PDA

View Full Version : American emmigration


Elzinator
November 16th 04, 02:36 PM
I don't know if anyone has already mentioned it here, but apparently
Canada is expecting (and inviting) an exodus of disenchanted (and
disillusioned) Americans into their country. Enough to give seminars
in several Am. cities on how to immigrate into Canada.

I have heard some serious considerations of leaving the US around
here; the disenchantment is more a reality than just a media
hyperbole.

A group here is considering Australia (diving nerds), a couple already
applied to universities in Vancouver.

Interesting :)

gman99
November 16th 04, 02:40 PM
(Elzinator) wrote:
> I don't know if anyone has already mentioned it here, but apparently
> Canada is expecting (and inviting) an exodus of disenchanted (and
> disillusioned) Americans into their country. Enough to give seminars
> in several Am. cities on how to immigrate into Canada.
>
> I have heard some serious considerations of leaving the US around
> here; the disenchantment is more a reality than just a media
> hyperbole.
>
> A group here is considering Australia (diving nerds), a couple already
> applied to universities in Vancouver.
>
> Interesting :)

I think it's more hype than anything else...too cold for all those
Californians...

John Hanson
November 16th 04, 03:21 PM
On 16 Nov 2004 06:36:53 -0800, (Elzinator) wrote
in misc.fitness.weights:

>I don't know if anyone has already mentioned it here, but apparently
>Canada is expecting (and inviting) an exodus of disenchanted (and
>disillusioned) Americans into their country. Enough to give seminars
>in several Am. cities on how to immigrate into Canada.

Mentioned? There is that thread that has about 673 posts at present
count.

>
>I have heard some serious considerations of leaving the US around
>here; the disenchantment is more a reality than just a media
>hyperbole.

I'm all in favor of it.

>
>A group here is considering Australia (diving nerds), a couple already
>applied to universities in Vancouver.
>
>Interesting :)

Yes. Here I thought it was just blather. Encourage more to move on.

spodosaurus
November 16th 04, 03:28 PM
Elzinator wrote:
> I don't know if anyone has already mentioned it here, but apparently
> Canada is expecting (and inviting) an exodus of disenchanted (and
> disillusioned) Americans into their country. Enough to give seminars
> in several Am. cities on how to immigrate into Canada.
>
> I have heard some serious considerations of leaving the US around
> here; the disenchantment is more a reality than just a media
> hyperbole.
>
> A group here is considering Australia (diving nerds), a couple already
> applied to universities in Vancouver.
>
> Interesting :)

Apparently the New Zealand embassy (or was it the consulate) in the US
received a ten fold higher rate of enquiry about migrating to NZ after
the recent election.

--
spammage trappage: replace fishies_ with yahoo

I'm going to die rather sooner than I'd like. I tried to protect my
neighbours from crime, and became the victim of it. To jump to the end
of the story, as a result of this I need a bone marrow transplant. Many
people around the world are waiting for a marrow transplant, too. Please
volunteer to be a marrow donor:
http://www.abmdr.org.au/
http://www.marrow.org/

Proton Soup
November 16th 04, 04:27 PM
On 16 Nov 2004 06:36:53 -0800, (Elzinator)
wrote:

>I don't know if anyone has already mentioned it here, but apparently
>Canada is expecting (and inviting) an exodus of disenchanted (and
>disillusioned) Americans into their country. Enough to give seminars
>in several Am. cities on how to immigrate into Canada.
>
>I have heard some serious considerations of leaving the US around
>here; the disenchantment is more a reality than just a media
>hyperbole.
>
>A group here is considering Australia (diving nerds), a couple already
>applied to universities in Vancouver.
>
>Interesting :)

I think the link to the story I read was posted on Lyle's forum. To
me at least, it just looks like Canadian opportunists wishing to
capitalize on the hopes and dreams of disenchanted Americans.

