Higher Education Bill in Congress - PASSED

[Si modo]

There is a normal distribution of intelligence. Not everyone is capable of getting a college education. This is (rather was) a fact. Because of this entitlement mentality, the dumbing down of our students through grade inflation has infiltrated higher education. Congrats to the entitlement crowd on once again promoting mediocrity.

I support loans based on MERIT alone (considering public ed quality, even that is hard to measure) - nothing else.

 

[The T]

An educated public makes a better informed electorate..

I agree with you 1000% that an educated public makes a better informed electorate.

Unfortunately, that will not occur in a government financed and controlled school.

"Every politically controlled educational system will inculcate the doctrine of state supremacy sooner or later. . . . Once that doctrine has been accepted, it becomes an almost superhuman task to break the stranglehold of the political power over the life of the citizen. It has had his body, property and mind in its clutches from infancy. An octopus would sooner release its prey. A tax-supported, compulsory educational system is the complete model of the totalitarian state. "–Isabel Paterson, The God of the Machine (1943)

.

Then pile the Unions on to it that have ONLY their interests at heart.

 

[American Horse]

I agree. I'm sick of education. We want our children uneducated. Who needs it? Can a Republican name a single good thing that ever came from education?

It is indeed strange the tangents some of us launch into; this is tongue in cheek...right?

Not when it comes to republicans. Christian colleges have historically been ranked the lowest in the nation. Christian leaders have complained that to be accredited, they must teach at least a token course in "evolution".

The Bush administration peppered the Justice Department with crappy grads from those schools replacing the actual qualified which resulted in scandal after scandal.

Normally, when a new president comes in, he replaces many members of the Justice Department with people he can trust. THEN HE LEAVES THEM ALONE. Bush, illegally (God, that word seemed to follow him constantly) replaced them because he wanted them to go after Democrats. Not legal. Christians have shown themselves to be far from scrupulous as this last administration demonstrates. And which they still demonstrate with all this talk of murder and secession. That is what we refer to as "traitor".

Scandal puts spotlight on Christian law school - The Boston Globe

The graduate from Regent -- which is ranked a "tier four" school by US News & World Report, the lowest score and essentially a tie for 136th place -- was not the only lawyer with modest credentials to be hired by the Civil Rights Division after the administration imposed greater political control over career hiring.

-----------------
One third-year student, Chamie Riley , said she rejected the idea that any government official who invokes her Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination could be a good representative of Regent.

As Christians, she said, Regent students know "you should be morally upright. You should not be in a situation where you have to plead the Fifth." (and yet they were Chamie, they were)

Rdean, the OP was and is about student loans and the availability of a broad base of access to those loans or a reduction of availability to one source, the government. Since loans have been guaranteed heretofore by the government - a good thing - they have been broadly available to any person serious about their higher education, whether they preferred a Christian school or any other.

Serious students in high school could go to a local bank, and the bank would, by simply drawing up a pro-forma application process their loan, and make certain the applicant repaid it, with the government forced to guarantee the loan only as a last resort. Banks provided the agency of collection. This ensured an interest by the business community in the advancement of education of local people, with the hope that by advancing their education they would be more responsible and prosperous citizens, which would be a better environment economically and civilly all around. The banker would also have references with which to evaluate the character qualities of the applicant.

Up to now applicants could count on timely processing of their loans, and going to the government has been a last resort.

This new scheme will force private lenders out and the only source will be government loans. The lines will be a kind of rationing mechanism for those loans.

This likely will create a major distortion in our system of higher education. How will that be a good thing?

 

[The T]

There is a normal distribution of intelligence. Not everyone is capable of getting a college education. This is (rather was) a fact. Because of this entitlement mentality, the dumbing down of our students through grade inflation has infiltrated higher education. Congrats to the entitlement crowd on once again promoting mediocrity.

Well stated. It's exactly on the mark. Obama tells us that he wants to "introduce more competition". He has yet to prove it.

 

[JakeStarkey]

There is a normal distribution of intelligence. Not everyone is capable of getting a college education. This is (rather was) a fact. Because of this entitlement mentality, the dumbing down of our students through grade inflation has infiltrated higher education. Congrats to the entitlement crowd on once again promoting mediocrity.

I support loans based on MERIT alone (considering public ed quality, even that is hard to measure) - nothing else.

Your cnclusion is unsupported. How about some evidence?

 

[rdean]

There is a normal distribution of intelligence. Not everyone is capable of getting a college education. This is (rather was) a fact. Because of this entitlement mentality, the dumbing down of our students through grade inflation has infiltrated higher education. Congrats to the entitlement crowd on once again promoting mediocrity.

