Yale grades portray Kerry as a lackluster student
His 4-year average on par with Bush's
By Michael Kranish, Globe Staff | June 7, 2005

WASHINGTON -- During last year's presidential campaign, John F. Kerry was
the candidate often portrayed as intellectual and complex, while George W.
Bush was the populist who mangled his sentences.

But newly released records show that Bush and Kerry had a virtually
identical grade average at Yale University four decades ago.

In 1999, The New Yorker published a transcript indicating that Bush had
received a cumulative score of 77 for his first three years at Yale and a
roughly similar average under a non-numerical rating system during his
senior year.

Kerry, who graduated two years before Bush, got a cumulative 76 for his four
years, according to a transcript that Kerry sent to the Navy when he was
applying for officer training school. He received four D's in his freshman
year out of 10 courses, but improved his average in later years.

(In the interest of upholding international copyright laws, a significant
portion of this article has been snipped. Go to the link below to see the
article in it's entirety.)

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/wa...dent? mode=PF

NOYB wrote:
Yale grades portray Kerry as a lackluster student
His 4-year average on par with Bush's
By Michael Kranish, Globe Staff | June 7, 2005

WASHINGTON -- During last year's presidential campaign, John F. Kerry was
the candidate often portrayed as intellectual and complex, while George W.
Bush was the populist who mangled his sentences.


He's not "portrayed" that way, President Bush does in fact mangle words
& sentences.

But newly released records show that Bush and Kerry had a virtually
identical grade average at Yale University four decades ago.


Does anybody actually believe this? Strikes me as yet another case of
Bush's records being conveniently lost or falsified.

If you want to see the *real* difference between the two, compare how
the two's children speak in public, and behave in general. But hey, if
'family values' matter most to you, then you probably won't care about
raising intelligent, well balanced, well-spoken, professional, and
high-achieving kids... at least, if you claim you care about family
values and voted for Bush anyway...

DSK

On Tue, 07 Jun 2005 13:19:59 -0400, DSK wrote:


If you want to see the *real* difference between the two, compare how
the two's children speak in public, and behave in general. But hey, if
'family values' matter most to you, then you probably won't care about
raising intelligent, well balanced, well-spoken, professional, and
high-achieving kids... at least, if you claim you care about family
values and voted for Bush anyway...

DSK


We should have elected Kerry. Besides well-balanced, well-spoken, professional,
and high-achieving kids, we could have expected:

Taxes to go up *only* for those making over $200,000,
The 'No Child Left Behind Act' to be fully funded,
The Iraq Coalition to become much larger very soon, especially with
all the French and German troops that will join,
Everyone able to have the same medical care afforded members of
Congress,
Cheap prescription drugs,
All children going to college,
An immediate end to the nuclear weapons aims of North Korea and Iran,
America to soon be the beloved nation of the entire world,
A tremendous decrease in unemployment,
A huge increase in high-paying jobs,
A resurgence of manufacturing jobs,
A tremendous decrease in outsourcing, with jobs returning to the US,
An energy independent America, with no reliance on Mideast oil,
A modernized military, able to meet all threats,
The failure of terrorist organizations to breed new generations,
A 50% reduction in the deficit,
Enforcement of all of our trade laws, with a complete review in 120
days,
An increase in the minimum wage to $7.00,
The creation of10 million new jobs in his first term,
Changes in credit laws to prevent very high interest rates,
The savings of billions of dollars in medical overhead costs,
The inspection of the 95% of containers entering the country not
currently inspected,
More secure borders,
The hardening of nuclear plants, airports, trains and subways against
attack,
Improvement of our intelligence gathering, analysis and sharing to
stop terrorists before they can do harm,
A tougher, smarter, more effective war on terror,
The securing of nuclear materials worldwide,
A speed-up in drug and vaccine development,
and,
did I mention he will raise taxes only on those making $200,000 or
more?

Did I leave anything out?

--
John H

"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal,
murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a
particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to
miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his
continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction
... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real
...."
- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003

If you want to see the *real* difference between the two, compare how
the two's children speak in public, and behave in general. But hey, if
'family values' matter most to you, then you probably won't care about
raising intelligent, well balanced, well-spoken, professional, and
high-achieving kids... at least, if you claim you care about family
values and voted for Bush anyway...



John H wrote:
We should have elected Kerry. Besides well-balanced, well-spoken, professional,
and high-achieving kids, we could have expected:

Taxes to go up *only* for those making over $200,000,

Or maybe a reduction in the huge defecit due to the "war on terrorism"
which Bush & Cheney are fighting by invading countries that have no
connection to terrorism...

