‘Meathead’ Majors

George Rebane

Apropos to the lively discussion at ‘True Value of Work and Caring Economics’, Harvard professor of government Harvey Mansfield contributed a telling piece about the “poor choices … students made in selecting their courses and majors.”  In ‘Sociology and Other Meathead Majors’ Dr Mansfield points out the distinction between education based on facts and that based on values.  And, of course, therein lays a root cause of rot in our workforce.  Majors in ‘values based’ subject areas are hard to sell on the labor markets.  And moreover, such majors are victims of the commercially useless leftwing ideologies that are rampant in the country’s schools.  That is a double burden that no employer, save the government, wants to bear.

Mansfield opines that “Archie Bunker was right to be skeptical of his son-in-law’s opinions.”, and goes on to say –

More fundamental, however, is the division within the university today, in America and everywhere, between science and the humanities. Science deals with facts but the humanities also have to deal with values. This is where the problem of bad choices arises. We think that one can have knowledge of fact but not of values—the famous "fact/value" distinction.

Science has knowledge of fact, and this makes it rigorous and hard. The humanities have their facts bent or biased by values, and this makes them lax and soft. This fact—or is it a value?—gives confidence and reputation to scientists within the university. Everyone respects them, and though science is modest because there is always more to learn, scientists sometimes strut and often make claims for extra resources. Some of the rest of us glumly concede their superiority and try to sell our dubious wares in the street, like gypsies. We are the humanists. 

Comments

[Todd Juvinall]

The world doesn't need more psychologists, they need mechanics.

[Mike Thornton]

Well, we've finally gotten to the core of modern regressive thought.
"We need to create a society and economy based upon the sage wisdom and insight of Archie Bunker!"

[Todd Juvinall]

You are always quoting Mao and Joseph so what is your point? LOL

[wmartin]

"The world doesn't need more psychologists, they need mechanics."...

It seems to me that you could argue that Meathead Nation needs more psychologists...or at least more massage therapists.

Personally, I don't care how many degrees in Chicano Studies or Comparative Religions get issued, I'm just not real fond of paying for 3/4 of it.

Aside from the nearly infinitely sized iron rice bowl that a modern university represents in terms of government largesse, there's also the problem of student loans. Those things are like handing out mortgages to anyone that could fog a mirror, the main net effect was to drive up the cost of the goods purchased. You just know that I'll get to bail that out too.

Anyhow, things'll keep on keepin' on in Meathead Nation. Lots of malinvestment in things that have bad ROI, scads of handwaving about the good things that can be done with other peoples' money. Whether it's the hydrogen economy, modern WPA programs that simply disappear into the maw of state and local government, insanely complex health programs that do something I'm not really clear on, you can count on more good works.

At least Obama closed down Gitmo, got the troops out of Afghanistan, didn't start any new wars, and got the Patriot Act turned off.

[Mike Thornton]

Even if it were true, that I'm "always quoting Mao and Joseph", which it isn't, at least they were real people, Todd.
However this thread has already illuminated another aspect of the "Great Divide".
Regressives value money and commerce above all else. Progressives believe that money and commerce are subservient to the needs of society. In short, money and commerce should be tools and used in the service of the betterment of humanity.
Humanity should not be enslaved in service of commerce and capital.

[George Rebane]

"Humanity should not be enslaved in service of commerce and capital." It sounds like some of us already know who will define the "needs of society", and whose money will be "subservient" to such needs.

MikeT, it sure would be good to get a few exemplars of such sustainable progressive societies so that we can set a proper course for our future, or know when to bid the pilgrims a bon voyage.

BTW, in literary communications semi-quotes indicate a special emphases or unattributable quotes that someone may have said; direct quotes are used to repeat what someone actually said or wrote. Then who is attributed with saying, "We need to create a society and economy based upon the sage wisdom and insight of Archie Bunker!"

[Todd Juvinall]

As long as MikeT gets to decide the rules in his "workers paradise", I bet we all know where he will be in that paradise. wink wink.

[Greg Goodknight]

"At least Obama closed down Gitmo, got the troops out of Afghanistan, didn't start any new wars, and got the Patriot Act turned off."

Don't forget holding unemployment below 8% with passing of the Pelosi/Reid trillion$ Porkulus Bill.

[wmartin]

For all I know, the man isn't real, he's just a character on an XBox title. Maybe the man behind the throne is whoever programmed the Obama character in 'Grand Theft America: Washington DC'.

[Greg Goodknight]

Reading about meathead majors reminded me of a talk I couldn't wait to be over at UC Berkeley's 2011 cattle call commencement

http://newscenter.berkeley.edu/2011/05/16/benavidezcommencementspeech/

Young (well, at 31, not that young; he picked up 10 AA degrees in California community colleges before transferring into Berkeley) Mr. Benevidez gave a proper lopsided left of center sermon to the captives at Cal's old stadium. He'll for sure be off to get his BA in Sociology Piled high and Deeper and have a good shot at actually being employed on a tenure track somewhere. Unlike most of his classmates.