Well stated. It's exactly on the mark. Obama tells us that he wants to "introduce more competition". He has yet to prove it.

Admit it, you guys will never, EVER see anything Obama does as "positive", NEVER. Be honest.

The first high school I went to had only a run down multi use room and no labs. Everything was out of books that were old and tattered. In my Junior year, I moved to Ygnacio Valley High in California, a school in the same district as a paper mill, Wrigley Gum plant, Dow Chemical plant.

Ygnacio Valley had fully equipped labs, an enormous theater, a gymnastics department, Olympic sized pools, tennis courts. But the labs, oh the science labs. Some of the best financed in the state.

Oh, and how many black students did Ygnacio have? NONE. They had NONE. Not one.

And you want to base it strictly on "merit"? Looks more like it's based on "luck".

 

[Modbert]

There is a normal distribution of intelligence. Not everyone is capable of getting a college education. This is (rather was) a fact. Because of this entitlement mentality, the dumbing down of our students through grade inflation has infiltrated higher education. Congrats to the entitlement crowd on once again promoting mediocrity.

I support loans based on MERIT alone (considering public ed quality, even that is hard to measure) - nothing else.

If the loans aren't there, plenty of more people will not be able to get a college education. Taking out a loan for college shows responsibility and that you are willing to take the results of your actions.

This is suppose to be the land of the opportunity is it not?

Loans aren't a entitlement mentality, it's a helping hand. Besides, you seem to forget that loans are to be paid back.

 

[Si modo]

There is a normal distribution of intelligence. Not everyone is capable of getting a college education. This is (rather was) a fact. Because of this entitlement mentality, the dumbing down of our students through grade inflation has infiltrated higher education. Congrats to the entitlement crowd on once again promoting mediocrity.

Well stated. It's exactly on the mark. Obama tells us that he wants to "introduce more competition". He has yet to prove it.

Admit it, you guys will never, EVER see anything Obama does as "positive", NEVER. Be honest.

The first high school I went to had only a run down multi use room and no labs. Everything was out of books that were old and tattered. In my Junior year, I moved to Ygnacio Valley High in California, a school in the same district as a paper mill, Wrigley Gum plant, Dow Chemical plant.

Ygnacio Valley had fully equipped labs, an enormous theater, a gymnastics department, Olympic sized pools, tennis courts. But the labs, oh the science labs. Some of the best financed in the state.

Oh, and how many black students did Ygnacio have? NONE. They had NONE. Not one.

And you want to base it strictly on "merit"? Looks more like it's based on "luck".

I am not opposed to government loans at all. I am opposed to having them available to all.

Merit alone.

 

[Si modo]

There is a normal distribution of intelligence. Not everyone is capable of getting a college education. This is (rather was) a fact. Because of this entitlement mentality, the dumbing down of our students through grade inflation has infiltrated higher education. Congrats to the entitlement crowd on once again promoting mediocrity.

I support loans based on MERIT alone (considering public ed quality, even that is hard to measure) - nothing else.

If the loans aren't there, plenty of more people will not be able to get a college education. Taking out a loan for college shows responsibility and that you are willing to take the results of your actions.

This is suppose to be the land of the opportunity is it not?

Loans aren't a entitlement mentality, it's a helping hand. Besides, you seem to forget that loans are to be paid back.

Loans ONLY to those based on merits, not to all.

Not all should be getting a college education. Intelligence follows a normal distribution - it's a statistical fact.

 

[Contumacious]

An educated public makes a better informed electorate..

I agree with you 1000% that an educated public makes a better informed electorate.

Unfortunately, that will not occur in a government financed and controlled school.

"Every politically controlled educational system will inculcate the doctrine of state supremacy sooner or later. . . . Once that doctrine has been accepted, it becomes an almost superhuman task to break the stranglehold of the political power over the life of the citizen. It has had his body, property and mind in its clutches from infancy. An octopus would sooner release its prey. A tax-supported, compulsory educational system is the complete model of the totalitarian state. "–Isabel Paterson, The God of the Machine (1943)

.

Christian colleges aren't "government financed" and they are mostly the lowest quality in the nation - tier four.

And you came to that conclusion how?

Bank robbers , drive Rolls Royce. Ar they a better quality of individuals?

What you are saying is not really your "concern". You are saying, "Those liberal elites want to turn our children into communists

The "progressive" -(statist) movement began in the early 1900's - after all schools have been nationalized.

If the schools are "controlled" then it's only a matter of time before we are all "controlled". Oh, panic, fear, running with hands wildly waving, HEEEELP!!! WE'RE CONTOOOOOLED!

Can you identify any aspect of our lives which is not controlled by fedgov?


.

