PDA

View Full Version : Obama's New Strategy: Blame Bush



Gangreenseason
03-14-2009, 10:58 AM
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29689284

I think that Obama should really try to stick to the hope and change he promised in his campaign to end the finger pointing and petty politics. We all know that this problem has been building up not only from the Bush 2 administration but all the way to the latter part of the Reagan years. He should focus on what he has to do to remedy this situation.

blenderboy5
03-14-2009, 11:08 AM
Maybe Obama's *****ing about the deficit would have more weight if he wasn't adding trillions to it... and then telling the neanderthals who worship him that he'll cut the deficit in half (which would still make it higher than Bush's highest deficit, btw).

DenButsu
03-14-2009, 12:46 PM
the neanderthals who worship him

What is it with you, man? You can't mention Obama without some petty *** snipe at his supporters. Kool aid et al ad nauseum.

And I know, you'll say you're "just joking". But in fact, it's really ****ing rude, man. You're talking about me and a lot of the other posters here when you make those underhanded little blanket dismissals. And it's really lame.

As I said before, I'm not really personally offended, more like disappointed. That shtick is so damn old and tired. And really, it's beneath you. You're a much better poster than that most of the time.

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

Back on topic - I don't think Obama talking about Bush getting us into the mess we're in now is exactly a new strategy by any means. I think we heard just a little bit about that on the campaign trail, too.

And he's right, so I don't see what the big deal is.

But the longer the recession and all the other problems we're facing continue under his watch, the more he'll own them. So keep hope alive, conservatives - you just might get your chance to make something stick to him yet.

DenButsu
03-14-2009, 12:56 PM
Matt Yglesias responds (http://yglesias.thinkprogress.org/archives/2009/03/leave_george_w_bush_aloooooone.php) to the Post article (http://www.thehollywoodgossip.com/images/gallery/chris-crocker-cries.jpg):


Leave George W. Bush Aloooooone

The country is in a terrible situation in economic, strategic, and budgetary terms and itís overwhelmingly the fault of the team that was running the show before January 20th. Naturally, the team thatís been running the show since January 20th wants people to understand the baseline conditions against which they should be judged. The Washington Post is mightily displeased (http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2009_03/017287.php). Apparently weíre just supposed to pretend that this all happened by coincidence.

blenderboy5
03-14-2009, 03:29 PM
What is it with you, man? You can't mention Obama without some petty *** snipe at his supporters. Kool aid et al ad nauseum.

And I know, you'll say you're "just joking". But in fact, it's really ****ing rude, man. You're talking about me and a lot of the other posters here when you make those underhanded little blanket dismissals. And it's really lame.

As I said before, I'm not really personally offended, more like disappointed. That shtick is so damn old and tired. And really, it's beneath you. You're a much better poster than that most of the time.


Oh let me be clear... I wasn't kidding. I wasn't "just joking." There are absurb idiotic voters in this country who spend 90% of their time sucking Obama's dick and the rest of it *****ing about how awful Bush was. Whether we're talking about Chris Matthews or Rachel Maddow (fine... she wouldn't actually suck Obama's dick... and yes DB that was a joke) or your casual PSD poster, it's annoying as ****.

And get off your high horse. Quite a few of your comments are rude snipy comments and petty dismissals. So lay the **** off.



Back on topic - I don't think Obama talking about Bush getting us into the mess we're in now is exactly a new strategy by any means. I think we heard just a little bit about that on the campaign trail, too.

And he's right, so I don't see what the big deal is.


It's really not that big of a deal, in all honesty. But the whole "new strategy/change we can believe in" argument kinda falls apart when you (not you, DB, Obama...) (1) ***** about Bush and (2) justify it by saying "Chill guys, past administrations have done the same thing."



But the longer the recession and all the other problems we're facing continue under his watch, the more he'll own them. So keep hope alive, conservatives - you just might get your chance to make something stick to him yet.

Yet but by that time we'll have nationalized banks and things forced down our throats that don't really have anything to do with the actual recession but are being accomplished thanks to fear mongering.

I know PHX, I thought fear mongering was dead too...

cabernetluver
03-14-2009, 04:54 PM
Oh let me be clear... I wasn't kidding. I wasn't "just joking." There are absurb idiotic voters in this country who spend 90% of their time sucking Obama's dick and the rest of it *****ing about how awful Bush was. Whether we're talking about Chris Matthews or Rachel Maddow (fine... she wouldn't actually suck Obama's dick... and yes DB that was a joke) or your casual PSD poster, it's annoying as ****.


