I Read the News Today, Oh Boy

As always, I started the paper off with the letters to the editor. What do my fellow citizens have on their minds that they have to share with others? Oh, hey, look a letter that seems to imply that graduate students teaching classes at the UO necessarily means a poor educational experience:

The UO can’t compete

In the Nov. 25 Register Guard, Anne Williams does a fine job of reporting the facts. One item she missed, however, relates to University of Oregon professor John Nicols’ “concerns” about the quality of education in the program. At the UO, these classes are typically taught by graduate students, not professors, and in halls with 200 to 300 students, not the 30 to 40 in a typical College Now class.

As such, these classes are a profit center for UO, which calls into question the UO’s “objectivity” in evaluating the quality of education. College Now fills a need for students who want high-quality instruction, smaller class sizes and lower cost. The UO can’t compete with those benefits.

Who wrote this letter? Hey, it's our good friend and fellow AFT unionist Bob Baldwin! Thanks a lot Bob.

Two things for Bob, real quick.

One, we prefer to be called "graduate employees" because, and why would you have cause to know this, we actually have to fight the federal government and various state governments just to have the right to have unions, so the word "employee" is quite important to us.

Two, go fuck yourself. It's great that you're proud of Lane Community College and its programs, but do you really need to take a swipe at your union brothers and sisters while doing your bragging? You don't see us writing letters about how much public employees cost and how lazy they are, now do you?

After the letters it's on to the front pages. The R-G just recently started running "corrections" on page two and I love them. Today's paper featured three corrections to a story the R-G ran yesterday about how economists are split over whether Measures 66 & 67 are really "job-killing taxes" which just happens to be what the business-backed people are calling their campaign.

Guess what the three things the story got wrong all had in common. Guess:

A story on the cover of Friday’s newspaper about economists’ views on two upcoming tax measures contained several errors:

The Eugene economics firm ECONorthwest has not taken a position on measures 66 and 67, but its managing director, Randall Pozdena, has. The story incorrectly stated that ECONorthwest contends the tax measures are job killers.

A letter supporting passage of measures 66 and 67 has been signed by 36 Oregon economists. The story incorrectly stated that 16 economists signed the letter.

By 2013, the corporate income tax rate under Measure 67 would be restored to the current level for businesses whose taxable income falls below $10 million a year. The story incorrectly stated that the tax rate would be restored to the current level for businesses whose in-state sales fall below $10 million a year.

If you guessed all three errors hurt the "Yes for Oregon!" side, you win.

Lastly, the Business section. A story about how tariffs on Chinese tires are going to hurt the little guy where it hurts the most. No, not there, in the pocketbook. The article is a beaut, from "President Obama recently slapped a 35 percent tariff on tires after a U.S. union claimed that an influx of Chinese imports has cost more than 5,000 U.S. tire workers their jobs since 2004." to "Matt Edmonds, vice president of the online retailer Tire Rack, says the tariff punishes buyers who want cheaper tires. 'It’s going to impact those who really can afford it the least.'"

My favorite part of the article is where even good American tire companies are going to be forced to raise the price of their tires, partly because these "American" tire companies get some of their tires from China, but, as the tire companies are saying themselves, raw material costs are going up. In fact, even though Goodyear has said its cost increases are from raw materials, article author Dee-Ann Durbin goes ahead and doubts that and asserts that the increase could be to off-set the tariffs.

Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. will raise the price on all consumer replacement tires sold in North America by 6 percent starting Tuesday. The manufacturer, based in Akron, Ohio, cited raw material costs. Goodyear imports about 2 percent of its tires from China, so the increase also could offset tariffs.

And, no, not one person or organization who supports this crazy, (Chinese) job-killing tariff is quoted or cited in the story. Why would they be? They're crazy.

The Solution to All of Our Problems

A couple of times in the last couple of weeks I have heard a lot about how there is a desperate need in this country to make it easier to apply for financial aid for college. Apparently the financial aid form is 8 pages long. The form asks a lot of personal questions. It's complicated. The idea out there, supported by Clinton, is to knock it down to a page. Maybe an automatic thing based on tax returns. This is fine, I guess, but really, is the idea that some potential students are discouraged from attending college because they are daunted by an 8 page form? At the risk of being over-the-top, I'm willing to say that if an 8-page form prevents you from applying, maybe you're not ready for college just yet.

And while I'm here, I just listened to a speech by Hillary Clinton in which she asserts that there are great numbers of potential students who are not going to college because they can't afford it. It used to be that college cost was expensive, but incomes were high enough that anyone could afford it and everyone went. When was this time, exactly? Aren't enrollments at all-time highs? Didn't college used to be comparatively cheap? Not saying, of course, that college should be more affordable or that people aren't choosing not to go based on costs, but still, these facts are wrong, no?

The 10 Most Dangerous College Courses

Boffo crazy and high-larry-us.

FSM’s Second Annual ‘America’s Most Dangerous College Courses’

Jason Rantz

It’s been two years since I’ve begun investigating insipid, scary and yes, downright dangerous college courses – sometimes funded by tax dollars – and unfortunately, little has changed. Arrogant professors, protected by tenure and faint-hearted administrators, use their classrooms to spread their twisted views of America and its allies. Sometimes, entire courses are focused on anti-American views; other times, professors take time from non-political classes, such as math or Kinesiology, to complain about George Bush, the war on terrorism, social justice, and whatever it is that happens to bother them at the time of their rants. Consequently, students are not being taught properly and universities and colleges are robbing their students of the well-rounded educations they are paying for and deserve.

Go ahead and check out the courses. I knew it was good stuff when I read about "far-Left Senator Ted Kennedy" and NBC's recent move to the far Left, led by that noted-Trot Chris Matthews.

Your Opinion, Solicited

Everyone knows that I am a cynical son-of-a-bitch (how dare you talk about my dead mother that way!). So I need a ruling. In announcing a committee to investigate how Oregon colleges are staffed, Governor Kulonoski said this:

[The Commission will] Study the impact of the use of part-time faculty and graduate student employees on program quality and student success, and recommend a consistent definition to describe adjunct, contingent and part-time faculty.

How should we be reading "the impact of the use of part-time faculty and graduate student employees on program quality and student success"?

Positive toward part-time faculty and graduate student employees?
Neutral toward part-time faculty and graduate student employees?
Negative toward part-time faculty and graduate student employees?

Help a (union) brother out here.

Twain

The fashion accessory of choice on the UO campus this fall seems to be boobs. Or more to the point, cleavage. Ample, ample cleavage. Even the new grad students are highlighting this particular feature of their physiology. I am, like any good '90s man, horrified by this development and wonder exactly what they young ladies are thinking.

For the Higher Ed Geeks

Easiest Test Ever

You Are 100% Feminist

You are a total feminist. This doesn't mean you're a man hater (in fact, you may be a man). You just think that men and women should be treated equally. It's a simple idea but somehow complicated for the world to put into action.

Are You a Feminist?

Ummm...anyone who is not a 100% feminist needs to take a class with Courtney. Oops, there I go again, shoving my extreme-left agenda down the throats of poor college students.

Goff, try to do something with this on Free Xchange. It would be crantastic.