 

[Si modo]

There is a normal distribution of intelligence. Not everyone is capable of getting a college education. This is (rather was) a fact. Because of this entitlement mentality, the dumbing down of our students through grade inflation has infiltrated higher education. Congrats to the entitlement crowd on once again promoting mediocrity.

I support loans based on MERIT alone (considering public ed quality, even that is hard to measure) - nothing else.

Your cnclusion is unsupported. How about some evidence?

As I am the premier authority on my own views, my conclusion about what I support is spot on.

But, I thank you for providing additional support for my view.

 

[Modbert]

Loans ONLY to those based on merits, not to all.

Not all should be getting a college education. Intelligence follows a normal distribution - it's a statistical fact.

Except being in college will prove that. Unless you believe there is grade inflation in the colleges today, then those not smart enough will not last long enough. However, the opportunity is what counts most.

 

[The T]

There is a normal distribution of intelligence. Not everyone is capable of getting a college education. This is (rather was) a fact. Because of this entitlement mentality, the dumbing down of our students through grade inflation has infiltrated higher education. Congrats to the entitlement crowd on once again promoting mediocrity.

I support loans based on MERIT alone (considering public ed quality, even that is hard to measure) - nothing else.

Your cnclusion is unsupported. How about some evidence?

The retort to your assertion should be good, I happen to know different .

And it doesn't look too good for YOU.

 

[rdean]

It is indeed strange the tangents some of us launch into; this is tongue in cheek...right?

Not when it comes to republicans. Christian colleges have historically been ranked the lowest in the nation. Christian leaders have complained that to be accredited, they must teach at least a token course in "evolution".

The Bush administration peppered the Justice Department with crappy grads from those schools replacing the actual qualified which resulted in scandal after scandal.

Normally, when a new president comes in, he replaces many members of the Justice Department with people he can trust. THEN HE LEAVES THEM ALONE. Bush, illegally (God, that word seemed to follow him constantly) replaced them because he wanted them to go after Democrats. Not legal. Christians have shown themselves to be far from scrupulous as this last administration demonstrates. And which they still demonstrate with all this talk of murder and secession. That is what we refer to as "traitor".

Scandal puts spotlight on Christian law school - The Boston Globe

The graduate from Regent -- which is ranked a "tier four" school by US News & World Report, the lowest score and essentially a tie for 136th place -- was not the only lawyer with modest credentials to be hired by the Civil Rights Division after the administration imposed greater political control over career hiring.

-----------------
One third-year student, Chamie Riley , said she rejected the idea that any government official who invokes her Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination could be a good representative of Regent.

As Christians, she said, Regent students know "you should be morally upright. You should not be in a situation where you have to plead the Fifth." (and yet they were Chamie, they were)

Rdean, the OP was and is about student loans and the availability of a broad base of access to those loans or a reduction of availability to one source, the government. Since loans have been guaranteed heretofore by the government - a good thing - they have been broadly available to any person serious about their higher education, whether they preferred a Christian school or any other.

Serious students in high school could go to a local bank, and the bank would, by simply drawing up a pro-forma application process their loan, and make certain the applicant repaid it, with the government forced to guarantee the loan only as a last resort. Banks provided the agency of collection. This ensured an interest by the business community in the advancement of education of local people, with the hope that by advancing their education they would be more responsible and prosperous citizens, which would be a better environment economically and civilly all around. The banker would also have references with which to evaluate the character qualities of the applicant.

Up to now applicants could count on timely processing of their loans, and going to the government has been a last resort.

This new scheme will force private lenders out and the only source will be government loans. The lines will be a kind of rationing mechanism for those loans.

This likely will create a major distortion in our system of higher education. How will that be a good thing?

Obama made it through Harvard based on student loans. Talk about a "major distortion". Bush went to Harvard because daddy pulled strings. McCain went to the Naval Academy (graduated 5th from bottom from 899 cadets) because, once again, daddy pulled strings. Sarah Palin went to Idaho U. from pageant scholarships (she earned it the old fashioned way, dressed skimpy in stilettos with big hair).

We need our best and brightest to finish school without crushing debt.

Rich Republicans don't understand this because they are rich.

Poor Republicans don't understand this because the are anti education (odd that. They say they want jobs but are against the very thing that will help them get jobs).

This from FOX News:

Michelle Obama: Barack's Book Sales Paid Off Our Student Loans - Political News - FOXNews.com

HARRISBURG, N.C. -- It wasn't until Barack Obama wrote a pair of best-selling books that he and his wife escaped their student loan debt, an experience Michelle Obama said Tuesday helps the couple understand everyday challenges better than policymakers in Washington.

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

I love to use Fox news as a source because it's the only one Republicans believe.
Fox - the Propaganda network.

