On 10/27/2010 1:03 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 27 Oct 2010 09:50:15 -0400, "Paul@BYC"
wrote:

I thought you would appreciate a quote of Spiro T. Agnew, who was a
colorful speaker.

That was actually William Safire. Agnew couldn't ad lib a fart at a
Boston Baked Bean dinner. (from Johnny Carson)


The speaker was Agnew. I didn't say "writer."

On 10/27/10 4:43 PM, I am Tosk wrote:
In ,
says...

On 10/27/2010 9:53 AM, I am Tosk wrote:
In ,
says...

On 10/27/2010 9:23 AM, I am Tosk wrote:
In ,
says...

On 10/27/2010 8:18 AM, John H wrote:
On Wed, 27 Oct 2010 07:51:18 -0400, wrote:

On 10/27/2010 7:13 AM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Wed, 27 Oct 2010 06:45:47 -0400, "Paul@BYC"
wrote:

Sure, I'm progressive. I believe in progress, in moving forward, in
extending rights, in scientific development, in opening doors, in making
sure the "play" is fair. I don't believe in scapegoating, in blaming one
ethnic group or another for our society's failures, or in trying to get
ahead by scaring large blocks of nervous people.

Now you've done it - sit back and watch the fur fly.

Are you a sociology professor studying internet behavior?


That's pretty funny!

If I were, some posters here would make for an interesting study group,
I'd bet.

My underpinnings and teachings are more classical, and less
trade-schoolish, not that there is anything wrong with learning a trade.
In my classes, you might learn what some great thinkers thought, why
they thought that, how those thoughts evolved, how they influence us
today. You'd also be required to write many long papers.


Must the papers be of a certain 'bent' to recieve a good grade?

Of course not. What we like to see is evidence the writer properly
prepared himself by reading and assimilating pertinent works, and spent
significant time thinking and writing so as to present a logical,
coherent paper. In class discussions, any ideas are welcome, but the
presenter has to be able to defend them. We try to teach our students to
think logically and to develop and use their wits.

Yes, "must be able to defend them". Against who? A professor with a
liberal bent that might not challenge one side as vigorously as the
other... Especially if that professor doesn't feel one side needs
defending at all... Watched three kids come through the system, and my
mom was a school administrator for almost 50 years, I know how it
works...




You appear unfamiliar with the process of "defending" one's papers,
thoughts, presentations as it is done at the college/university level. I
say that because you are injecting partisan politics into a process that
has nothing to do with partisan politics. The exercise is intellectual,
not political.

No offense, but you seem eager to point fingers and make accusations,
even on subjects about which you know little or nothing.

The challenges to the presenters come not from me, but from fellow
students chosen at random and given a copy of the paper a few days
before the class discussion. The object of the exercise is to develop
logical thinking processes, not to insult the presenters or the
challengers. My role is that of sometime moderator, to keep the
discussions on track and within the time limitations.

I trust you have the best intentions... I just know how tough it is for
my kid to be in a Social Studies class with a openly regressive teacher
who's car sports a bumper sticker saying "impeach Bush, torture Cheney".
She is a bright kid and knows how to play the game, she has the highest
grades in the class and it's not even her they are grading


You present an interesting paradox. On the one hand, you lament what you
perceive as a decline in freedom of speech and on the other hand, you
lament your kid's teacher expressing his or her freedom of speech on a
bumper sticker.

Nope, the problem comes when the teacher brings that radical/militant
attitude to the classroom, but you know that is what I meant, didn't
you?



So, you want to discuss politics here, eh?

:)

On 10/27/2010 4:43 PM, I am Tosk wrote:
In ,
says...

On 10/27/2010 9:53 AM, I am Tosk wrote:
In ,
says...

On 10/27/2010 9:23 AM, I am Tosk wrote:
In ,
says...

On 10/27/2010 8:18 AM, John H wrote:
On Wed, 27 Oct 2010 07:51:18 -0400, wrote:

On 10/27/2010 7:13 AM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Wed, 27 Oct 2010 06:45:47 -0400, "Paul@BYC"
wrote:

Sure, I'm progressive. I believe in progress, in moving forward, in
extending rights, in scientific development, in opening doors, in making
sure the "play" is fair. I don't believe in scapegoating, in blaming one
ethnic group or another for our society's failures, or in trying to get
ahead by scaring large blocks of nervous people.

Now you've done it - sit back and watch the fur fly.

Are you a sociology professor studying internet behavior?


