Singing the blues over “Varsity Blues.”

The “liberal elites” apparently don’t have to play by the same rules the rest of us do.

“We should allow anyone into our country…, while I live in at a walled and gated estate that keep all of the undesirables out.”

“We should ban the use of fossil fuels and promote public transportation…, while I hop around in private jets and chauffeur driven limousines.”

“We should keep increasing the funding for our pathetic public education system…, while I send all of my kids to private schools.”

“We should admonish the white middle class, make them feel guilty and create divisions between the races based on their “white privilege”…, while I actually take advantage of my rich, white, liberal elitist privileges.”

…and the list could go on and on and on.

According to Felicity Huffman and Lori Loughlin of Fox News, “Actresses Felicity Huffman and Lori Loughlin were among more than four dozen people charged in a nationwide college admissions cheating scandal that involved wealthy individuals paying up to $6.5 million to place their children into elite universities, according to court records.”

laws are for the peasants

“More than four dozen were charged.”  Would anyone care to wager how many people go to jail?  My money would be on no one.  They may end up paying some additional fines, which will mean nothing to them, but that will be about it.

“The alleged scam, which placed students into top colleges such as Yale, Georgetown, Stanford, University of Southern California, UCLA and the University of Texas, was run by William Rick Singer, from California, who helped parents get their children admission through bribes, court documents unsealed in Boston showed. Officials have been investigating the case, named ‘Operation Varsity Blues,’ for more than a year.”

“Singer, who authorities said will plead guilty to racketeering, ran the charity, Key Worldwide Foundation, which received $25 million in total to guarantee the admissions, U.S. Attorney Andrew Lelling said during a Tuesday news conference. The charitable foundation was allegedly used as a front to run the scam.”

“The racketeering conspiracy charges were unsealed Tuesday against the coaches at schools including Georgetown, Wake Forest University and the University of Southern California.  Authorities say the coaches accepted bribes in exchange for admitting students as athletes, regardless of their ability.”

So to make it worse, these privileged liberal elites took spots away from other student athletes who really needed these scholarships to have an opportunity to attend college at all.

“Most of the students did not know their admission to the school was due to a bribe, authorities said, but in some cases, the children and their parents took part in the scheme.”

Excuse me.  What?  So you’re saying in some cases the parents or the children were not aware of what was going on?  You’re saying they paid all of this money but didn’t know what they were giving it away for?  Or you’re saying these other people paid millions of dollars to help out of the goodness of their hearts?

‘“Singer would accommodate what parents wanted to do,’ U.S. Attorney Andrew Lelling said, adding that it ‘appears that the schools are not involved’ except for a USC administrator who was charged.”

Ohhhh nooooo…, of course none of the schools were involved!  Except one lowly administrator who is going to take the fall for all of them.

‘“There can be no separate college admission system for the wealthy and there will not be a separate criminal justice system either,’ Lelling said.  “We’re not talking about donating a building so a school is more likely to take your son or daughter, we’re talking about deception or fraud.’”

Truer words were never spoken!

But true words are spoken all of the time.

Who really believes that this is not going to keep right on happening though?

You can’t see me…, but my hand is up.

“Singer would help his clients’ children by having another individual take SAT or ACT tests on behalf of the students, officials said. Parents would allegedly pay up to $75,000 for each test and wire money to ‘charitable accounts.’”

liberal privilege

‘“Singer used the purported charitable donations from parents, at least in part, to bribe two SAT and ACT test administrators,’ court documents stated.”

“He would discuss with his clients what SAT or ACT score they desired for their children that were impressive but ‘not too impressive.’  He would then instruct Mark Riddell, of Palmetto, Florida, to take the exams for the students, or ‘replace the students’ exam responses with his own.’ Riddell had been working with Singer since 2011, documents stated.”

Beautiful…, just beautiful.

So these students didn’t think it was odd that they had SAT or ACT scores when they hadn’t even taken the test?