 

[The T]

There is a normal distribution of intelligence. Not everyone is capable of getting a college education. This is (rather was) a fact. Because of this entitlement mentality, the dumbing down of our students through grade inflation has infiltrated higher education. Congrats to the entitlement crowd on once again promoting mediocrity.

I support loans based on MERIT alone (considering public ed quality, even that is hard to measure) - nothing else.

Your cnclusion is unsupported. How about some evidence?

As I am the premier authority on my own views, my conclusion about what I support is spot on.

But, I thank you for providing additional support for my view.

*

 

[Si modo]

Loans ONLY to those based on merits, not to all.

Not all should be getting a college education. Intelligence follows a normal distribution - it's a statistical fact.

Except being in college will prove that. Unless you believe there is grade inflation in the colleges today, then those not smart enough will not last long enough. However, the opportunity is what counts most.

No, Dogbert - one's intelligence is not established at university. It follows a normal distribution even from childhood (General Intelligence Factor). And, there IS grade inflation already at the university level. It's bad. (Just one of several articles on it)

 

[JakeStarkey]

There is a normal distribution of intelligence. Not everyone is capable of getting a college education. This is (rather was) a fact. Because of this entitlement mentality, the dumbing down of our students through grade inflation has infiltrated higher education. Congrats to the entitlement crowd on once again promoting mediocrity.

I support loans based on MERIT alone (considering public ed quality, even that is hard to measure) - nothing else.

Your conclusion is unsupported. How about some evidence?

As I am the premier authority on my own views, my conclusion about what I support is spot on.

But, I thank you for providing additional support for my view.

Your conclusion is unsupported, thus is only good for you and no one else. OK, we know what you think, as wrong as it is.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Your premise and thus your conclusion, si modo, is false. Let's move on.

 

[Emma]

One third-year student, Chamie Riley , said she rejected the idea that any government official who invokes her Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination could be a good representative of Regent.

As Christians, she said, Regent students know "you should be morally upright. You should not be in a situation where you have to plead the Fifth." (and yet they were Chamie, they were)

I guess she missed this lecture:

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc]YouTube - Dont Talk to Police[/ame]

 

[ba1614]

It is indeed strange the tangents some of us launch into; this is tongue in cheek...right?

Not when it comes to republicans. Christian colleges have historically been ranked the lowest in the nation. Christian leaders have complained that to be accredited, they must teach at least a token course in "evolution".

The Bush administration peppered the Justice Department with crappy grads from those schools replacing the actual qualified which resulted in scandal after scandal.

Normally, when a new president comes in, he replaces many members of the Justice Department with people he can trust. THEN HE LEAVES THEM ALONE. Bush, illegally (God, that word seemed to follow him constantly) replaced them because he wanted them to go after Democrats. Not legal. Christians have shown themselves to be far from scrupulous as this last administration demonstrates. And which they still demonstrate with all this talk of murder and secession. That is what we refer to as "traitor".

Scandal puts spotlight on Christian law school - The Boston Globe

The graduate from Regent -- which is ranked a "tier four" school by US News & World Report, the lowest score and essentially a tie for 136th place -- was not the only lawyer with modest credentials to be hired by the Civil Rights Division after the administration imposed greater political control over career hiring.

-----------------
One third-year student, Chamie Riley , said she rejected the idea that any government official who invokes her Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination could be a good representative of Regent.

As Christians, she said, Regent students know "you should be morally upright. You should not be in a situation where you have to plead the Fifth." (and yet they were Chamie, they were)

Rdean, the OP was and is about student loans and the availability of a broad base of access to those loans or a reduction of availability to one source, the government. Since loans have been guaranteed heretofore by the government - a good thing - they have been broadly available to any person serious about their higher education, whether they preferred a Christian school or any other.

Serious students in high school could go to a local bank, and the bank would, by simply drawing up a pro-forma application process their loan, and make certain the applicant repaid it, with the government forced to guarantee the loan only as a last resort. Banks provided the agency of collection. This ensured an interest by the business community in the advancement of education of local people, with the hope that by advancing their education they would be more responsible and prosperous citizens, which would be a better environment economically and civilly all around. The banker would also have references with which to evaluate the character qualities of the applicant.

Up to now applicants could count on timely processing of their loans, and going to the government has been a last resort.

This new scheme will force private lenders out and the only source will be government loans. The lines will be a kind of rationing mechanism for those loans.

This likely will create a major distortion in our system of higher education. How will that be a good thing?

Funny how asshats like that don't address the subject matter but make it about anything else that has nothing to do with it.

Once they control the students money, they control what they have to do to get it. What do you want to bet "National Service" becomes a requirement to qualify?