BB, I think I know your attitude about the public pretty well. I know you do not have a high opinion of it, and I think you are fair enough to be an equal opportunity disliker of it. The problem is that for the most part, it sounds like you mean the people to the left of you are the only idiots. You have proven yourself not to be as dogmatic as I thought you were, and I owe you an appology for thinking you were. Then you go and use the femenazi thing and I shake my head.

I think you are way to smart for that. And I am not making a joke.

blenderboy5
03-14-2009, 06:50 PM
I know. And I realize I lose respect from people by saying things like "feminazi."

And yes, I don't have a lot of respect for the public, whether it's the martini sipping elite left, the welfare left, soccer mom America, the farmer right, the southern right, the hick right, whatever. I don't like the common man much.

DenButsu
03-14-2009, 09:38 PM
And get off your high horse. Quite a few of your comments are rude snipy comments and petty dismissals. So lay the **** off.

I take exception to that, and I think it's really disingenuous. You are constantly referring to Obama supporters as kool aid drinkers, idiots, morons, airheads, whatever. And I honestly think I don't do the same about the opposition. I might have times when I don't pull my punches (recent exchanges with Doomsday Dallas come to mind), but I think they're generally in response to specific posts, to comments or claims that I think are wrong or off base somehow, and not these blanket insults like you seem to really enjoy throwing around.

And I don't know if you don't know or don't care (or both) that when you do that you're actually talking about me, and cabernetluver, and ari, and SBC and Ink and other PSD posters in this forum. But you are. And to tell you the truth, that's pretty ****ing stupid, man. Because as far as I'm concerned, all of us (although others more than me, I'll admit) make a pretty consistent effort to make intellectually sound, well reasoned and well thought out arguments that are supported by facts and good sources. And that's not limited to the lefty side of the spectrum either - I'd say the same of gcoll, and BMD, and in fact of you, as well, most of the time.

Most of the time. But that's what makes seeing you post **** like that so maddening to me. Because right out of the gates you're undermining the civility of the discourse and the quality of the conversation before it even gets going.

Hawkize31
03-14-2009, 09:52 PM
Maybe Obama's *****ing about the deficit would have more weight if he wasn't adding trillions to it... and then telling the neanderthals who worship him that he'll cut the deficit in half (which would still make it higher than Bush's highest deficit, btw).

Translation of bolded part:

Hey, just to let you guys know, I would prefer to have no credibility whatsoever in my posts. Thanks.


...Keep the debate a little respectful man.

gcoll
03-15-2009, 01:01 AM
The more Obama is able to blame Bush, and "talk down" the economy....the better he looks when it recovers.

Do I like this type of whining? No. He asked for this job. It's not like he was thrown into it. But, from his standpoint...it makes perfect sense to do so.

blenderboy5
03-15-2009, 11:06 AM
I take exception to that, and I think it's really disingenuous. You are constantly referring to Obama supporters as kool aid drinkers, idiots, morons, airheads, whatever.



And I don't know if you don't know or don't care (or both) that when you do that you're actually talking about me, and cabernetluver, and ari, and SBC and Ink and other PSD posters in this forum. But you are. And to tell you the truth, that's pretty ****ing stupid, man. Because as far as I'm concerned, all of us (although others more than me, I'll admit) make a pretty consistent effort to make intellectually sound, well reasoned and well thought out arguments that are supported by facts and good sources. And that's not limited to the lefty side of the spectrum either - I'd say the same of gcoll, and BMD, and in fact of you, as well, most of the time.


And that's really disingenuous too. Because I don't talk about all Obama supporters like that. I talk specifically about the kool aid drinkers. For instance, the exact comment you got upset about referred to the people who worship him. As in the people who say "Ohmigod Obama walked by my leg is shaking I'm tingling inside his wife makes me orgasm OMG OMG OMG I think he looked at me through the camera Obama can never do anything wrong."

Those people.

And as I've made it clear, I don't consider you, or SB, or Ari, or CL, etc posters like that. I do find there are posters on here like that, and I make fun of them accordingly.