Yeah, come to our Canadian Citizenship Seminar. We'll help orient you
and fill out your paperwork, for just a few hundred of your American
dollars. Doesn't mean you'll have any more chance than the rest of
the applicants, though. I'm not sure the policy of the Canadian
government has changed at all.

Don't you wish you were Canadian, Dally? This could be the biggest
thing since Curves(tm). Hmm, then again, maybe they'd open a
franchise in MA. They'll need at least one yokel that speaks the
language.

-----------
Proton Soup

"Thanks for noticing that I didn't actually say anything." - Mike Lane

fj
November 16th 04, 06:53 PM
"Elzinator" > wrote in message
om...
> I don't know if anyone has already mentioned it here, but apparently
> Canada is expecting (and inviting) an exodus of disenchanted (and
> disillusioned) Americans into their country. Enough to give seminars
> in several Am. cities on how to immigrate into Canada.
>
> I have heard some serious considerations of leaving the US around
> here; the disenchantment is more a reality than just a media
> hyperbole.
>
> A group here is considering Australia (diving nerds), a couple already
> applied to universities in Vancouver.
>
> Interesting :)

For what? To avoid joining army?

John WIlliams
November 16th 04, 08:47 PM
Considering how you view things this could be the start of a brain
drain from the US => Canada.


(Elzinator) wrote in message >...
> I don't know if anyone has already mentioned it here, but apparently
> Canada is expecting (and inviting) an exodus of disenchanted (and
> disillusioned) Americans into their country. Enough to give seminars
> in several Am. cities on how to immigrate into Canada.
>
> I have heard some serious considerations of leaving the US around
> here; the disenchantment is more a reality than just a media
> hyperbole.
>
> A group here is considering Australia (diving nerds), a couple already
> applied to universities in Vancouver.
>
> Interesting :)

Adam Fahy
November 16th 04, 08:59 PM
Elzinator wrote:
> I don't know if anyone has already mentioned it here, but apparently
> Canada is expecting (and inviting) an exodus of disenchanted (and
> disillusioned) Americans into their country. Enough to give seminars
> in several Am. cities on how to immigrate into Canada.
>
> I have heard some serious considerations of leaving the US around
> here; the disenchantment is more a reality than just a media
> hyperbole.

Heaven forbid people live in the same continent as those who disagree
with them.


-Adam

Jim Ranieri
November 16th 04, 09:18 PM
"Proton Soup" > wrote in message
...
> On 16 Nov 2004 06:36:53 -0800, (Elzinator)
> wrote:
>
> >I don't know if anyone has already mentioned it here, but apparently
> >Canada is expecting (and inviting) an exodus of disenchanted (and
> >disillusioned) Americans into their country. Enough to give seminars
> >in several Am. cities on how to immigrate into Canada.
> >
> >I have heard some serious considerations of leaving the US around
> >here; the disenchantment is more a reality than just a media
> >hyperbole.
> >
> >A group here is considering Australia (diving nerds), a couple already
> >applied to universities in Vancouver.
> >
> >Interesting :)
>
> I think the link to the story I read was posted on Lyle's forum. To
> me at least, it just looks like Canadian opportunists wishing to
> capitalize on the hopes and dreams of disenchanted Americans.
>
> Yeah, come to our Canadian Citizenship Seminar. We'll help orient you
> and fill out your paperwork, for just a few hundred of your American
> dollars. Doesn't mean you'll have any more chance than the rest of
> the applicants, though. I'm not sure the policy of the Canadian
> government has changed at all.
>


I does sound sort of scammy. Probably selling info that's freely available.
Considering the target demographic, though - I'm sure they'll make a
fortune.