An interesting aside... when the College President (iirc) was detailing some of the wonderful work on campus, including mitigation of CO2 induced climate change, he had to stop and encourage some applause... I took it to mean there isn't much enthusiasm among the 2011 Berkeley grads for shivering in the cold over iffy science.

[Mike Thornton]

Well, George maybe we have a few more examples if you and your friends weren't constantly subverting even the slightest attempt.
Can you give me any actual examples of where your perfect free market economy has ever worked?
And by the way, unlike some of you, my ego isn't so huge, that I think I should be "making the decisions".
I am however pretty clear that when you start looking to Archie Bunker as your spiritual master, it shouldn't be any of you!

[Paul Emery]

Mike

Examples don't seem to exist in modern times.
George can confirm that. (perfect free market economies)

[George Rebane]

MikeT (and PaulE) - I wasn't asking for perfect examples of economies that could serve as goals. Any of the imperfect ones that you consider adequate will do. I'm looking for any working examples of sustainable collectivism that could work in America.

I have never claimed that a perfect free market exists now, but I can point to several imperfect free markets now and historically in the US that are better than what we have in America today. The economic ranking published annually by The Economist and others show the US down the list a way. We used to be well in the top five. We could go back to closer to such less regulated and less subsidized market places.

[Greg Goodknight]

No one has ever claimed there was such a thing as a "perfect free market economy". Utopias are not an option.

A market economy needs profit and loss. It's the 'loss' side that tends to starve enterprises that need to be put out of their misery, and it's the 'loss' signal that is generally missing in all of the government sponsored or controlled entities that our coersive leftist utopians are so fond of. Failed political initiatives don't get starved, they get budget increases, sending ever more good money after bad.

Here's a blast from the past... Milton Friedman being interviewed by Phil Donahue in '79, speaking to many of the points touched on by this thread...
http://www.gold-speculator.com/youtube-videos/11809-milton-friedman-donahue-1979-a.html

[Dixon Cruickshank]

Nice try Thornton to try and spin away from your concept - nice going George - he only asked for 1, not 2 or 3, just 1 = epic fail as usual

I haven't commented here much because of your worthless neverending crap - at least this time you kept it under 5000 words I don't want to read

[Paul Emery]

George

Can you provide us with a few contemporary, though less than perfect, free market examples that we should be emulating.

[wmartin]

"Can you provide us with a few contemporary, though less than perfect, free market examples that we should be emulating."...

Do you mean existing free markets that aren't used in the US? Something else?

Honestly, I think this is a lot bigger question than commerce. What it really boils down to is whether you believe that the overall results are better from a mass of people all making individual decisions vs. codified regulations coming down from on high. The real world will provide a mixture of the two, but I think that people have a natural preference for one or the other.

So, should the government choose your wages? how energy is produced? should it provide make-work to a huge group of people?

The usual examples of free market failure are pretty boring. Of course you can't allow companies to dump spent radioactive fuel rods in the creek, but I can't say that there's 40+% of GDP worth of regulatin' and services to be done.

The interesting corner case to me is lack of competition. At least there's some push back on labor monopolies like public unions, but there are very strong natural tendencies towards centralization in some industries.

The Friedmans of the world (who is painful to watch in his later years, too much in the way of crochety sloganizing) may be for the death of Chrysler, but the net effect is the same as abolishing antitrust law. You may not allow companies to combine to form oligopolies/monopolies, but die-off accomplishes the same end.

[Paul Emery]

I was referring to countries that have adopted
free market policies that you respect. Less than perfect of course.

[wmartin]

Sorry to indulge in my Typing Tourette's, but there you go.

Mr Emery, if you want to engage in an argument with a free market afficionado, what I'd suggest is going after the areas that really are problems.

The strawman arguments against pollution are pretty played out, but I'll suggest others.

. As mentioned before, the problem of monopoly. Government of course is the largest form of this, but it's worth examining. Natural production monopolies (cars, raw materials, computer components) exist in quite a few places.

. Asymmetric risk. By this I mean the ability of people to make decisions with huge downside risk, but very little personal risk. CEO's and financial traders, for instance, can make huge bets. If they win, they and their firm become rich, if they lose, they get fired. Lacking balance, the tendency is to put a billion dollars on black and spin.

. National interest. Does it really make sense to live in a country that can't make shoes? You'd better be really nice to the Chinese in a whole host of areas, or you'll be cutting your own huaraches.