That's pretty funny!

If I were, some posters here would make for an interesting study group,
I'd bet.

My underpinnings and teachings are more classical, and less
trade-schoolish, not that there is anything wrong with learning a trade.
In my classes, you might learn what some great thinkers thought, why
they thought that, how those thoughts evolved, how they influence us
today. You'd also be required to write many long papers.


Must the papers be of a certain 'bent' to recieve a good grade?

Of course not. What we like to see is evidence the writer properly
prepared himself by reading and assimilating pertinent works, and spent
significant time thinking and writing so as to present a logical,
coherent paper. In class discussions, any ideas are welcome, but the
presenter has to be able to defend them. We try to teach our students to
think logically and to develop and use their wits.

Yes, "must be able to defend them". Against who? A professor with a
liberal bent that might not challenge one side as vigorously as the
other... Especially if that professor doesn't feel one side needs
defending at all... Watched three kids come through the system, and my
mom was a school administrator for almost 50 years, I know how it
works...




You appear unfamiliar with the process of "defending" one's papers,
thoughts, presentations as it is done at the college/university level. I
say that because you are injecting partisan politics into a process that
has nothing to do with partisan politics. The exercise is intellectual,
not political.

No offense, but you seem eager to point fingers and make accusations,
even on subjects about which you know little or nothing.

The challenges to the presenters come not from me, but from fellow
students chosen at random and given a copy of the paper a few days
before the class discussion. The object of the exercise is to develop
logical thinking processes, not to insult the presenters or the
challengers. My role is that of sometime moderator, to keep the
discussions on track and within the time limitations.

I trust you have the best intentions... I just know how tough it is for
my kid to be in a Social Studies class with a openly regressive teacher
who's car sports a bumper sticker saying "impeach Bush, torture Cheney".
She is a bright kid and knows how to play the game, she has the highest
grades in the class and it's not even her they are grading


You present an interesting paradox. On the one hand, you lament what you
perceive as a decline in freedom of speech and on the other hand, you
lament your kid's teacher expressing his or her freedom of speech on a
bumper sticker.

Nope, the problem comes when the teacher brings that radical/militant
attitude to the classroom, but you know that is what I meant, didn't
you?


To be brutally frank, no. You didn't say that, nor did you imply it.
I don't know what "openly regressive" means, either. I don't understand
your comment about "not even her they are grading." What does that mean?

Perhaps we might have better understanding if you just came out and said
what you mean, instead of obfuscating. I read through some of your long
post on your kid's motorcycling adventures before I gave up because I
didn't understand much of the lingo you were using. I'm a big fan of
standard English.


It is too late to impeach Bush. :)

On 10/27/10 4:59 PM, Paul@BYC wrote:
On 10/27/2010 4:43 PM, I am Tosk wrote:

You present an interesting paradox. On the one hand, you lament what you
perceive as a decline in freedom of speech and on the other hand, you
lament your kid's teacher expressing his or her freedom of speech on a
bumper sticker.

Nope, the problem comes when the teacher brings that radical/militant
attitude to the classroom, but you know that is what I meant, didn't
you?


To be brutally frank, no. You didn't say that, nor did you imply it.
I don't know what "openly regressive" means, either. I don't understand
your comment about "not even her they are grading." What does that mean?

Perhaps we might have better understanding if you just came out and said
what you mean, instead of obfuscating. I read through some of your long
post on your kid's motorcycling adventures before I gave up because I
didn't understand much of the lingo you were using. I'm a big fan of
standard English.


It is too late to impeach Bush. :)



Standard English? In wrecked boats?

Dream on.

On Wed, 27 Oct 2010 16:41:06 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Wed, 27 Oct 2010 16:12:50 -0400, John H
wrote:

Spoofing is not the best behavior, in my opinion, but it's not nearly as sick as
slammer's crap.

John, why do you re-quote it? I'd never see most of that junk if
people didn't reply to it or re-post it in some way. After a while
he'd get tired of talking to himself.

I quoted only enough to make my point. I saw the whole message only because
someone else had quoted the whole message. I've got the individual filtered.

Now, I don't recall your commenting on the original entire quote. But, I could
have missed it.

Senility is heck.
--

Hope you're having a great day!

John H

On Wed, 27 Oct 2010 18:00:10 -0400, John H
wrote:

Senility is heck.