But you can't deny that there are many Obama supporters, who spent 8 years *****ing about the federal deficit but who's collective heart flutters every time Obama signs another bill. Who lay awake counting the great achievements of Obama. It's sickening.

And while every president has had kool-aid drinkers, Obama's cult is... different.

The more Obama is able to blame Bush, and "talk down" the economy....the better he looks when it recovers.

Do I like this type of whining? No. He asked for this job. It's not like he was thrown into it. But, from his standpoint...it makes perfect sense to do so.

As I said, from an old school political standpoint, it's a great strategy. But not the (ready for this, DB?) "change we can believe in" strategy we were promised. Just more of the same, actually.

DenButsu
03-15-2009, 11:45 AM
Obama's cult is... different.

As you set out to refute my point with the majority of your post, in the end your final punctuation mark is (once again) just another confirmation of what I'm talking about.

Don't get me wrong. I understand the point you're trying to make.

The correlation from my side would be the Palin rally attendants who were shouting, "Kill him!"

From my side of things, those fools would be equally as brainwashed as the fools you're talking about - except in a more harmful manner.

But here's the difference, blender boy: I'm always posting in here blog posts from the right, conservative bloggers like Andrew Sullivan and Ross Douthat and David Brooks... people from the right who are challenging the right's thinking. I'm never saying it's fundamentally wrong to support the right. I'm saying there are right and wrong ways of doing it.

But you, on the other hand (and you say you're not talking about us, but ****, man, come on, you perpetually are making little petty sniping disses of Obama supporters - you're too smart not to know that doesn't hit home, god damn it), you're constantly putting down the people who believe in liberal ideas without actually addressing what you think is wrong with those liberal ideas.

That's the difference.

ari1013
03-15-2009, 12:00 PM
Who was the conservative writer who wrote about the "starbursts" he feels when Sarah Palin winks?

That was... different as well.

Face it, you're going to have clowns on both ends. Mocking them probably isn't the best way to delegitimize their stance.

dbroncos78087
03-15-2009, 12:53 PM
I think he should change the typical blame game and pick an older president (from the 1800s). It would be a nice change of place. I would blame James Garfield, how dare he be assassinated one month before his 50th birthday!

SmthBluCitrus
03-15-2009, 01:00 PM
Obama's been President for all of, what, seven weeks? I don't see anything wrong with referencing (albeit in a camouflaged manner) the previous administration.

Bush blamed Clinton for lax security and 9/11.
Clinton blamed Bush 41 for the economy (ITES).
FDR blamed Hoover.

It only seems to reason that Obama would tie the struggles to Bush.

blenderboy5
03-15-2009, 01:04 PM
The correlation from my side would be the Palin rally attendants who were shouting, "Kill him!"

From my side of things, those fools would be equally as brainwashed as the fools you're talking about - except in a more harmful manner.

Agreed. Of course, the nutjobs I'm talking about are the same ones who masturbated to the documentary about Bush getting assassinated. And no, I'm still not talking about you.



But here's the difference, blender boy: I'm always posting in here blog posts from the right, conservative bloggers like Andrew Sullivan and Ross Douthat and David Brooks... people from the right who are challenging the right's thinking. I'm never saying it's fundamentally wrong to support the right. I'm saying there are right and wrong ways of doing it.


I have a good idea... you could post things from actual conservatives. David Brooks hasn't been a conservative for quite some time and Andrew Sullivan left his conservatism in the closet and is at best a Ron Paul Republican.

That being said, I do respect the fact that you post conservative (or at least conservative leaning) sources and such. And there's nothing wrong with posting conservative or even RINO ideas refuting ideas some conservatives or extreme conservatives endorse, because it gets people thinking.

And in all honesty, it's really the best way to win an argument. "You think this and call yourself (insert ideology)? Well leaders of your beliefe A, B, and C disagree."



But you, on the other hand (and you say you're not talking about us, but ****, man, come on, you perpetually are making little petty sniping disses of Obama supporters - you're too smart not to know that doesn't hit home, god damn it), you're constantly putting down the people who believe in liberal ideas without actually addressing what you think is wrong with those liberal ideas.

That's the difference.

I'm not being purposely obtuse here, DB. When I talk about the cult of Obama, I mean the little school girls from Chris Matthews to the NY Times to your average voter, who worship the ground he walks on. Who gush over every minute thing he does. Who spent the 2008 election season saying "OMG Obama's sooooo sexy I can't wait for January I love him."

