last long before they are sent back under the bridge.

        5. Ha. Yeah. I try to simplify things as much as possible. “I don’t like assholes” is pretty general and absolutely true and covers all fields of people. I am quite the egalitarian in my hyper-elitist way.
          I remember when the intertubes first came out. I was pretty excited too. I have never been much of a computer guy but this was great. I remember one night I did a search for, I don’t know, like “lion” then read about lions, but found a link to “zoos” and then read about zoos, then the Bronx zoo, then about the Bronx in general, then about Pelham Bay, then about the battle of Pelham, then about the American revolution, then about King George, then about English nobility blah blah blah. I could stay up until dawn.
          Then I found chat groups. I did pretty much the same as you. Then I sat back and though….80% of the people I know are total fucking idiots but I only know like 50 people. This means 40 idiots. Of those 40 idiots at least 1/4 of them are the decent sort of idiot who just means well and isn’t very bright and those weren’t so bad. Of the 10 non idiots 5 of them are assholes so that is 50%. This means my world was limited to 35 people I really was fucking annoyed by. The problem with internet message boards is that it inflated the numbers in an insane way. So even though the percentages stayed roughly the same there were just more loathsome people…a lot more. Eventually, the people who weren’t loathsome just gave up (you and me included) and the rule of the loathsome went lord of the flies style. Anyway, that is my best guesses as to the phenomenon.

        6. Your early Internet experience sounds just like mine. I searched for something like pre-Colombian Georgia history, then early white settlement, then cracker cattle to ranching in Florida to south Florida sugar cane production to international shipping to piracy to the battle of the Jutland.
          Then I thought chat rooms were great until I kind of got away from it for a while, then…..I let someone talk me into getting a Facebook profile, it seemed ok at first then turned into a big narcissistic gossip fest. Then I made the mistake of cruising the comments section of various news organizations, big mistake. When I began to realize how pissed off I got at people I would never meet I turned that shit off.
          One of the things that used to bug me about Facebook was I couldn’t even make a generic joke without someone thinking I was attacking them personally.
          Then my son told me about ROK and I’ve been coming here ever since. Sometimes it’s like sitting around the campfire drinking beer with old buddies.

        7. I didn’t fall for the facebook trap. I saw it as a confessional for a world bereft of god. I have never sat around a campfire before, but ROK does seem the way I imagine it.

      2. Just another example of a false dichotomy–there seem to be a lot of those these days. I went to a college in a small Georgia town. The locals there hated us college students because we were a bunch of dumb intellectuals, and the college students hated the locals because they were dumb redneck farmers. Like you said, cuntiness knows no bounds, and can infect the most educated and least educated among us. People say they want unity, but then fall into the trap of false dichotomies and let their cunty vibes shine.

        1. Which college? I don’t live in a college town but, I’m probably familiar with where you went.

        3. Well I’m not to familiar with Carrollton I was assuming it was somewhere in south or central Georgia.

        4. I’ve been all over. Visited Valdosta State, Georgia Southern, UGA, Berry College, had friends who went to Georgia College and State–thought it was fucking hilarious that Ben Rothlesburger had his false rape scandal there, the bars in that town consisting of townies and college kids.

        5. Yeah I’m pretty familiar with Valdosta and Georgia Southwestern in Americus had a lot of friends attend there.

      3. True, I have a dog in this fight (BSc and MSc) and despair as much of the “everyone with a degree is stupid” as much as the “elites” who look down on those without post-college credentials

      4. Finishing up my PhD, and I can tell you that dogmatism and intellectual bad faith can be found at every level of the academy. On the other hand, so can genuine excellence, excitement, and desire to push the frontiers of knowledge for the betterment of humanity.
        My point is that anti-intellectualism is not based on education, experience, or intelligence. It is an emotional attitude that people pick up from culture when they stop being humble before the vastness and wonder of the universe.

        1. Eh, I’d say that they pick it up when they continually encounter the snobbery and disdain that is now openly expressed by the elite and “educated”. No doubt that there’s always existed some envy or hatred (on both sides) but since the internet we’e been deluged by people who think that they are above all of us on a 24/7/365 basis, and it’s now even manifesting on shows and movies (hello Merryl Streep).

        2. Speaking from personal experience, it is Ivy League MBAs and JDs that serve up the elite disdain. They *are the elite,* in all the places that count.