What? :-)

On Oct 27, 6:00*pm, John H wrote:
On Wed, 27 Oct 2010 16:41:06 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Wed, 27 Oct 2010 16:12:50 -0400, John H
wrote:

Spoofing is not the best behavior, in my opinion, but it's not nearly as sick as
slammer's crap.

John, why do you re-quote it? *I'd never see most of that junk if
people didn't reply to it or re-post it in some way. *After a while
he'd get tired of talking to himself.

I quoted only enough to make my point. I saw the whole message only because
someone else had quoted the whole message. I've got the individual filtered.

Now, I don't recall your commenting on the original entire quote. But, I could
have missed it.

Senility is heck.
--

Hope you're having a great day!

John H

Spoofing is not the best behavior, in my opinion, but it's not
nearly as sick as
slammer's crap.

You don't have to read one thing I post, " Pope " John.... Ingersoll
gets what he deserves, nothing less.

Now, go cash yet another cheque from the Government, you teat-sucking
asshole racist.

On Wed, 27 Oct 2010 08:42:07 -0400, "Paul@BYC"
wrote:

On 10/27/2010 8:35 AM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute! wrote:
On Oct 27, 7:41 am, wrote:

If "critical thinking" (aka indoctrination) is what happened to my
oldest, you can have it. A product of American U, just finishing up her
masters, she still thinks George Bush pushed a button in the oval
office, sent missiles to take out the twin towers, the pentagon, and the
plane over PA, "there were no planes, the footage was faked", "the
witnesses were staged"... Yeah, critical thinking... Pffffttttt...

Are you blaming American University for this?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

No, actually I think it was more the pseudo - intellectuals she got in
with earlier at U-Hart...


I doubt many intellectuals, even pseudo-intellectuals, believe that
"George Bush pushed a button in the oval office, sent missiles to take
out the twin towers, the pentagon, and the plane over PA, "there were no
planes, the footage was faked", "the witnesses were staged"..."

If I were you, I would look elsewhere for the origins of those thoughts
in your child's head.

University is meant to teach rigor. Conspiracy theories generally
lack much rigor.

That said, I wouldn't doubt that George knew something was afoot, to
happen and planned to use it to invade Iraq, whatever it was.

The neocon crew were hoping for an incident that would allow them to
launch a US military force, the specific goal being change in the
mideast. Certain of them also liked the idea of controlling all that
oil.

That said, to string everyone's worst nightmare together to form a
theory probably isn't a good idea but certain aspects of each of them
are at least considerable.

On Wed, 27 Oct 2010 09:29:02 -0700 (PDT), "*e#c"
wrote:

On Oct 27, 6:19*am, I am Tosk wrote:
In article ,
says...





On Tue, 26 Oct 2010 19:39:32 -0400, "Paul@BYC"
wrote:

On 10/26/2010 6:54 PM, I am Tosk wrote:
In ,
says...

On 10/26/2010 3:38 PM, I am Tosk wrote:
In ,
says...

On 10/26/2010 3:18 PM, jps wrote:
On Tue, 26 Oct 2010 14:19:34 -0400, "Paul@BYC"
* *wrote:

On 10/26/2010 11:43 AM, jps wrote:
On Mon, 25 Oct 2010 19:00:01 -0400, "Paul@BYC"
* * wrote:

On 10/25/2010 12:28 PM, I am Tosk wrote:
In ,
says...

I get a lunch break, but you guys get to post here all day.
Rich? Retired? Not me.

I work from home, my wife is my boss, and after 20 years, *we still get
along, couldn't be better. Admittedly much of our business is now
automated, but we spent many a year and hour getting here

I teach at a university in the middle of the state.

What do you teach?

Upper level undergrad and some grad courses in the traditional liberal
arts.

Uh oh, one of the brainwashers!

As you know, ignorance is being worn as a badge of honor by a good
many Americans, including certain beverage-based political
organizations.

Glad to hear there's still some who are committed to edumacating our
yungins.

Through no fault of mine, we have a very high percentage of our students
going on to receive doctorates in the arts and sciences.
Smart is encouraged; stupid is not. :)

And still a political troll post, *no matter how you look at it...

It is trolling to mention teaching and academic achievement?

No, but the trashing of the tea party is...

The tea party? Who mentioned the tea party, besides you?

When I mentioned the beveraged-based party, I was referring to
Cokeheads and Pepsidroids.

Yeah sure... I guess a liar never changes his spots...


I see you've come to realize that about yourself, huh Panty Goddess.

He at least takes himself a little too seriously. He should probably
consider weaning himself from Hannity and O'Reilly.