Are all libs like that? Obviously not. There's some people who were just happy a black man was elected to the presidency. And there's some people who are happy it's anyone but Bush. Others say "Hey, there's a D next to his name... here's my vote."

But the best libs are the ones who sit there and say "Sure, Obama's no messiah, but I like him for A, B, and C, and while I think he's wrong (as he occaisonally is) on D and E, I feel he's doing the best he can."

And yes, DB, that last one was talking about you and my favorite libs on this board.

blenderboy5
03-15-2009, 01:07 PM
Obama's been President for all of, what, seven weeks? I don't see anything wrong with referencing (albeit in a camouflaged manner) the previous administration.

Bush blamed Clinton for lax security and 9/11.

Bush did. Despite Clinton's best attempts of tying pseudo-conservative Chris Wallace to the vast right wing conspiracy. And having cronies on the 9/11 commission.


It only seems to reason that Obama would tie the struggles to Bush.

Few presidents don't put some of the blame on their predecessors. And if Obama didn't blame Bush for some things, even the things that aren't his fault, he'd be ********.

dbroncos78087
03-15-2009, 01:10 PM
I'm not being purposely obtuse here, DB. When I talk about the cult of Obama, I mean the little school girls from Chris Matthews to the NY Times to your average voter, who worship the ground he walks on. Who gush over every minute thing he does. Who spent the 2008 election season saying "OMG Obama's sooooo sexy I can't wait for January I love him."

Are all libs like that? Obviously not. There's some people who were just happy a black man was elected to the presidency. And there's some people who are happy it's anyone but Bush. Others say "Hey, there's a D next to his name... here's my vote."

But the best libs are the ones who sit there and say "Sure, Obama's no messiah, but I like him for A, B, and C, and while I think he's wrong (as he occaisonally is) on D and E, I feel he's doing the best he can."

And yes, DB, that last one was talking about you and my favorite libs on this board.

Oh i wasnt even pointing at you. I was actually pointing to the strategy of blame the past. I dont like it during the presidency. During the campaign it is perfectly acceptable i think to point out how you will be different but now that the presidency has started it is time to move on. I want to hear what he plans to do. Normally i dont quote Fox News in a good context but they said yesterday (as i am sure they have said numerous times) "Bush is in Texas now".

blenderboy5
03-15-2009, 01:11 PM
Oh i wasnt even pointing at you. I was actually pointing to the strategy of blame the past. I dont like it during the presidency. During the campaign it is perfectly acceptable i think to point out how you will be different but now that the presidency has started it is time to move on. I want to hear what he plans to do. Normally i dont quote Fox News in a good context but they said yesterday (as i am sure they have said numerous times) "Bush is in Texas now".

hahaha... I was talking to the other DB.

dbroncos78087
03-15-2009, 01:18 PM
hahaha... I was talking to the other DB.

Oh, i am so use to being DB. I forget that in this domain i am not DB.

egoc
03-15-2009, 10:27 PM
if and when Obama 'blames' bush he's pointing at economic strategies that failed so obviously that he left a stinkin' pile of **** for Obama to clean up. It's a reminder to all the cretins who think cutting the taxes on the rich will do anything but make the rich richer.

and before anyone begins chanting the republican catchphrase '52 months of growth' let me point out that the base of that growth was trillions of dollars loaned to subprime borrowers and 10 years of bad lending policies set in motion by deregulation vis-a-vis the repeal of the Glass-Steagle act (not the Fair Housing Act or the Community Reinvestment Act) has coming crashing down all at once.

gcoll
03-16-2009, 12:30 AM
A quick point about the difference between the far right and the far left. The far right isn't teaching kids. Bill Ayers was a college professor.

egoc
03-16-2009, 06:25 AM
A quick point about the difference between the far right and the far left. The far right isn't teaching kids. Bill Ayers was a college professor.


Henry Kissenger, who can't travel to certain areas of the world for fear of being arrested as a war criminal, taught at Georgetown.
would you care to match teachers of the far left ilk and teachers of the far right ilk man for man? Let's start at Liberty University.

ari1013
03-16-2009, 09:14 AM
A quick point about the difference between the far right and the far left. The far right isn't teaching kids. Bill Ayers was a college professor.
English and history departments are going to have their wacky liberals. Business schools are going to have their wacky conservatives. That's how it works.

blenderboy5
03-16-2009, 10:29 AM
Henry Kissenger, who can't travel to certain areas of the world for fear of being arrested as a war criminal, taught at Georgetown.
would you care to match teachers of the far left ilk and teachers of the far right ilk man for man? Let's start at Liberty University.