Will Brink
November 16th 04, 09:42 PM
In article >,
(Elzinator) wrote:

> I don't know if anyone has already mentioned it here, but apparently
> Canada is expecting (and inviting) an exodus of disenchanted (and
> disillusioned) Americans into their country. Enough to give seminars
> in several Am. cities on how to immigrate into Canada.
>
> I have heard some serious considerations of leaving the US around
> here; the disenchantment is more a reality than just a media
> hyperbole.
>
> A group here is considering Australia (diving nerds), a couple already
> applied to universities in Vancouver.
>
> Interesting :)

It's not hard to understand why people feel that way at the moment.

--
Will Brink @ http://www.brinkzone.com/

Bob Mann
November 17th 04, 12:03 AM
On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 20:59:14 GMT, Adam Fahy >
wrote:

>Elzinator wrote:
>> I don't know if anyone has already mentioned it here, but apparently
>> Canada is expecting (and inviting) an exodus of disenchanted (and
>> disillusioned) Americans into their country. Enough to give seminars
>> in several Am. cities on how to immigrate into Canada.
>>
>> I have heard some serious considerations of leaving the US around
>> here; the disenchantment is more a reality than just a media
>> hyperbole.
>
>Heaven forbid people live in the same continent as those who disagree
>with them.
>
>
>-Adam

Did someone set Canada adrift from the North American continent
without telling me?
--
Bob Mann
Help save trees. Wipe your ass with an owl.

Keith Hobman
November 17th 04, 12:06 AM
In article >, wrote:

> On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 20:59:14 GMT, Adam Fahy >
> wrote:
>
> >Elzinator wrote:
> >> I don't know if anyone has already mentioned it here, but apparently
> >> Canada is expecting (and inviting) an exodus of disenchanted (and
> >> disillusioned) Americans into their country. Enough to give seminars
> >> in several Am. cities on how to immigrate into Canada.
> >>
> >> I have heard some serious considerations of leaving the US around
> >> here; the disenchantment is more a reality than just a media
> >> hyperbole.
> >
> >Heaven forbid people live in the same continent as those who disagree
> >with them.
> >
> >
> >-Adam
>
> Did someone set Canada adrift from the North American continent
> without telling me?

It's the north continental drift theory...

Adam Fahy
November 17th 04, 12:30 AM
Bob Mann wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 20:59:14 GMT, Adam Fahy >
> wrote:
>
>>Elzinator wrote:
>>
>>>I don't know if anyone has already mentioned it here, but apparently
>>>Canada is expecting (and inviting) an exodus of disenchanted (and
>>>disillusioned) Americans into their country. Enough to give seminars
>>>in several Am. cities on how to immigrate into Canada.
>>>
>>>I have heard some serious considerations of leaving the US around
>>>here; the disenchantment is more a reality than just a media
>>>hyperbole.
>>
>>Heaven forbid people live in the same continent as those who disagree
>>with them.

> Did someone set Canada adrift from the North American continent
> without telling me?

I knew some ****tard was going to notice that after I posted. This is
part of what I snipped from Elzi's message:

>>>A group here is considering Australia (diving nerds) [...]

But I forgot to reword my post, oh no. Please forgive me, my
intellectual better!


-Adam

Richard Smith
November 17th 04, 01:28 AM
"John Hanson" > wrote in message
...
> On 16 Nov 2004 06:36:53 -0800, (Elzinator) wrote
> in misc.fitness.weights:
>
> >I don't know if anyone has already mentioned it here, but apparently
> >Canada is expecting (and inviting) an exodus of disenchanted (and
> >disillusioned) Americans into their country. Enough to give seminars
> >in several Am. cities on how to immigrate into Canada.
>
> Mentioned? There is that thread that has about 673 posts at present
> count.
>
> >
> >I have heard some serious considerations of leaving the US around
> >here; the disenchantment is more a reality than just a media
> >hyperbole.
>
> I'm all in favor of it.
>
> >
> >A group here is considering Australia (diving nerds), a couple already
> >applied to universities in Vancouver.
> >
> >Interesting :)
>
> Yes. Here I thought it was just blather. Encourage more to move on.
Why yes, yes of course.