The 'No Child Left Behind Act' to be fully funded,

Or maybe the 'No Child Left Behind' act would be rescinded and in it's
place a reasonable, effective, and non-punitive, educational policy that
could be executed with the existing level of funding

BTW you're an educator John H (or at least have claimed to be) what do
you really think of President Bush's unfunded mandate called 'The No
Child Left Behind Act'?

The Iraq Coalition to become much larger very soon, especially with
all the French and German troops that will join,

Or maybe coalition members would stop leaving

Everyone able to have the same medical care afforded members of
Congress,

Why doesn't the Republican controlled Congress do this now?

Cheap prescription drugs,

Why doesn't the Republican controlled Congress do this now? Instead of
the *more expensive* drug plans forced down the country's throats in the
form of a huge deficit-increasing subsidy to the big pharmaceutical
companies which the just-previous and Republican controlled Congress
enacted under the guise of "Medicare Reform" (cough cough)?

All children going to college,

Or maybe just the ones that are smart enough to benefit, whether they
can pay or not.


An immediate end to the nuclear weapons aims of North Korea and Iran,

Why doesn't the Republican controlled Congress do this now?

America to soon be the beloved nation of the entire world,

You mean like we would if GWB honored his campaign promises to put into
force the Kyoto Accords, acted to stop genocide, and didn't lock up
people forever & for no reason other than some fumbling intimation that
they *might* be terrorists?


A tremendous decrease in unemployment,
A huge increase in high-paying jobs,
A resurgence of manufacturing jobs,

Why can't President Bush and the Republican controlled Congress do this now?


An energy independent America, with no reliance on Mideast oil

Or maybe we could just ask Halliburton to return the 200 million + that
they've stolen or overcharged since the beginning of the Iraq war.

A modernized military, able to meet all threats,

I thought Rumsfeld was giving us that now, as soon as he finishes
rooting out the 'Clintonized' military leadership (why is it taking more
than 4 years?).

Etc Etc Etc

Oh and thanks for acknowledging all the problems that the Bush
Administration is creating, or worsening, and leaving for the grown-ups
to clean up after them... I hope the grown-ups get there soon...

DSK

On Tue, 07 Jun 2005 15:54:04 -0400, DSK wrote:

If you want to see the *real* difference between the two, compare how
the two's children speak in public, and behave in general. But hey, if
'family values' matter most to you, then you probably won't care about
raising intelligent, well balanced, well-spoken, professional, and
high-achieving kids... at least, if you claim you care about family
values and voted for Bush anyway...



John H wrote:
We should have elected Kerry. Besides well-balanced, well-spoken, professional,
and high-achieving kids, we could have expected:

Taxes to go up *only* for those making over $200,000,

Or maybe a reduction in the huge defecit due to the "war on terrorism"
which Bush & Cheney are fighting by invading countries that have no
connection to terrorism...

The 'No Child Left Behind Act' to be fully funded,

Or maybe the 'No Child Left Behind' act would be rescinded and in it's
place a reasonable, effective, and non-punitive, educational policy that
could be executed with the existing level of funding

BTW you're an educator John H (or at least have claimed to be) what do
you really think of President Bush's unfunded mandate called 'The No
Child Left Behind Act'?

The Iraq Coalition to become much larger very soon, especially with
all the French and German troops that will join,

Or maybe coalition members would stop leaving

Everyone able to have the same medical care afforded members of
Congress,

Why doesn't the Republican controlled Congress do this now?

Cheap prescription drugs,

Why doesn't the Republican controlled Congress do this now? Instead of
the *more expensive* drug plans forced down the country's throats in the
form of a huge deficit-increasing subsidy to the big pharmaceutical
companies which the just-previous and Republican controlled Congress
enacted under the guise of "Medicare Reform" (cough cough)?

All children going to college,

Or maybe just the ones that are smart enough to benefit, whether they
can pay or not.


An immediate end to the nuclear weapons aims of North Korea and Iran,

Why doesn't the Republican controlled Congress do this now?

America to soon be the beloved nation of the entire world,

You mean like we would if GWB honored his campaign promises to put into
force the Kyoto Accords, acted to stop genocide, and didn't lock up
people forever & for no reason other than some fumbling intimation that
they *might* be terrorists?


A tremendous decrease in unemployment,
A huge increase in high-paying jobs,
A resurgence of manufacturing jobs,

Why can't President Bush and the Republican controlled Congress do this now?


An energy independent America, with no reliance on Mideast oil

Or maybe we could just ask Halliburton to return the 200 million + that
they've stolen or overcharged since the beginning of the Iraq war.

A modernized military, able to meet all threats,

I thought Rumsfeld was giving us that now, as soon as he finishes
rooting out the 'Clintonized' military leadership (why is it taking more
than 4 years?).

Etc Etc Etc

Oh and thanks for acknowledging all the problems that the Bush
Administration is creating, or worsening, and leaving for the grown-ups
to clean up after them... I hope the grown-ups get there soon...