        3. You have children, GoJ. I thought that you would’ve understood Streep’s simple point — that shitty behavior from those at the top drifts down to everybody, and then society loses. Our leaders are supposed to be better people than we are.
          Or did you routinely mock handicapped people to your children?
          Her speech was neither Democratic or Republican. She never mentioned political parties. She was concerned about you-know-who’s BEHAVIOR as it affects society.

        4. Trump didn’t mock a handicapped guy.
          Two, her point was that if it weren’t for her primpy little elite arse, then all we’d be left with is things that most people enjoy doing that are apparently “below” her kind. And MMA? Mixed Martial ARTS. Seems to me, it’s right in the name.
          She’s an effite snob and an overrated actress, an opinion I’ve held of her for a long time now, long before that Devil wears Prada movie yet.

      5. I agree with this caveat: The left has successfully infiltrated and commandeered higher education and most institutions in the United States. I find it amusing at how they can simultaneously argue that Trump and the right are a bunch of uneducated, marginalized fools who have no relevance anymore and should just die already AND stupid white guys are in charge of everything.
        Kind of like with Harry Potter’s core theme, higher education is less of actually producing top intellectual talent than providing a meeting place for the magically gifted to form lifetime connections and cliques with each other to dominate the muggles. The skull and bones meetings mattered more than business economics 101. it always did even in olden times since when the kings and queens even bothered to attend school and read and write which they had originally considered too pedestrian for royalty kind of like learning auto repair. The primary business of being a king or queen in the old days was surviving attempts by your siblings to kill you off during childhood and surviving that, everything else largely took care of itself!
        So anyways, higher education along with science is now as corrupt as it ever was during the days when the number 0 was outlawed in ancient Greece setting back mathematics in the west for a thousand years and geocentric astronomy outlawed by the church which also had veto power in education. Different times, different church.

        1. hmm. You seem like yet another person who wasted his/her time in high school thinking THAT was the time of your life, rather than the time to prepare for your life. I can’t count the number of people I know who were raised in poverty and sacrificed so much for an education. You don’t even realize how “entitled” your rant sounds.

        2. Yeah, but couldn’t that be said of higher education (university/college) itself as also a kind of 13th grade? Due to wage deflation (thanks massive immigration and feminism), most college students don’t bother working part time and either live off of their parents or go into debt and spend 4 years regressing into infancy with coloring books in victimization classes.
          Thanks to the left being in bed with banker oligarchs (hi Hillary!), there is little chance that there will be money for “free” college education in the states anytime soon. Consequently, high schoolers are viewed as “losers” by the elite for not being smart or well connected enough to rise up to a higher caste. (Or at least not able to fake being a member of a Native American tribe such as how Elizabeth Warren did)
          This reminds me of this scene from A Clockwork Orange. Note the narration by Alex explaining for the beating he gives to the “old man” (sound familiar to leftist rhetoric on “checking privilege?”)
          “One thing I could never stand is to see a filthy, dirty old drunkie, howling away at the filthy songs of his fathers and going blerp, blerp in between as it might be a filthy old orchestra in his stinking rotten guts. I could never stand to see anyone like that, whatever his age might be, but more especially when he was real old like this one was.”

          And then… with a simple change of political administration (or heck, graduation day), they’re no better than the loser working class they mocked. Heck, some of them wind up WORSE off! My auto mechanic lives quite well and his hands haven’t been clean a day in his life.
          Note, I have nothing against education. I have also sacrificed and worked to educate myself in the sense of becoming a decent human being but I suppose everyone defines decent differently. On the contrary, I sadly think higher education has become less accessible in the past 50 years along with less relevant to what it used to mean.

    2. Yup
      Never trust any degree that isn’t an stem one. And even then do your homework as those also are being infiltrated by feminism.

  21. Use archive.is, Jesus… You are so fucking dumb, giving clicks (and money) to those websites.

    1. For those of us who still think computers are funny little boxes made out of magic and legerdemain can someone tell me if the above “Guest” talking about archive something is a troll of some sorts or passing out useful info?

      1. archive.is is a website that creates a cached (saved) version of a webpage. So, you give it a url, and it saves the file.
        Using archive.is, you protect against quiet updates that change the content, page deletion, and advertising (so they get no $$$ from the pageview).

  22. And once again the democrats display that they still don’t get it. If you don’t have their approved educational pedigree you are but shit on their shoes.
    MAGA!