America should be left to all those who feel they're entitled to multiple
SUVs financed through the equity in their houses and then bailed out when
the real estate markets finally tank. And oh yes, everyone should have dual
income households to make the monthly payments because no one should do
without that which they feel they deserve.


Then there's folks like me. We save. We don't buy everything on
credit...and we don't want our gubmint to lie to us about "weapons of mass
destruction" to justify a war without an exit strategy but with a gigantic
bill financed on "easy monthly payments". Morons. "Money for nothing and
dolts for free".

I've voted Republican since I could (in 1976) and this year I became fed up
with the duplicity and out right bull**** lies fed to the happy sheep that
represent the American people, i.e., just about everyone on this NG.

Yes, I'm ready to take my money and energy and move.

But Canada ain't it. America was. But "Uhmerika" has become another
entitlement state. By the "peepull" and for the "peepul"....fukin'
lemmings.

Richard.

>

John Hanson
November 17th 04, 01:41 AM
On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 19:28:14 -0600, "Richard Smith"
> wrote in misc.fitness.weights:

>
>"John Hanson" > wrote in message
...
>> On 16 Nov 2004 06:36:53 -0800, (Elzinator) wrote
>> in misc.fitness.weights:
>>
>> >I don't know if anyone has already mentioned it here, but apparently
>> >Canada is expecting (and inviting) an exodus of disenchanted (and
>> >disillusioned) Americans into their country. Enough to give seminars
>> >in several Am. cities on how to immigrate into Canada.
>>
>> Mentioned? There is that thread that has about 673 posts at present
>> count.
>>
>> >
>> >I have heard some serious considerations of leaving the US around
>> >here; the disenchantment is more a reality than just a media
>> >hyperbole.
>>
>> I'm all in favor of it.
>>
>> >
>> >A group here is considering Australia (diving nerds), a couple already
>> >applied to universities in Vancouver.
>> >
>> >Interesting :)
>>
>> Yes. Here I thought it was just blather. Encourage more to move on.
>Why yes, yes of course.
>
>America should be left to all those who feel they're entitled to multiple
>SUVs financed through the equity in their houses and then bailed out when
>the real estate markets finally tank. And oh yes, everyone should have dual
>income households to make the monthly payments because no one should do
>without that which they feel they deserve.
>
>
>Then there's folks like me. We save. We don't buy everything on
>credit...and we don't want our gubmint to lie to us about "weapons of mass
>destruction" to justify a war without an exit strategy but with a gigantic
>bill financed on "easy monthly payments". Morons. "Money for nothing and
>dolts for free".
>
>I've voted Republican since I could (in 1976) and this year I became fed up
>with the duplicity and out right bull**** lies fed to the happy sheep that
>represent the American people, i.e., just about everyone on this NG.
>
>Yes, I'm ready to take my money and energy and move.
>
>But Canada ain't it. America was. But "Uhmerika" has become another
>entitlement state. By the "peepull" and for the "peepul"....fukin'
>lemmings.
>
So where you moving to?

Lee Michaels
November 17th 04, 02:00 AM
"Bob Mann" > wrote
>
> Did someone set Canada adrift from the North American continent
> without telling me?
..
No, it just seems that way because of the polar cap melting.