[Mike Thornton]

The answer of course, Paul, is that they don't have any examples where there policies have worked to enrich anyone but the oligarchs.
In fact when it comes to the greatest example of capitalism's success (being as a result of the New Deal policies of FDR) the freemarketeers want to roll all that back and pretend it never existed.
And for Dixon, I told you before to relax and think some happy thoughts.
Kicking poor Black women off welfare so their kids can be homeless, hungry and start working their way towards being the next prison generation will likely do it for you, I'm sure.
The real story with all of this is that, as a result of regressive extremism and intransigence, the economy is indeed failing. We are likely on the edge of a real "Depression".
The sad part for regressives, is that the American people are tired of the "Manchurian Muslim" BS and are seeing through regressive deceptions. That's why regressives and republicans are getting their lunch handed to them in special elections and recall efforts.
And think of this, despite all of the screaming and hand wringing that FOX and regressive media has put forward over the last three years aimed at turning the public against Obama, the best that the regressives can muster when it comes to presidential candidates are "Mittens", a 1/2 dozen FOX contributors, that are doing nothing but using "Trumped" up runs in order to personally enrich themselves and a hypocritical governor, who flies in a state owned helicopter to his son's baseball game and then rides 100 yards in a limousine to his seat, because he's too lazy to walk it!

[Mikey McD]

Thornton, it may serve you well to travel a bit. The poorest among us has a higher standard of living than billions of people on earth; thank you capitalism (freedom).

"don't have any examples where there policies have worked to enrich anyone but the oligarchs." Are you serious? If so, you now have zero, no make that negative, creditability.

[George Rebane]

Imperfect free market examples. Paul, I would look to what Singapore and Hong Kong SAR are doing today, and, of course, the US prior to, say, 1970.

Since we know what government does now and what it did in these markets, we can use the good parts as models for a target market for the US. The tedious response to such a suggestion has always been 'Well, do you really want to have or go back to ...?' thereby citing some onerous factor that has nothing to do with the establishment of a freer market than we have now. And please don't again misunderstand, GOVERNMENT DOES HAVE A ROLE IN SETTING UP AND MAINTAINING A (LESS THAN PERFECT) FREE MARKET, primarily by enforcing the rules, and not choking the market with added rules over time as it has done.

[Mike Thornton]

Mikey , you realize that 1% of Americans control 40% of this country's wealth don't you?
And you know that the gap is widening, right?
I've actually been to some pretty poverty stricken places in the world and I can also tell you that there is an increasing number of people, right here in the good old USA, that are living in cars and under bridges, sleeping in doorways and on bus benches.
I actually see them and talk to them on a regular basis. So do me a favor and get off your high horse, since if there is anyone who doesn't know what their talking about at this moment, I'm pretty sure it's you!

[Todd Juvinall]

Mikey, you are so right. The American welfare recipient has two TVs and as much food as they need. The next generation of criminals are going to be he same ones we have always had, black, white or blue, they are lawbreakers. The liberal welfare state starting with the Great Society said to women that a husband was to be replaced by the state and they were right. The state takes care of the offspring from birth thru incarceration to death.

[D. King]

The state takes care of the offspring from birth thru incarceration to death.

LOL!

[Mike Thornton]

Another example of shallow regressive thought.
"Welfare recipients have two TVs and as much (high calorie/low nutrition) food as they need."

[Todd Juvinall]

MT, Looks like you can copy paste, wow!

[stevenfrisch]

Mike, Paul I have to ask again--why are we here?

It just seems totally futile.

[Todd Juvinall]

So it appears Frisch is in agreement then with MT's posts. We knew you were pulling our leg when you said you were a fan of capitalism. Liars never prosper.

Paul at least has the intelligence to debate here.

[Greg Goodknight]

"Resistance is futile!" - Locutus of Blog

Really, Steve, how many times have you written such things, yet you stay here. Why?

[Greg Goodknight]

"Welfare recipients have two TVs and as much (high calorie/low nutrition) food as they need."

That actually reminds me of a Soviet propaganda campaign that backfired. Pravda (or some other house organ) had an interview with a supposedly poor US urban black man who spoke much like Thornton. The piece included a photo of the guy out on the street in his bombed-out neighborhood, leaning against his primer-gray wreck of a used car.

Instead of the fellow's downtrodden misery, "middle class" Soviets focused on ... he has a car? Something they couldn't afford.

[Mikey McD]

At least in the USA we still have the choice to live in poverty or to work ourselves out of it. Their are much worse things in the world than an income gap; just ask anyone in North Korea.

[stevenfrisch]

Hey all I am doing is asking them what the heck the value proposition is for them being here. It seems the same things are repeated, no one ver changes their minds, no real learning is going on, and one just has to suffer the slings and arrows of incivility to participate. I mean really guys, what is the real value?