  23. It’s lost on the press that Amerika has been run into the ground from some of the allegedly ‘best’ people from the Ivy Leagues crapholes of Harvard, Princeton, and Yale. I’m still waiting for the Zero Negro to show his Columbia transcript and any of these ‘scholarly’ articles he allegedly wrote.

    2. Imagine if I were to seal my records and make it as a successful doctor (despite having absolutely 0 experience as a doctor and losing more lives than I save) just because of my skin color.

      1. Obamas college transcripts were at least one secret the intelligence agencies were able to keep. Heh.

  24. I know a man who works at NASA with a bachelor’s in Electrical Engineering. He’s been there for 20+ years, and he knows more about how every facet of mission control works (and, consequently, how programming high-effeciency never-fail systems works) than any man alive.
    He routinely surprises Ph.D’s because he’s got experiences and insights they never even dreamed of.
    Post-Graduate education is inferior to experience in most fields.

    1. @Taignobias
      We have an old engineer like that too, HOWEVER, a BS degree was harder to earn 20+ years ago and students had mandatory undergrad curriculum that was closer to what is required for an MS degree today.
      So, with that said, your NASA friend may not have a Masters degree, but due to WHEN he attended college, he most certainly has the academic equivalent of someone who earned a Masters degree today. This academic foundation EXCLUDES actual work experience.
      Not to mention on the job training was FAR superior to what is given today. He even possibly did PUBLISHABLE PhD level work and projects while at NASA, 20 years ago. In contrast when compared to today, a junior to senior level engineer wouldn’t be able to come within 1000 feet of.

      1. He let me borrow his books and notebooks. While the textbooks had actual value (compared to mine), there wasn’t much more to his college degree than mine, which I think says a lot about the engineering curriculum where I attended college.
        But you are right that the projects are the key. NASA has the benefit of being entirely unique work, so basically everything done is research and proof-of-concept work. Years of exposure to the inner workings of the impossible gives unique perspective if only you learn from it.
        I know a few programmers that have twenty years of experience, and a few who have twenty years of the same experience. The difference is how you absorb the lessons of your experiences and apply them to future work, and in this skill alone is this man true master.

        6. One thing that has ruined critical thinking skills is the ubiquity of multiple choice for practically every major test. These standardized test only train you to be good at these kinds of tests without having real practical knowledge.

    3. Who doesn’t love the gifted, doggedly determined autodidact? The guy with two PhDs and a level rank to that man, that’s who. People like the one you describe are regularly putting some scholars to shame in my workplace as well. It’s terrific when an academic snob underestimates them. There’s a certain purity in it. Good times.

    4. I have a family member with several degree’s that couldn’t assemble basic Ikea pack furniture to save their life. I also know a highschool dropout that could build a small village with electricity and running water in the event of a zombie apocalypse.
      The former is living very comfortably with their ‘pieces of paper’ in some superfluous role for a big company. The latter is living paycheck to paycheck and body will be toast come retirement.

    1. Scott Baio should be on the forefront, dude was vocal and loud for Trump the entire election season.

  26. Everyone seen with Trump is completely written off as deplorable by the mainstream, minorities and protected groups especially, as the biggest cynics are from within their groups.
    They are the ones to blame as they’ve pressured their own people to not do business with him. Ergo, no representation. Their fault, not Trump’s.

  27. Obama may have benefited from being black, but I think that the blacks did not benefit from him being president. Seems like race relations have gone back 50 years instead of improving. Hillary would have done for gender relations what Obama has done for race relations as far as I’m concerned.
    The MSM onslaught is just starting and will continue non stop during Trump’s presidency. The voters rejection of MSM polls, predictions and character assassination during the last election gave me something to hope for. I just hope that the voters continue to reject MSM and the liberal agenda of making citizens dependent on Big Daddy/Big Brother government.

  28. Honestly I bet Donald Trump’s America will be better for black people than Obama’s was. The current administration has created horrible race relations in this country intentionally, the black community wont be able to heal until the instigators are out of office.

  29. As one of my physics professors famously said…. (and I’ll paraphrase in case it’s recognized) “Don’t assume a PhD equates to intelligence. I know two faculty members right here that are total morons.”
    🙂

  32. Who the hell even cares what nobodies at a jerk off rag think anyway? He’s made himself multiple fortunes through picking out the most competent candidates for almost half a century so they’re flat out empirically wrong.

Comments are closed.