Richard Smith
November 17th 04, 02:18 AM
"John Hanson" > wrote in message
...
> On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 19:28:14 -0600, "Richard Smith"
> > wrote in misc.fitness.weights:
>
> >
> >"John Hanson" > wrote in message
> ...
> >> On 16 Nov 2004 06:36:53 -0800, (Elzinator) wrote
> >> in misc.fitness.weights:
> >>
> >> >I don't know if anyone has already mentioned it here, but apparently
> >> >Canada is expecting (and inviting) an exodus of disenchanted (and
> >> >disillusioned) Americans into their country. Enough to give seminars
> >> >in several Am. cities on how to immigrate into Canada.
> >>
> >> Mentioned? There is that thread that has about 673 posts at present
> >> count.
> >>
> >> >
> >> >I have heard some serious considerations of leaving the US around
> >> >here; the disenchantment is more a reality than just a media
> >> >hyperbole.
> >>
> >> I'm all in favor of it.
> >>
> >> >
> >> >A group here is considering Australia (diving nerds), a couple already
> >> >applied to universities in Vancouver.
> >> >
> >> >Interesting :)
> >>
> >> Yes. Here I thought it was just blather. Encourage more to move on.
> >Why yes, yes of course.
> >
> >America should be left to all those who feel they're entitled to multiple
> >SUVs financed through the equity in their houses and then bailed out when
> >the real estate markets finally tank. And oh yes, everyone should have
dual
> >income households to make the monthly payments because no one should do
> >without that which they feel they deserve.
> >
> >
> >Then there's folks like me. We save. We don't buy everything on
> >credit...and we don't want our gubmint to lie to us about "weapons of
mass
> >destruction" to justify a war without an exit strategy but with a
gigantic
> >bill financed on "easy monthly payments". Morons. "Money for nothing
and
> >dolts for free".
> >
> >I've voted Republican since I could (in 1976) and this year I became fed
up
> >with the duplicity and out right bull**** lies fed to the happy sheep
that
> >represent the American people, i.e., just about everyone on this NG.
> >
> >Yes, I'm ready to take my money and energy and move.
> >
> >But Canada ain't it. America was. But "Uhmerika" has become another
> >entitlement state. By the "peepull" and for the "peepul"....fukin'
> >lemmings.
> >
> So where you moving to?

I hate you. :-)

I wish I knew.

Proly will end up saving a bit more and doin' the ex-pat Amurrican thing in
Mexico.

Forking idjits...believing everything Madison Avenue vomits out....as if
they can have everything they want.

Thinking that everyone can "auto-magically" improve upon their parent's
"station" in life is the biggest crock of **** ever sold to Americans. But
I hold Americans responsible for not thinking it through as to how that
improvement would happen and then not making the sacrifices to make it
possible for future generations...and now they'll believe whoever lies to
them in the loudest voice.

RIchard
>

John Hanson
November 17th 04, 02:55 AM
On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 20:18:38 -0600, "Richard Smith"
> wrote in misc.fitness.weights:

>
>"John Hanson" > wrote in message
...
>> On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 19:28:14 -0600, "Richard Smith"
>> > wrote in misc.fitness.weights:
>>
>> >
>> >"John Hanson" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> >> On 16 Nov 2004 06:36:53 -0800, (Elzinator) wrote
>> >> in misc.fitness.weights:
>> >>
>> >> >I don't know if anyone has already mentioned it here, but apparently
>> >> >Canada is expecting (and inviting) an exodus of disenchanted (and
>> >> >disillusioned) Americans into their country. Enough to give seminars
>> >> >in several Am. cities on how to immigrate into Canada.
>> >>
>> >> Mentioned? There is that thread that has about 673 posts at present
>> >> count.
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >I have heard some serious considerations of leaving the US around
>> >> >here; the disenchantment is more a reality than just a media
>> >> >hyperbole.
>> >>
>> >> I'm all in favor of it.
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >A group here is considering Australia (diving nerds), a couple already
>> >> >applied to universities in Vancouver.
>> >> >
>> >> >Interesting :)
>> >>
>> >> Yes. Here I thought it was just blather. Encourage more to move on.
>> >Why yes, yes of course.
>> >
>> >America should be left to all those who feel they're entitled to multiple
>> >SUVs financed through the equity in their houses and then bailed out when
>> >the real estate markets finally tank. And oh yes, everyone should have
>dual
>> >income households to make the monthly payments because no one should do
>> >without that which they feel they deserve.
>> >
>> >
>> >Then there's folks like me. We save. We don't buy everything on
>> >credit...and we don't want our gubmint to lie to us about "weapons of
>mass
>> >destruction" to justify a war without an exit strategy but with a
>gigantic
>> >bill financed on "easy monthly payments". Morons. "Money for nothing
>and
>> >dolts for free".
>> >
>> >I've voted Republican since I could (in 1976) and this year I became fed
>up
>> >with the duplicity and out right bull**** lies fed to the happy sheep
>that
>> >represent the American people, i.e., just about everyone on this NG.
>> >
>> >Yes, I'm ready to take my money and energy and move.
>> >
>> >But Canada ain't it. America was. But "Uhmerika" has become another
>> >entitlement state. By the "peepull" and for the "peepul"....fukin'
>> >lemmings.
>> >
>> So where you moving to?
>
>I hate you. :-)
>
>I wish I knew.
>
>Proly will end up saving a bit more and doin' the ex-pat Amurrican thing in
>Mexico.