[Mikey McD]

Do the poor in the USA have access to state provided (taxpayer funded) health care? YES.
Facts:
Do the poor in the USA have access to State provided (taxpayer funded) food ?YES
Do the poor in the USA have access to state provided (taxpayer funded) shelter? YES
Do the poor in the USA have access to state provided (taxpayer funded) education? YES
Do the poor in the USA have the freedom to choose their religion? YES

I send the bulk of my annual charity to Africa because the kids would not have food, shelter, education or health care without my funds. My extremely high US taxes cover the bulk of my 'local' philanthropy (see services I pay for via taxes above).

[Greg Goodknight]

I think there are too many who actually think you'll finally learn something, Steve. Personally, I have my doubts.

Hmmm.... political science... that's a meathead major, isn't it? So is rhetoric, Peeline's major. Keachie's was history. I see a pattern here...

[George Rebane]

SteveF, perhaps I am wrong, but I believe you and yours are arguing your case here on RR for the same reason that I and others are arguing our case - it is for those critically thinking, objective, and yet undecided RR readers who peruse these comment streams with their various threads. Neither of us harbor much hope of changing each others' minds.

To your credit, it appears that you all are giving us your best shots here. And, of course, so are we. The 40% undecideds may benefit from such apologetics coming from politically polarized adherents when we stick to discussing ideas - which now in the large we do.

Thoughts?

[Mikey McD]

I learn from Paul and I hope the favor is returned by me or another 'radical' commenter.

[Mike Thornton]

That's a really good question, Steve!
I'm (frankly) getting bored with it.
The level of selfishness and hate from the regressive crowd is not only tiring, but toxic.
It's really sad how they love to attack the poor and disenfranchised as they lick the boots of the rich and powerful.
While I really don't wish it on any of them (maybe with the exception of TJ), I'd love to see any of these people spend a year living the life of someone in poverty in America today.
Perhaps they would then actually find out how things really are as compared to what Limbaugh and Beck tell them they are.

[Greg Goodknight]

Thornton... just to fill in the blanks... are you in the meathead or non-meathead major camp? Sociology, perhaps?

[Mikey McD]

Not one thing said has been an attack on the poor or disenfranchised.
I can't stand Rush or Beck or? You can't pigeon hole all the 'liberty-lovers' into the same camp and that is obviously frustrating you [notice the countless times my opinion has not jived with Greg's, Wmartin, Rebane, Todd, etc]. Your abuse is evidence that your opinion is fallible, emotional and void of fact/reason/logic and most importantly solutions to the problems of our era.

I strongly urge you to continue the debate without malice and with a focus on SOLUTIONS; or leave the debate to the grown-ups.

[Mikey McD]

I CHOOSE not to.

"I'd love to see any of these people spend a year living the life of someone in poverty in America today. Posted by: Mike Thornton | 03 June 2011 at 11:54 AM

[Steve Frisch]

George, I think that is a very good response. That is why I come here. Thank you for your candor.

I only wish the other commentators were as clear and forthright with their answers.

Greg, I mean really, is this the way you choose to communicate with your peers? Demeaning people is a waste of time. I really don't care if you think I am a meathead, I know you are Archie. Just remember Archie was a parody, a cartoon of the worst tendencies of American society. I will proudly wear the meathead label with you to prove that you are Archie to the 40%.

I believe that is illustrated even more clearly everyday.

[Greg Goodknight]

First, I was a meathead fan, Steve, and Archie Bunker always was a left wing caricature of a conservative buffoon. That includes the original British version.

Second, as far as my rhetoric here is concerned, I only occasionally stoop to that level when Thornton (and, all too often, you) deserves some of their own medicine returned, with interest.

[Greg Goodknight]

Besides, Todd J is the Archie. I am the walrus. goo goo g'joob

You see, Steve, I'm not a conservative. Todd knows that, Russ knows that. George has figured it out too, and your (and Peeline's) working "to prove that you are Archie to the 40%" is every bit as ugly as you charge I've ever been.

I do think you are a lying (by omission), pompous, rent-seeking ass, but that's another discussion for another day.

[Mikey McD]

Greg we need a box to put you in NOW!!!!

You see, Steve, I'm not a conservative. Todd knows that, Russ knows that. George has figured it out too" Posted by: Greg Goodknight | 03 June 2011 at 01:24 PM

[Todd Juvinall]

Let me see. Hmmm. In response to Thorton and his challenge to live as apoor person. If I am not mistaken, most of us started out poor (but when a child hardly noticed) then as we worked real hard we decided to get educated, stay out of jail, off the drugs and off the streets. The results are astounding! In this place called America, we poor folks got ahead! Now we do our best to never forget our roots and we are all quite giving of our hard earned money and time to those less fortunate. We just don't wear it on our sleeves like liberals. My guess is people on the left like Thornton have non of those attributes and have lived off the system in one way or another all their lives. For instance, Frisch and Thorton belong to non profits that take tax money and redistribute it. I bet they take their cut and probably have benefits. While their outrage at we on the right gets louder and louder and yet we are working the private sector where there are not "benefits" unless we pay for them. I really don't care that loony lefty's call us names, we are the walrus koo kooka choo.