“In a January interview with Parade, actor William H. Macy discussed how ‘stressful’ applying to colleges had been.”

Ha!  Do tell William H.!  Tell us how stressful it has been when everything had been pre-arranged!

‘“She’s going to go to college [Macy talking about his daughter]…, we’re right now in the thick of college application time, which is so stressful,’ Macy said. ‘I am voting that once she gets accepted, she maybe takes a year off. God doesn’t let you be 18 twice…, But it’s just my opinion, and we’ll see what she wants to do, what Felicity thinks and how the chips fall.’”

What a lyin’ piece of disingenuous liberal garbage.  Yessss, we’ll just have to see what Fe-li-ci-ty wants to do.  Especially since you already knew how the “chips were going to fall.”

“Several colleges, including Yale, University of Texas and USC, released statements following Tuesday’s news conference saying they were ‘victims’ of the bribery scheme.”

Believe me…, all of these billion dollar universities are a lot of things…, but a “victim” is not one of them.

liberal privlege 2

So next time one our liberal elitist friends decides to lecture us on how to behave, who to vote for, and what to believe…, just remember who they are really looking out for…, themselves and their elitist friends.

 

NOTE:  If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please scroll down to the very bottom of this page and click the “Follow” button.  That’ll keep you up to date on all of my latest posts.

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

 

The question isn’t “are you intelligent?”  It’s “how are you “intelligent?”

The theory of multiple intelligences was started back in 1983 by Dr. Howard Gardner, a professor of education at Harvard University.

mult inteligence 1

He felt that the older beliefs about intelligence, based on I.Q. testing, were not really fair and far too limited.

Instead, Dr. Gardner proposed eight different types of intelligences to represent a wider range of interests in children and adults. These intelligences are:

mult intelligence 3

Our schools typically focus most of their attention on linguistic (reading and writing) and mathematical intelligence.  For students who happen to be naturally talented in these areas, school is fun because they are successful.  For those of us who are more talented in other areas, school can be frustrating, difficult and/or boring.

mult intelligence 4

It would be nice if we could place equal attention on individuals who show gifts in the other intelligences: the artists, architects, tradespeople, musicians, naturalists (nature, animals and or plants), designers, dancers, therapists, salespeople, entrepreneurs, and many others who enrich the world in which we live…, but that just is not the case.

Unfortunately, many students who have these gifts don’t receive much reinforcement or encouragement in school.  Many of these students, in fact, end up being labeled “learning disabled,” having “ADHD (attention deficit hyperactivity disorder,” or simple as underachievers, when their unique ways of thinking and learning aren’t addressed by a heavily tilted reading/writing and mathematical curriculum and classroom.

Every teacher out there has been made aware of the theory of multiple intelligences.  But the theory of multiple intelligences and how we address multiple intelligences does not translate well when we bump up against everyday reality, which has limited money, limited time, limited teacher resources, and large class sizes.

The challenge is to change our educational way of doing things so that each child has the opportunity to learn in ways that go along with their unique minds, ways of thinking, talents and interests.

The I.Q. test was developed in 1900 by a French psychologist, Alfred Binet.  The “I.Q” test does have some value, but it does not take into account many things regarding intelligence and talents that are not easily quantifiable.

As far as our schools are concerned, “Just because everyone is ‘treated the same’ does not mean ‘everyone is being treated fairly.’”

mult intelligence 2

(“Ctrl” and click on the following websites to access them.)

You can learn more about multiple intelligences and Howard Gardner at his website: http://www.howardgardner.com/

Here is a website where you can take your own multiple intelligences assessment: www.mypersonality.info

 

NOTE:  If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please scroll down to the bottom of this site and click the “Follow” button.  That’ll keep you up to date on all of my latest posts.

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

So the “biased, liberal, fake news media” now feels it is OK to belittle the education level of selected groups of voters? 

The answer to this question is undeniably “yes,” at least as far as Eugene Scott of The Washington Post is concerned.