No private ownership of firearms in Mexico.

>
>Forking idjits...believing everything Madison Avenue vomits out....as if
>they can have everything they want.
>
>Thinking that everyone can "auto-magically" improve upon their parent's
>"station" in life is the biggest crock of **** ever sold to Americans. But
>I hold Americans responsible for not thinking it through as to how that
>improvement would happen and then not making the sacrifices to make it
>possible for future generations...and now they'll believe whoever lies to
>them in the loudest voice.
>
I moved the bonds in my 401k over today to an international mutual
fund:-)

Brandon Berg
November 17th 04, 07:13 AM
"Bob Mann" > wrote in message
...
> On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 20:59:14 GMT, Adam Fahy >
> wrote:
>>Heaven forbid people live in the same continent as those who disagree
>>with them.
>
> Did someone set Canada adrift from the North American continent
> without telling me?

We're working on it, but we hit this huge rock about halfway through the
Montana border....

--
Brandon Berg
Fix the obvious homonym substitution to reply.

Lucas Buck
November 17th 04, 11:43 AM
On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 20:18:38 -0600, "Richard Smith" >
wrote:

>"John Hanson" > wrote in message
...
>> On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 19:28:14 -0600, "Richard Smith"
>> > wrote in misc.fitness.weights:
>>
>> >
>> >"John Hanson" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> >> On 16 Nov 2004 06:36:53 -0800, (Elzinator) wrote
>> >> in misc.fitness.weights:
>> >>
>> >> >I don't know if anyone has already mentioned it here, but apparently
>> >> >Canada is expecting (and inviting) an exodus of disenchanted (and
>> >> >disillusioned) Americans into their country. Enough to give seminars
>> >> >in several Am. cities on how to immigrate into Canada.
>> >>
>> >> Mentioned? There is that thread that has about 673 posts at present
>> >> count.
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >I have heard some serious considerations of leaving the US around
>> >> >here; the disenchantment is more a reality than just a media
>> >> >hyperbole.
>> >>
>> >> I'm all in favor of it.
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >A group here is considering Australia (diving nerds), a couple already
>> >> >applied to universities in Vancouver.
>> >> >
>> >> >Interesting :)
>> >>
>> >> Yes. Here I thought it was just blather. Encourage more to move on.
>> >Why yes, yes of course.
>> >
>> >America should be left to all those who feel they're entitled to multiple
>> >SUVs financed through the equity in their houses and then bailed out when
>> >the real estate markets finally tank. And oh yes, everyone should have dual
>> >income households to make the monthly payments because no one should do
>> >without that which they feel they deserve.
>> >
>> >Then there's folks like me. We save. We don't buy everything on
>> >credit...

You'd be a fool NOT to buy a house on credit, since you can deduct the mortgage
interest AND property taxes from your income tax.

>> >Yes, I'm ready to take my money and energy and move.

Your energy?