[Mike Thornton]

Mikey, you simply cannot deny that the overall tone of the regressives is one of demonizing the poor, while lionizing the rich. If you're not part of that camp, then good for you!
But when you start making statements about all the great benefits that the poor in America are getting, you need to get your ass out on the pavements and see what it's really like!
You might as well be parroting Beck and Limbaugh, because that is exactly the type of propaganda they use in order to dehumanize the enemies of their corporate overlords.
The truth of that matter is that, it's the Wall Street banksters and captains of industry who have sold out our country and crashed our economy, not some poor person looking for a place to sleep tonight and maybe getting a few dollars in food stamps!
It pisses me off, to no end, to listen to a bunch of pompous idiots, talk about things that they no nothing about.
If you want to know about my "major", it comes from growing up and living on a lot of those mean streets. I'd didn't learn what I know from a book in a college class at Berkeley. I've been out in the world for a long time and I've learned the vast majority of what I know from living it and/or seeing it first hand, up close and personal!

[Steve Frisch]

Greg, I don't really care if you are a conservative, you are a combative, mean, irrational, and disrespectful voice in almost every exchange you have. That was the primary characteristic of Archie.

[George Rebane]

Gentlemen - are we back in the mudball innings? Hopefully this is just half-time and we're getting a little strident exercise before settling back down to serious, albeit more pacific, business.

In this regard, I haven't seen anyone grapple the fortunes of the country as our technical workforce shrinks, and our non-technical (and overwhelmingly innumerate) workforce grows. Takers?

[Greg Goodknight]

Frisch, you get the respect from me that you have earned. You've made it clear trashing my good name is your goal here, with "prove that you are Archie to the 40%" a clear statement of intent to defame.

Thanks, I needed that. Do you have the same "staff attorney" as "Robert Lou"? Ask them about it.

[Greg Goodknight]

"It pisses me off, to no end, to listen to a bunch of pompous idiots, talk about things that they no nothing about.
If you want to know about my "major", it comes from growing up and living on a lot of those mean streets. I'd didn't learn what I know from a book in a college class at Berkeley. I've been out in the world for a long time and I've learned the vast majority of what I know from living it and/or seeing it first hand, up close and personal!"

We'll make that 'honorary meathead', you've earned it. If it makes you feel better, I didn't learn anything from a book in a college class at Berkeley, either.

[Mikey McD]

Greg, I find you very logical. More importantly I find that you cite facts and offer solutions. Well done, keep up the good work.

First, I am unaware of the working definition of 'regressives' (can anyone say SPIN!), but Rebane, Greg, etc never demean the poor; you are making things up. Ironically, Rebane and I have teamed up to put OUR money where our mouth's are (not for a pat on the back, as a part of a SOLUTION). "you need to get your ass out on the pavements and see what it's really like! "Posted by: Mike Thornton | 03 June 2011 at 02:12 PM

I will start taking suggestions from a heartless, hateful, illogical ranter like you when tuna start riding bicycles- not a second sooner. Ask yourself, when have I ever offered a solution?

[Mike Thornton]

But isn't that was because you were too busy sleeping off the bath house party from the night before, Greg?

[stevenfrisch]

George, I find it amazing that you pull the 'mudslinging' card out only when one of the 'left' calls it like it is. The unrestrained incivility of Mr. Goodknight and your propensity to tolerate it, speaks clearly to your stewardship of this forum. Greg and Todd are both serial insulters. I have said it before but I will say it again, you reap what you sow.

[Cha Cha Cha]

And Enos and Thornton and Frisch are boy scouts (not the LSD kind that Jcutter despises).

"are both serial insulters."

[Todd Juvinall]

George, you are doing just fine here. When the loons on the left complain they are simply doing what they have done since age two. No big deal. I find it interesting Frisch defends the mud slung by Thornton and cries a river when Greg defends himself. What a hot!

[Greg Goodknight]

Frisch, I feel your pain. You can dish it out, but you can't take it when you come out swinging hard and get your nose bloodied anyway.

I believe the 'incivility' Frisch has been experiencing started afresh after he wrote an Op/Ed for The Union extolling the virtues of AB32 and the evil of Prop 23, and in the comments afterwards tried to pass himself of as a disinterested observer of the process of good governance. He just wouldn't fess up to being the CEO of a company that would gain revenue from that good governance. Hence the lying by omission charge.