DSK

Check out Virginia's implementation of the NCLB Act. You'll not find a lot of
whining about lack of funds. Of course, Virginia already had some standards for
its educational system. It seems as though a big problem is the states'
inability to spend the money allocated them. Why fund more when what's funded
isn't being spent?

http://www.pen.k12.va.us/VDOE/nclb/

As to several of your questions, "Why hasn't the Republican controlled...?", I
would say, for many of these, because it's impossible.

Lastly, you made my point. We should have elected Kerry, who can do the
impossible and only tax the rich. He would have worked miracles, like getting
folks out of wheel chairs.


--
John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."

John H wrote:
As to several of your questions, "Why hasn't the Republican controlled...?", I
would say, for many of these, because it's impossible.


That's funny, they reduced the deficit under Clinton *and* had NO
terrorist attacks on US soil... and put many more *real* terrorists
behind bars for life than Bush has done... after due process, too. Icing
on the cake.

Is making Social Security more fiscally sound "impossible"?
Is an energy-independent America "impossible"
Would it have been impossible to put together a *real* coalition to
invade Iraq, like say for example the one that President George Bush Sr
put together?
Is it "impossible" to increase manufacturing jobs?
Is it "impossible" to gain the respect of, and cooperation with, other
nations?
Is influencing North Korea to not build "nookular" weapons totally
impossible, when it had been done for years before President Bush Jr
took office?
Is it "impossible" to protect the environment?


Lastly, you made my point.

Actually, you made mine. Most of Bush & Cheney's policy's have been a
total failure if you look at the good of the country overall, and if you
look at successful policies of the past.

Of course, it's a lot easier to call names and then say doing all these
things is "impossible."

.... We should have elected Kerry

I agree. Actually, we did elect Gore, but unfortunately he didn't get
tot ake office and even you agree that the country is the poorer for it.

... He would have worked miracles, like getting
folks out of wheel chairs.


If that were true, maybe the Pope would have endorsed Kerry.

DSK

"John H" wrote in message
...

We should have elected Kerry. Besides well-balanced, well-spoken,
professional,
and high-achieving kids, we could have expected:

Taxes to go up *only* for those making over $200,000,

It's called "No Billionaire Left Behind"

"DSK" wrote in message
.. .
NOYB wrote:
Yale grades portray Kerry as a lackluster student
His 4-year average on par with Bush's
By Michael Kranish, Globe Staff | June 7, 2005

WASHINGTON -- During last year's presidential campaign, John F. Kerry was
the candidate often portrayed as intellectual and complex, while George
W. Bush was the populist who mangled his sentences.


He's not "portrayed" that way, President Bush does in fact mangle words &
sentences.

But newly released records show that Bush and Kerry had a virtually
identical grade average at Yale University four decades ago.


Does anybody actually believe this? Strikes me as yet another case of
Bush's records being conveniently lost or falsified.

Sore looser.

If you want to see the *real* difference between the two, compare how the
two's children speak in public, and behave in general. But hey, if 'family
values' matter most to you, then you probably won't care about raising
intelligent, well balanced, well-spoken, professional, and high-achieving
kids... at least, if you claim you care about family values and voted for
Bush anyway...

Bush's daughters manage to keep there assests hidden while Kerry's daughters
parade around in outfits that leave nothing to the imagination.

"Bert Robbins" wrote in message
...

"DSK" wrote in message
.. .
NOYB wrote:
Yale grades portray Kerry as a lackluster student
His 4-year average on par with Bush's
By Michael Kranish, Globe Staff | June 7, 2005

WASHINGTON -- During last year's presidential campaign, John F. Kerry
was the candidate often portrayed as intellectual and complex, while
George W. Bush was the populist who mangled his sentences.


He's not "portrayed" that way, President Bush does in fact mangle words &
sentences.

But newly released records show that Bush and Kerry had a virtually
identical grade average at Yale University four decades ago.


Does anybody actually believe this? Strikes me as yet another case of
Bush's records being conveniently lost or falsified.

Sore loser.

If I recall Einstein had difficulty throughout school.

But as the saying goes the proof is in the pudding.

Bush has proved himself and has no need to explain or apologize for his past
mistakes. His accomplishments speak for themselves. A very distinctive
resume.

And I do not blame Kerry either for his school record. Clearly he is a very
smart man who has a very impressive career while bravely serving our
Country.

This whole discussion is ridiculous.

On Tue, 07 Jun 2005 17:48:03 -0400, Bert Robbins wrote:



Bush's daughters manage to keep there assests hidden while Kerry's
daughters parade around in outfits that leave nothing to the imagination.


Really? I wonder what all those hits on Google are about?