Mr. Scott chooses to point out that, “Americans are pursuing higher education at growing rates, but those without a college education are increasingly finding a home in the GOP.”

So are you implying that voters without college educations are somehow less informed, Mr. Scott?

Are you implying that voters without college educations are somehow less deserving of the right to vote, Mr. Scott?

During the latest midterm elections in 2018, if I heard it once I heard it a thousand times from the democrats, “Every vote counts!”  “Every vote deserves to be counted!”

I guess that’s only true when you’re “harvesting” what you believe are votes for democrats.  Right Mr. Scott?

Voter demographics should not have a bearing on anything.  Each voter is as important as any other voter.  The important things are that each legal voter have the opportunity to vote, and that they vote only once.

According to new data released by the Pew Research Center, higher educational attainment is increasingly associated with Democratic Party affiliation and leaning:

“In 1994, 39% of those with a four-year college degree identified with or leaned toward the Democratic Party and 54% associated with the Republican Party.  In 2017, those figures were exactly reversed.”

More than half of registered voters who identify as Democrat have a bachelor’s degree, while fewer than 4 in 10 registered voters who identify as Republican have a bachelor’s degree.

Those with graduate degrees are even more likely to find their political home in the Democratic Party, according to the survey.

Meanwhile, the GOP has increasingly become more of a political destination to Americans who lack a college degree, according to Pew, “Among those with no more than a high school education, 47% affiliate with the GOP or lean Republican, while 45% identify as Democrats or lean Democratic.”

In Mr. Scott’s estimation, “This may not bode well for the GOP long-term as the American public becomes increasingly educated.”

I think he means, “… as the American public becomes increasingly brain washed by our liberal education systems!”

According to Census Bureau data, “More than a third of American adults have a four-year college degree or higher, the highest level ever measured by the Census Bureau.”

Why Mr. Scott…, I do believe you are “fake news!”

You say, “This may not bode well for the GOP long-term as the American public becomes increasingly educated,” but if “more than a third of American adults have a four-year college degree or higher,” that would mean close to two thirds do not.  How does that “not bode well for the GOP?”

Mr. Scott goes on to say, “As the Republican Party increasingly becomes the party of those without degrees, their leaders may feel pressure to champion policies that benefit working class voters…”

Well, we can’t have that!  Right Mr. Scott?

That damn “working class,” right Mr. Scott?

Those pathetically ignorant “working class” voters who don’t deserve to vote, but pay for all of your liberal “give-away” programs, right Mr. Scott?

Pew data shows that the educational makeup of the two major parties’ electorates also has changed substantially over the past two decades, particularly when factoring in race:

“When race and education are taken into account, white voters who do to not have a college degree make up a diminished share of Democratic registered voters.  White voters who do not have a four-year degree now constitute just a third of Democratic voters, down from 56% two decades ago.  By contrast, non-college white voters continue to make up a majority of Republican and Republican-leaning registered voters at 59%.”

Ha!  I knew it wouldn’t take long before race got involved in the issue!

Apparently “non-educated” white voters are less desirable that “non-educated” Black or Latino voters.

Mr. Scott finishes by saying, “Some top GOP officials have attracted attention for their desire to win women and people of color to their party.  Perhaps moving forward we’ll see more emphasis on what can be done to win the highly educated.”

It seems to me, Mr. Scott, that your “highly educated” people are more often than not the people that are more “highly confused.”

Also, why is it that liberals seem to only value education as a result of a college education?

How about educations and training acquired by our “trade” professionals, like electricians, plumbers, welders, carpenters, HVAC technicians, mechanics, licensed practical nurses, construction professionals, et al?  Do these educations, most of which are quite extensive, not count just because they are practical?

How about the soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines who serve in our military, most of whom do not have college educations?  Do these educations not count because they are practical in nature?