BTW on the global warming front, here's an interesting recent sea level measurement discussion:
http://www.aviso.oceanobs.com/fileadmin/images/news/indic/msl/MSL_Serie_EN_Global_IB_RWT_NoGIA_Adjust.gif

http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2011/05/27/sea-level-plummeting-lowest-level-since-at-least-2004/

Note the red line is smoothed... the last of the blue raw datapoints are nearly off the bottom of the chart on the lower right corner. Steve, please tell me again how CO2 is the driver of modern climate and sea level in the context of this new info!

[Todd Juvinall]

Greg, Frisch has self interest in global warming and no facts will dissuade him.

[Mike Thornton]

Mikey, I've got a 30 year track record of working to make a positive difference, so I'm pretty comfortable about what I've done and where I stand in these matters.
And while putting up some "money" is a pretty cool thing to do, it doesn't mean that you actually have any real experience, nor is it the same as being on the front lines.
But hey, if you've done something, than you desreve credit for what you did!
And lets be clear that it is the regressives who are constantly judging and demonizing people and doing it for some of the most crass and selfish reasons imaginable.
Then you have people like Todd, who apparently does it for kicks and/or because it gets him off somehow.
What Steve F. says is completely true. As long as it's the targets of regressive rage that are getting ripped, you guys are always fine with it.
So, I really think the whining (while expected) is really pretty lame and you should give it up...
Speaking of Steve, I can tell you that the guy knows more and is smarter, than any 10 of you combined.

[stevenfrisch]

Greg, incivility is your calling card.

I never tried to pass myself off as anything other than exactly who and what I am, the CEO of a organization taking a position based on years of involvement in public policy, and applying the collective experience of myself and our staff to an issue of importance. That's free speech my friend. Let me tell you I have been 'taking it' for years, and your critique is not going to hurt me, but I am calling you an what you are; a rude, ill mannered bully, who can only make his point by demeaning people, and implying they have ulterior motives for their actions.

I have stated many, many times here that I do what I do because I believe in it, just like you, but you can't accept that.

What a mean spirited little man you are. It must be frustrating to you that you are stuck in Nevada County working on what? Community Access Television and playing a horn? Flying around on your little airplane. Too bad you aren't actually working on something big and important--but then life can be a little disappointing eh? Little man syndrom really hit the mark didn't it?

[Mike Thornton]

You have to remember, Steve, according to the regressives "you're either with them or against them!" No matter what they say or do, they are right and they are moral, so if you disagree with them you have to be wrong and immoral. It's called "projection". They take all their dishonesty and mal-intent and then assign to whomever they see as their enemies.

[Mikey McD]

I still can't find anything constructive in your post. How is the goal of increasing EVERYONE'S INDIVIDUAL LIBERTY 'regressive'? The only people "demonized" here are the elite that FORCE their doctrine of nanny government on us. I side with Ben, Paul, and others that believe our gigantic (technical term) government is the problem and less of it (directed by freedom loving Americans) is the solution.

Problem: central planning continues to fail the lower and middle class (socially via entitlements, economically via a ridiculous [I contend immoral] tax code, pathetic negative yields on personal savings, unwarranted regulation and fiscally via uncontrollable spending/debt).

Solutions: Give choices instead of FORCING dependence on government entitlement programs [SS, farms, education, etc], reform the tax code [flat tax = equitable tax], decrease regulations, shut down the Federal Reserve, stop bailouts/stimulus/QE1.2.3., cut spending and pay down debt.)

[George Rebane]

I'm beginning to think that Russ Steele on NCMW nailed it here.
http://ncwatch.typepad.com/media/2011/06/this-reminds-me-of-some-of-the-discussion-on-this-blog.html

[Michael R. kesti]

"...it is the regressives who are constantly judging and demonizing people..."

It is clear to me, MT, that your intent in the several occasions of using the term "regressives" in this thread is to judge and demonize. You, sir, are a hypocrite.

[Mikey McD]

Kesti, OH SNAP! Well put and right on the money.

"...it is the regressives who are constantly judging and demonizing people..."

It is clear to me, MT, that your intent in the several occasions of using the term "regressives" in this thread is to judge and demonize. You, sir, are a hypocrite.

Posted by: Michael R. kesti | 03 June 2011 at 07:20 PM

[Paul emery]

George, hoot should be banned for redundancy. It just doesn't have the devastating impact it once had..

Todd

For the sake of variety can you use another word other than hoot. Here's some recommendations. What a joke, scam; lie, farce, piece of ...,hypocrite, liar, phony, scammer, idiot, fool, dolt, dum dum, ass, mess, poopster, piece of whatever, hippie, commie, red, wimp, looser, dip stick, rat,dog, mouse, skunk, punk, creep, pervert,

You can even be intellectually challenging and call some one a impetuous cynic, deceiver, or add any of the above such as impetuous dolt. You can use insidious with any of the above such as insidious dog rat or creep . how about insolent fool or looser. Try over educated dolt.