Except here's the difference.

People who go to Liberty University know what they're getting. A great education with an evangelical backing.

People who go to, say, the University of Colorado don't go for an ideological education. They don't go there wanting nutjob pseudo Indian Ward Churchill teaching them.

cabernetluver
03-16-2009, 11:00 AM
Except here's the difference.

People who go to Liberty University know what they're getting. A great education with an evangelical backing.

People who go to, say, the University of Colorado don't go for an ideological education. They don't go there wanting nutjob pseudo Indian Ward Churchill teaching them.

No no no no. Now come on. While I agree with your assessment of Ward Churchill, do you really think that anyone signing up for his class does not know what they are going to get?

Now back on point, donít you find it odd that the Bushies are now taking the tact that they had nothing to do with the economic problems that we are now working our way out of.

The essential problem that really makes our current set of problems truly tied to the Republican and therefore Bush agenda comes down to the basic philosophy of the right that the least amount of government is the best (which I guess means that anarchy is the goal). If one does not believe in the value of government, then one is going to make it as ineffective as possible.

Point in case is the SEC during the Bush years. Its lack of oversight is directly responsible for a great many of the problems that we are currently facing. Madoff is the example, not the sum and total of the problems. The SEC became neutered from lack of leadership and lack of desire to have the government get into the affairs of private business. Lack of leadership leads to lack of staff investigations. Etc.

The SEC let AIG get involved in a business based in Great Britain whose liabilities were over 2 trillion dollars. No oversight by a neutered agency is in fact directly tied to the Bush administration. Now donít get me wrong, this attitude goes back to 1965 at its genesis, and was enunciated by Ronald Reagan, that government is the problem, and I will be first in line to agree that too much government is a problem, the key is defining what is too much.

No administration is going to do everything right, and the important question arising from this would be how well they accept responsibility for what they did wrong. I go back to the press conference where President Bush was asked what he felt he had done wrong and could not come up with a single thing. When asked in another he had failed at, his answer was the information that he was given. Not what he had ordered, decided, chosen, or anything. Damn, I wish I was so perfect.

Having a confluence of lack of ability of self examination with a philosophy of government is inherently bad, we have a huge mess.

egoc
03-16-2009, 11:23 AM
Except here's the difference.

People who go to Liberty University know what they're getting. A great education with an evangelical backing.

People who go to, say, the University of Colorado don't go for an ideological education. They don't go there wanting nutjob pseudo Indian Ward Churchill teaching them.

Ward Churchill taught ethnic studies at Boulder. I'm sure students signing up for his elective classes knew what they're getting into.

Kissenger taught International Law at Georgetown. He's STILL spewing his bigotry in the name of that institution. Students hoping to get a Masters in International Law from GU have no choice but to take the class he teaches. Whether they know he's wanted for war crimes in many countries or not, they have to wade through his slanted opinions.

DodgersFan28
03-17-2009, 02:11 AM
Republican 2010-2012 Strategy: Blame Obama & the Democrats

This is simply politics at work. The real goal should be not to buy everything either side says, but to maintain an objective perspective on current events.

CubsGirl
03-17-2009, 02:21 AM
Republican 2010-2012 Strategy: Blame Obama & the Democrats

This is simply politics at work. The real goal should be not to buy everything either side says, but to maintain an objective perspective on current events.
Agreed. Mr. CG was looking for a summary on Obama's first howevermany (53 now?) days in office, and he said reading the BBC's site was a breath of fresh air because they just stated what Obama did on which day without any sort of opinion or liberal/conservative spin so he could judge for himself if he liked it or not.

I wish we had an American outlet that did that so well :sigh:

SmthBluCitrus
03-17-2009, 09:03 AM
Agreed. Mr. CG was looking for a summary on Obama's first howevermany (53 now?) days in office, and he said reading the BBC's site was a breath of fresh air because they just stated what Obama did on which day without any sort of opinion or liberal/conservative spin so he could judge for himself if he liked it or not.