>> So where you moving to?
>
>I hate you. :-)
>
>I wish I knew.
>
>Proly will end up saving a bit more and doin' the ex-pat Amurrican thing in
>Mexico.

Oh, PLEASE do.
More than likely, you'd be dead within two years at the hands of the local
street gang after they take you hostage and force you to empty your bank
account for them first.

There's a REASON that almost all the migration traffic across that border is
in the OTHER direction...


--
Luke lefty AT dodgerssuck.com
"You were the worst possible result of an orgasm." (Papa Titus)

Jim Ranieri
November 17th 04, 02:41 PM
"Lucas Buck" > wrote in message
news:1100691802.wrF7/[email protected]
> On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 20:18:38 -0600, "Richard Smith"
>
> wrote:
>
> >"John Hanson" > wrote in message
> ...
> >> On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 19:28:14 -0600, "Richard Smith"
> >> > wrote in misc.fitness.weights:
> >>
> >> >
> >> >"John Hanson" > wrote in message
> >> ...
> >> >> On 16 Nov 2004 06:36:53 -0800, (Elzinator)
wrote
> >> >> in misc.fitness.weights:
> >> >>
> >> >> >I don't know if anyone has already mentioned it here, but
apparently
> >> >> >Canada is expecting (and inviting) an exodus of disenchanted (and
> >> >> >disillusioned) Americans into their country. Enough to give
seminars
> >> >> >in several Am. cities on how to immigrate into Canada.
> >> >>
> >> >> Mentioned? There is that thread that has about 673 posts at present
> >> >> count.
> >> >>
> >> >> >
> >> >> >I have heard some serious considerations of leaving the US around
> >> >> >here; the disenchantment is more a reality than just a media
> >> >> >hyperbole.
> >> >>
> >> >> I'm all in favor of it.
> >> >>
> >> >> >
> >> >> >A group here is considering Australia (diving nerds), a couple
already
> >> >> >applied to universities in Vancouver.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Interesting :)
> >> >>
> >> >> Yes. Here I thought it was just blather. Encourage more to move
on.
> >> >Why yes, yes of course.
> >> >
> >> >America should be left to all those who feel they're entitled to
multiple
> >> >SUVs financed through the equity in their houses and then bailed out
when
> >> >the real estate markets finally tank. And oh yes, everyone should
have dual
> >> >income households to make the monthly payments because no one should
do
> >> >without that which they feel they deserve.
> >> >
> >> >Then there's folks like me. We save. We don't buy everything on
> >> >credit...
>
> You'd be a fool NOT to buy a house on credit, since you can deduct the
mortgage
> interest AND property taxes from your income tax.
>
> >> >Yes, I'm ready to take my money and energy and move.
>
> Your energy?
>
> >> So where you moving to?
> >
> >I hate you. :-)
> >
> >I wish I knew.
> >
> >Proly will end up saving a bit more and doin' the ex-pat Amurrican thing
in
> >Mexico.
>
> Oh, PLEASE do.
> More than likely, you'd be dead within two years at the hands of the local
> street gang after they take you hostage and force you to empty your bank
> account for them first.
>
> There's a REASON that almost all the migration traffic across that border
is
> in the OTHER direction...
>
>

I dunno...if you had enough dough to build yourself a nice walled compound
on the coast, plus enought leftover to pay off the federales as needed, it
could be a nice life.