See how creative you can be. Hope this is a help. You're kinda in a rut.

In fact hang out at any grammar school and get some ideas.

[stevenfrisch]

What does it feel like to host Dilbert George?

[John W]

Paul, with the ability to name call like that you should write a comic strip.

[stevenfrisch]

Oh hey Greg, did I mention that all 3 pieces of legislation I was working on passed the legislature this week?

SB 14, SB 15 and SB 201 were the numbers.

The first two were also supported by the San Diego EDC, LA EDC, Fresno Business Council, Valley Vision along with Sierra Business Council.

But then I am just, how did Todd put it, a failed 'cook'.

[enjoy your opm high]

Just send us the bill, don't rub it in our faces...

"legislation I was working on passed the legislature this week? SB 14, SB 15 and SB 201 were the numbers. "
Posted by: stevenfrisch | 03 June 2011 at 08:26 PM

[Paul emery]

Oow

Failed cook

That's pretty good. That can be applied to many occupations such as teacher, mechanic, tree trimmer, plumber, developer, builder, lawyer, musician. Just about any occupation. This is getting good.

[Paul emery]

John W.

I don't call anybody names. I'm just concerned about the state of the art of trash talk.

[Greg Goodknight]

Wow, three pieces of legislation without any controversial content whatsoever. Passed the Senate by virtual unanimous consent. Mom and apple pie.

And how many of those words did you write, Steve?

[stevenfrisch]

They passed because a broad group of stakeholders spent 2 years working on them Greg. What did you do this week?

[Greg Goodknight]

Regarding Thornton's blind spot, the best statement of that was by the great Tom Lehrer back in the '60's:

“I know that there are people who do not love their fellow man, and I hate people like that!”

[Greg Goodknight]

Steve, it's unclear just what you actually did for these bills. Show up for meetings, eat a few doughnuts?

Will California avoid financial catastrophe as a result of these getting sent to the Assembly?

Still, cleaning up the budget process is important. Even the deck chairs on the Titanic needed proper placement.

Bravo, Steve!

[Mike Thornton]

"Regressive(s)" is (as I have explained previously) the correct term to describe both the philosophy and the it's supporters. I don't know what else you call it when people are trying to roll back the clock, on social progress, in the way that regressives are trying to do.
I get the fact that you don't like it when people decide not to play by your rule book and use terms that you don't want used, regardless of their accuracy.
Once again, I think it's interesting that as long as you support the regressive agenda, you can say anything you want to anyone (as long as they're not a fellow regressive) in as snotty, hateful and dishonest manner as can be mustered.

[Greg Goodknight]

"I never tried to pass myself off as anything other than exactly who and what I am, the CEO of a organization taking a position based on years of involvement in public policy, and applying the collective experience of myself and our staff to an issue of importance."

What I recall you avoiding at The Union blog was any mention of AB32 or Prop 23 impacting revenues of your company, Sierra Business Council, which, as far as I can tell, is, strangely enough, also not by any stretch of the imagination a council of businesses.

[Michael R. Kesti]

Listen to yourself, Mike. You are being every bit as judgmental, demonizing, snotty, hateful, and dishonest as you have accused others of being. How do you justify this?

[stevenfrisch]

Funny Greg how you can sit on your tush and assume everyone else does nothing.

We supported these reform bills for more than 3 years as part of the California Constitutional Convention proposal, worked with other organizations to get them included in the California Forward reform agenda, met with legislators and staff to perfect the language, and did public education through forums and meetings to ensure people knew what the impact would be.

We worked with B Corporation, the forerunner of the Public Benefit Corporations bill for more than 6 years, before they were even formed, as part of a Stanford University innovations in business program.

Your guys sure complain a lot...I would love it if you would stop acting hatefully toward everyone else and actually do something productive. I have said it a dozen times here; we don't need to agree on everything, but we could work together on the things we do agree on. But that is not possible as long as you act like buffoons.

This is how your ilk hurries the 'great divide' and tears our nation down. This is why you are not patriots.

[stevenfrisch]

Regressive--absolutely valid word. I get them having trouble with it. It is accurate.

[stevenfrisch]

Kesti--here is the definition.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/regressive

[Greg Goodknight]

Thornton...
"...it is the regressives who are constantly judging and demonizing people..."

Really, faced with that, is there no glimmer of self awareness in you?

[stevenfrisch]

Greg, you know nothing about Sierra Business Council. I have 700 member businesses, and work regularly with business councils and organizations all over the state. This has nothing to do with you doubting the number or type of businesses and everything to do with you disagreeing with the policies we promote. Just be honest and admit it.