I wish we had an American outlet that did that so well :sigh:

It would be nice. Everything is backed up by a corporation with a specific interest. You still get the news, but you have to sift through an opinion.

gcoll
03-17-2009, 11:31 AM
Ward Churchill taught ethnic studies at Boulder. I'm sure students signing up for his elective classes knew what they're getting into.
The fact that there is even an "ethnic studies" proves the point I'm making.

ari1013
03-17-2009, 11:34 AM
The fact that anyone would major in ethnic studies and then expect to find a job bewilders me.

ink
03-17-2009, 11:39 AM
Agreed. Mr. CG was looking for a summary on Obama's first howevermany (53 now?) days in office, and he said reading the BBC's site was a breath of fresh air because they just stated what Obama did on which day without any sort of opinion or liberal/conservative spin so he could judge for himself if he liked it or not.

I wish we had an American outlet that did that so well :sigh:

Do you have a link CG?

ari1013
03-17-2009, 11:47 AM
Do you have a link CG?
I imagine it's this --- http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7938625.stm

They've been updating it daily.

blenderboy5
03-17-2009, 12:08 PM
The fact that anyone would major in ethnic studies and then expect to find a job bewilders me.

It's like all those other ******** PC majors.

With all due respect, what's a degree in Women's Studies, Jewish Students, Black Studies, etc, gonna get you?

Or what the **** is a degree in LGBT studies gonna get you? Honestly.

cabernetluver
03-17-2009, 12:35 PM
I don't want to put myself in the position of defending different majors, PC, or otherwise, but, honestly, for most majors, no direct line exists between what you studied and a job.

It is easy to pick on some of them, but back before some of the more current majors were created, we had philosophy majors, political science majors, and history majors, and my favorite would be sociology majors. There are not many jobs for philosophers, political scientists, historians with 4 year degrees and sociologists.

I certainly understand that you are looking at college as a trade school and for some it is. Accounting certainly leads to a career, as does engineering and I guess to some degree finance. I am sure you can come up with a few more, but for most of us, college was a place that most of us go to as our ticket to the next place.

Trust me when I write that what I have done for a living had nothing to do with college or post grad. In fact it has been my experience that most employers who are hiring, donít really care what the degree is in unless the specific job requires a specific training.

As I now approach creating my next project, I promise you that I am so far removed from college that the specifics are unimportant, but, what was important was I learned how to learn. I think that is what I always looked for in employees when I was in management.

I know this is rambling, but I just wanted to add my two cents.

CubsGirl
03-17-2009, 12:56 PM
I imagine it's this --- http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7938625.stm

They've been updating it daily.
Yep, that's exactly it. I haven't looked through it, but Mr. CG said that, to him, it seemed very unbiased in either direction.

blenderboy5
03-17-2009, 01:15 PM
I don't want to put myself in the position of defending different majors, PC, or otherwise, but, honestly, for most majors, no direct line exists between what you studied and a job.

It is easy to pick on some of them, but back before some of the more current majors were created, we had philosophy majors, political science majors, and history majors, and my favorite would be sociology majors. There are not many jobs for philosophers, political scientists, historians with 4 year degrees and sociologists.

I certainly understand that you are looking at college as a trade school and for some it is. Accounting certainly leads to a career, as does engineering and I guess to some degree finance. I am sure you can come up with a few more, but for most of us, college was a place that most of us go to as our ticket to the next place.

Trust me when I write that what I have done for a living had nothing to do with college or post grad. In fact it has been my experience that most employers who are hiring, donít really care what the degree is in unless the specific job requires a specific training.

As I now approach creating my next project, I promise you that I am so far removed from college that the specifics are unimportant, but, what was important was I learned how to learn. I think that is what I always looked for in employees when I was in management.

I know this is rambling, but I just wanted to add my two cents.

Oh, it's not rambling... I completely understand what you're saying. And my degree will be in government and politics, and that's a BS major if there ever was one lol.

CubsGirl
03-17-2009, 01:16 PM
Oh, it's not rambling... I completely understand what you're saying. And my degree will be in government and politics, and that's a BS major if there ever was one lol.
It's too bad there's no blanket Social Sciences major. All the social sciences interest me, but none of them stick out enough for me to pick that one exclusively. I'm ALWAYS flip-flopping on what I want my major to be.

ari1013
03-17-2009, 01:26 PM
It's like all those other ******** PC majors.