No, these educations don’t “count” in the minds of liberals because these are educations that do not indoctrinate the students into the liberal political ideology.

Nicholas Carnes and Noam Lupu, also of The Washington Post, have their own take on voter demographics, specifically as they pertain to Donald Trump’s election and support.

Carnes and Lupu say that, “Media coverage of the 2016 election often emphasized Donald Trump’s appeal to ‘the working class.’ The Atlantic said that ‘the billionaire developer is building a blue-collar foundation.’ The Associated Press wondered what ‘Trump’s success in attracting white, working-class voters’ would mean for his general election strategy.  On Nov. 9, the New York Times front-page article about Trump’s victory characterized it as ‘a decisive demonstration of power by a largely overlooked coalition of mostly blue-collar white and working-class voters.’”

“But what about education?” They continued.  “Many pundits noticed early on that Trump’s supporters were mostly people without college degrees.  There were two problems with this line of reasoning, however.”

“First, not having a college degree isn’t a guarantee that someone belongs in the working class, nor should it somehow indicate that these people are not successful (think Bill Gates, Mark Zuckerberg, Steve Jobs, Richard Branson, Aretha Franklin, Quentin Tarantino, Ellen DeGeneres, Simon Cowell, Ted Turner, Rachel Ray, Kim Kardasian, Mark Wahlberg, Al Pacino, Seth Rogan, Marshall “Eminem” Mathers, and Robert ‘F-you’ DeNiro, just to name a few).”

“And, second, although more than 70 percent of Trump supporters didn’t have college degrees, when we looked at the NBC polling data, we noticed something the pundits left out: during the primaries, about 70 percent of all Republicans didn’t have college degrees, close to the national average (71 percent according to the 2013 Census).  Far from being a magnet for the less educated, Trump seemed to have about as many people without college degrees in his camp as we would expect any successful Republican candidate to have.”

So Mr. Scott, you have been debunked!

“Observers have often used the education gap to conjure images of poor people flocking to Trump, but the truth is, many of the people without college degrees who voted for Trump were from middle- and high-income households.”

Many, if not most, of these “observers” are quite confused and quite biased as well.  “Poor people” flocking to candidates is, again, only desirable when they are “flocking” to the appropriate liberal candidate.

“In short, the narrative that attributes Trump’s victory to a “coalition of mostly blue-collar white and working-class voters” just doesn’t square with the 2016 election data.  According to the election study, white non-Hispanic voters without college degrees making below the median household income made up only 25 percent of Trump voters.”

In a word, there are “uneducated voters” and then there are “uneducated voters.”

It would appear that it is the democrats who are a party of extremes.  They seem to be comprised mostly of college eggheads, highly paid entertainers, extreme social and environmental interest groups, high school drop-outs, high school graduates who haven’t furthered their education, and all of those who live off of the government and have no intent to better themselves.

In a recent National Review article (The National Review is recognized as a leading conservative magazine, but was exposed during the election as just another “swampy,” establishment, media outlet) about Trump’s alleged support among the working class bordered on a call to arms against the less fortunate, saying that, “The white American underclass is in thrall to a vicious, selfish culture whose main products are misery and used heroin needles.  Donald Trump’s speeches make them feel good. So does OxyContin,” and that “the truth about these dysfunctional downscale communities is that they deserve to die.”

According to Carnes and Lupu, “This kind of stereotyping and scapegoating is a dismaying consequence of the narrative that working-class Americans swept Trump into the White House.  What deserves to die isn’t America’s working-class communities.  It’s the myth that they’re the reason Trump was elected.”

Shame on you National Review, and shame on you Eugene Scott.

And thank you to Nicholas Carnes and Noam Lupu for reporting the facts and not twisting the facts to fit the liberal narrative.

 

NOTE:  If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please scroll down to the bottom of the page and click the “Follow” button.  That’ll keep you up to date on all of my latest posts.

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

remember-when-you-said-trump-would-never-be-president-but-36286487

 

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