On Wed, 27 Oct 2010 15:08:12 -0400, "Dr. Dr. Dr. Phd, Md. STD"
wrote:

On 10/27/10 2:38 PM, jps wrote:
On Wed, 27 Oct 2010 10:40:33 -0400, "Dr. Dr. Dr. Karen Grear, MD, PhD,
wrote:

On 10/27/10 6:45 AM, Paul@BYC wrote:
On 10/27/2010 6:24 AM, I am Tosk wrote:
In ,
says...

On Tue, 26 Oct 2010 18:00:05 -0400, "Paul@BYC"
wrote:

On 10/26/2010 5:50 PM, jps wrote:
On Tue, 26 Oct 2010 16:01:53 -0400, "Paul@BYC"
wrote:

On 10/26/2010 3:38 PM, I am Tosk wrote:
In ,
says...

On 10/26/2010 3:18 PM, jps wrote:
On Tue, 26 Oct 2010 14:19:34 -0400, "Paul@BYC"
wrote:

On 10/26/2010 11:43 AM, jps wrote:
On Mon, 25 Oct 2010 19:00:01 -0400, "Paul@BYC"
wrote:

On 10/25/2010 12:28 PM, I am Tosk wrote:
In ,
says...

I get a lunch break, but you guys get to post here all day.
Rich? Retired? Not me.

I work from home, my wife is my boss, and after 20 years,
we still get
along, couldn't be better. Admittedly much of our business
is now
automated, but we spent many a year and hour getting here



I teach at a university in the middle of the state.

What do you teach?

Upper level undergrad and some grad courses in the traditional
liberal
arts.

Uh oh, one of the brainwashers!

As you know, ignorance is being worn as a badge of honor by a good
many Americans, including certain beverage-based political
organizations.

Glad to hear there's still some who are committed to
edumacating our
yungins.


Through no fault of mine, we have a very high percentage of our
students
going on to receive doctorates in the arts and sciences.
Smart is encouraged; stupid is not. :)

And still a political troll post, no matter how you look at it...


It is trolling to mention teaching and academic achievement?

Look out, you've already raised some hairs. Just mentioning higher ed
makes folks nervous around here...

Kool-aid is served year 'round hereabouts.


There really is a strong undercurrent of anti-intellectualism in this
country, more so than at any other time I can remember. It's too bad
because a dumbed down America will go down the tubes.

You mean "down the tubes" faster. The Chinese are turning out
engineers at 10 times the rate we are, many of them studying at our
universities.

The emergence of this beverage-based group really puts a point on it.
Their candidates don't require a basic knowledge of the constitution,
pivotal supreme court rulings or basic tenets of law. Instead, they
just supply a few common sense-isms, rail on the media, taxes, them
smart folks who got us in all this trouble, and mention the day they
accepted Jesus into their lives as their personal lord and savior.

That's it! You're electable and ready to govern! Yahooo!

Please don't feel obligated to respond. I'm already tainted by the
"liberal" stamp and you can remain above the fray. You should try to
keep it that way as long as possible since you'll have chosen sides
otherwise.

I hope your students help our country rediscover the pride of a
liberal arts education, the ability to leverage well-developed
critical thinking skills, and be of a country that accepts the
responsibility of the social compact between citizens, our obligation
to the state and our country.

Screw the greedy, the globalists and anybody who shops Walmart.

It's ok JPS, our new poster already tainted himself, progressives can't
help it, they just can't play fair here or anywhere else...



I don't know you at all, but you seem extraordinarily volatile and
subject to wide mood swings. One minute you seem to agree this would be
a better place without all the personal name calling and the next minute
you're engaging in it.

Sure, I'm progressive. I believe in progress, in moving forward, in
extending rights, in scientific development, in opening doors, in making
sure the "play" is fair. I don't believe in scapegoating, in blaming one
ethnic group or another for our society's failures, or in trying to get
ahead by scaring large blocks of nervous people.



Paul,
I don't know where you are from, but in my neck of the woods if one
wants to minimize arguments and name calling, it makes sense to avoid
religious and political topics. Now if you enjoy heated debates, you
are right on target.

Debating with the likes of you is like hitting a heavy bag. Thud,
thud, thud. No response. Just dense mass of filling with a coarse
cover.

Again, is calling someone a "dense mass of filling with a course cover"
in the best interest of a kinder and gentler rec.boats?

WTF do you care? You're just a spoofin' fool that likes to buttsniff
his percieved adversaries.