With all due respect, what's a degree in Women's Studies, Jewish Students, Black Studies, etc, gonna get you?

Or what the **** is a degree in LGBT studies gonna get you? Honestly.
Well... Jewish studies; Catholic studies; ___ Theological studies = jobs in the clergy if that's what you're looking for.

But yes, a lot of those people are aimless.

ari1013
03-17-2009, 01:29 PM
I don't want to put myself in the position of defending different majors, PC, or otherwise, but, honestly, for most majors, no direct line exists between what you studied and a job.

It is easy to pick on some of them, but back before some of the more current majors were created, we had philosophy majors, political science majors, and history majors, and my favorite would be sociology majors. There are not many jobs for philosophers, political scientists, historians with 4 year degrees and sociologists.

I certainly understand that you are looking at college as a trade school and for some it is. Accounting certainly leads to a career, as does engineering and I guess to some degree finance. I am sure you can come up with a few more, but for most of us, college was a place that most of us go to as our ticket to the next place.

Trust me when I write that what I have done for a living had nothing to do with college or post grad. In fact it has been my experience that most employers who are hiring, donít really care what the degree is in unless the specific job requires a specific training.

As I now approach creating my next project, I promise you that I am so far removed from college that the specifics are unimportant, but, what was important was I learned how to learn. I think that is what I always looked for in employees when I was in management.

I know this is rambling, but I just wanted to add my two cents.
Now that's true, but (sorry to carbon date you here) you're from a different generation. Back in your day, the number of college graduates relative to the overall labor force was rather small. Back then any college degree would give you a head-up on the competition. Today you actually need to either have a focused degree or go 18th century and find yourself an apprenticeship (or internship as we call it now).

ari1013
03-17-2009, 01:31 PM
It's too bad there's no blanket Social Sciences major. All the social sciences interest me, but none of them stick out enough for me to pick that one exclusively. I'm ALWAYS flip-flopping on what I want my major to be.
At the half dozen or so schools I've been involved with, most of the social sciences have overlapping requirements. So if you take 3 courses here, 3 courses there, and so on, you're basically on your way to a degree in one of the fields with maybe 2 more specific classes to take.

cabernetluver
03-17-2009, 01:36 PM
Now that's true, but (sorry to carbon date you here) you're from a different generation. Back in your day, the number of college graduates relative to the overall labor force was rather small. Back then any college degree would give you a head-up on the competition. Today you actually need to either have a focused degree or go 18th century and find yourself an apprenticeship (or internship as we call it now).

As an established person I really don't look at my formal education as being relevant to anything I might do. My experience is way more important.

That said, if I were starting out, I think you might be right, but I still tend to think as an employer, and as such, for most positions, I want someone who can think, write a coherent declarative sentence, and is ready to learn about the real world.

That said, CARBON DATING? How dare you :mad:

QuietWyatt
03-17-2009, 01:36 PM
It's like all those other ******** PC majors.

With all due respect, what's a degree in Women's Studies, Jewish Students, Black Studies, etc, gonna get you?

Or what the **** is a degree in LGBT studies gonna get you? Honestly.

I'm currently majoring in Indian Studies at UND and look forward to attending Law School here studying Indian Law. I feel that's very important, considering the unique legal relationship our government has with Indian Reservations and Tribal government.

blenderboy5
03-17-2009, 01:56 PM
I'm currently majoring in Indian Studies at UND and look forward to attending Law School here studying Indian Law. I feel that's very important, considering the unique legal relationship our government has with Indian Reservations and Tribal government.

Thanks for the inisght (no sarcasm intended), that's actually a really neat career choice.

SmthBluCitrus
03-17-2009, 01:58 PM
I'm currently majoring in Indian Studies at UND and look forward to attending Law School here studying Indian Law. I feel that's very important, considering the unique legal relationship our government has with Indian Reservations and Tribal government.

That would be something of prime importance in North Dakota (among other Western states) as well. Good luck with that!

ari1013
03-17-2009, 02:46 PM
As an established person I really don't look at my formal education as being relevant to anything I might do. My experience is way more important.

That said, if I were starting out, I think you might be right, but I still tend to think as an employer, and as such, for most positions, I want someone who can think, write a coherent declarative sentence, and is ready to learn about the real world.

That said, CARBON DATING? How dare you :mad:
I felt snarky :)