Plus, I directly answered the question about SBC's work relative to AB 32 related programs. I support AB 32 because I believe in it. I will be proud to implement it.

Under ANY circumstances any revenue derived to a non-profit has to be retained for a recognized charitable purpose.

Of course what you are seeking to do is divert peoples attention by attacking motives rather than discuss the ideas. It is a standard tactic and I am not stupid enough to do that with you.

Get off you butt and do something good. The world is full of way too many lazy, complaining, complacent, self interested armchair critics.

[Michael R. Kesti]

Thanks, Steve, but I already understood the word and, although The Free Dictionary doesn't mention it, I also understand the derision Mike intends when he uses it, too. How do you suppose he justifies his hypocrisy?

[stevenfrisch]

Its ridiculous Michael--regressive is a real word, and it aptly describes how Mike sees their position. If Todd, George and Greg can call people communists, socialists and collectivists when the people they are describing clearly are not advocating for socialism as it is defined, Mike can call them regressive when it fits the definition.

[Michael R. Kesti]

I agree that "regressive" is a real word and Mike certainly can use it as he has, and I said nothing that should indicate otherwise. Do you dispute that his intention in using the word as he has in this thread is to be judgmental and demonizing?

[D. King]

"...Stanford University innovations in business program..."

Just missing one thing...now what was that..I wrote it down somewhere...Oh yeah.

Note to self:
Must stop driving business of California before innovating.

[D. King]

Must stop driving business "out" of California before innovating.

Sorry.

[stevenfrisch]

Mr. D. KIng SB 201 was is all about keeping business in California. Right now if you want to do business as a public benefit corporation you have to be chartered in Maryland or Vermont.

[stevenfrisch]

Jeez Michael I am thinking about that overused line in The Untouchable, "Never bring a knife to a gunfight..."

[D. King]

Does SB14 make it easier to do business?

[Michael R. Kesti]

I'll take that to mean that you don't dispute that Mike's intention is to be judgmental and demonizing. Given that he accused those he chooses to call regressives of judging and demonizing others, he has made a hypocritical statement. I ask you, again, how you feel he justifies his hypocrisy?

[Michael R. Kesti]

I intended but forgot to thank you for showing me just am infintesimal bit of respect by calling me "Michael" rather than "Kesti". Thank you very much.

[Greg Goodknight]

Must stop driving California citizens and businesses off the cliff, which AB32 is already doing, while the catastrophic 'science' behind it continues to collapse.

Steve, I've never hidden my disdain for your rent seeking policy initiatives and your working to ensure a reworking of California energy generation that is destined to ruin the state, so I don't know why you think that requires some sort of cathartic testimonial.

It is about policy, it is about the science, it isn't about partisan politics.

Your Op-Eds in The Union, and your comments in their blog, even when challenged, danced around the fact you were the CEO of a company that would derive revenue from AB32 which was threatened by Prop 23. That is a lie by omission. You weren't 'just a guy like the other commenters who watched what was happening in Sacramento and shared his opinions' which, at best, was a misrepresentation.

[Greg Goodknight]

This is for 'middle of the road' Steve Frisch, a repeat of an unanswered question: please, name some Republicans you've supported in the past three elections. Why did you choose them over their Democratic, Green, P&F or Lib opponents?

[stevenfrisch]

Michael, I think Mike is saying what he believes, that the position that many are taking here is regressive. That is not inherently demeaning.

[stevenfrisch]

D. KIng--I do think that creating performance metrics for government agencies, boards, commissions and programs will help business in the long run by helping to force government activities to prove their worth. I also support sunset clauses for agencies, boards and commissions, which did not happen this year. I believe that if a government program does not meet its objectives it should go away.

[stevenfrisch]

Yeah I am just sick of you calling me a liar--its bullshyte. You want to argue the policy fine, you want to question my motives, take a flying leap. I want to implement AB 32 because it is good public policy. If my organization can speed that..more power to us. My original post stands, you don't know a thing abut my organization. Do you think all businesses are represented by the US Chamber? I simply attract a different type of business owner, thats my niche.

I have not voted for a Republican in a while, because they have turned into wild eyed reactionaries. I think my last Republican votes were Ted Owens twice, Mike Holmes, and Bruce McPherson in a state office. I voted for Conlon for Treasurer. I'm sure I have voted for a number of Republicans for local boards since I don't make a practice of looking up party registration for non-partisan offices. (Of course Republicans now tout their party affiliation for non-partisan offices)

But the idea that you judge a degree of moderateness by partisan voting record is kind of skewed, Republicans have been increasingly radical in their positions. My moderate positions trump party, so if the Republican has tilted so far right that they are extreme I may never vote for a Republican and still be moderate. That's why the Republicans have become a permanent minority in this state.