Bob Mann
November 17th 04, 11:55 PM
On Wed, 17 Nov 2004 00:30:40 GMT, Adam Fahy >
wrote:

>Bob Mann wrote:
>> On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 20:59:14 GMT, Adam Fahy >
>> wrote:
>>
>>>Elzinator wrote:
>>>
>>>>I don't know if anyone has already mentioned it here, but apparently
>>>>Canada is expecting (and inviting) an exodus of disenchanted (and
>>>>disillusioned) Americans into their country. Enough to give seminars
>>>>in several Am. cities on how to immigrate into Canada.
>>>>
>>>>I have heard some serious considerations of leaving the US around
>>>>here; the disenchantment is more a reality than just a media
>>>>hyperbole.
>>>
>>>Heaven forbid people live in the same continent as those who disagree
>>>with them.
>
>> Did someone set Canada adrift from the North American continent
>> without telling me?
>
>I knew some ****tard was going to notice that after I posted. This is
>part of what I snipped from Elzi's message:
>
> >>>A group here is considering Australia (diving nerds) [...]
>
>But I forgot to reword my post, oh no. Please forgive me, my
>intellectual better!
>
>
>-Adam


--
Bob Mann
Help save trees. Wipe your ass with an owl.

Bob Mann
November 17th 04, 11:56 PM
On Wed, 17 Nov 2004 00:30:40 GMT, Adam Fahy >
wrote:

>Bob Mann wrote:
>> On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 20:59:14 GMT, Adam Fahy >
>> wrote:
>>
>>>Elzinator wrote:
>>>
>>>>I don't know if anyone has already mentioned it here, but apparently
>>>>Canada is expecting (and inviting) an exodus of disenchanted (and
>>>>disillusioned) Americans into their country. Enough to give seminars
>>>>in several Am. cities on how to immigrate into Canada.
>>>>
>>>>I have heard some serious considerations of leaving the US around
>>>>here; the disenchantment is more a reality than just a media
>>>>hyperbole.
>>>
>>>Heaven forbid people live in the same continent as those who disagree
>>>with them.
>
>> Did someone set Canada adrift from the North American continent
>> without telling me?
>
>I knew some ****tard was going to notice that after I posted. This is
>part of what I snipped from Elzi's message:
>
> >>>A group here is considering Australia (diving nerds) [...]
>
>But I forgot to reword my post, oh no. Please forgive me, my
>intellectual better!
>
>
>-Adam


You know that no dead will go unpunished, good or otherwise.
--
Bob Mann
Help save trees. Wipe your ass with an owl.

Bob Mann
November 17th 04, 11:57 PM
On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 23:13:48 -0800, "Brandon Berg" >
wrote:

>
>"Bob Mann" > wrote in message
...
>> On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 20:59:14 GMT, Adam Fahy >
>> wrote:
>>>Heaven forbid people live in the same continent as those who disagree
>>>with them.
>>
>> Did someone set Canada adrift from the North American continent
>> without telling me?
>
>We're working on it, but we hit this huge rock about halfway through the
>Montana border....


If you come at it from both sides you might be able to just snap it
off.
--
Bob Mann
Help save trees. Wipe your ass with an owl.

Adam Fahy
November 18th 04, 01:33 AM
Bob Mann wrote:

> You know that no dead will go unpunished, good or otherwise.

They can.


-Adam

User
November 18th 04, 02:43 AM
> I have heard some serious considerations of leaving the US around
> here; the disenchantment is more a reality than just a media
> hyperbole.
>
> A group here is considering Australia (diving nerds), a couple already
> applied to universities in Vancouver.


I hope they don't let the door hit them in the arse on their way out.

Bob Mann
November 18th 04, 04:22 AM
On Thu, 18 Nov 2004 01:33:44 GMT, Adam Fahy >
wrote:

>Bob Mann wrote:
>
>> You know that no dead will go unpunished, good or otherwise.
>
>They can.
>
>
>-Adam

Don't tell me you had a humourectomy while I was away.
--
Bob Mann
Help save trees. Wipe your ass with an owl.

Brandon Berg
November 18th 04, 02:57 PM
"Usenet Posting" > wrote in message
...
>>> A group here is considering Australia (diving nerds), a couple already
>>> applied to universities in Vancouver.
>>>
>>> Interesting :)
>
> One can argue various demographics but it is clear that the PhDs lean
> heavily democrat.

Based on what?

--
Brandon Berg
Fix the obvious homonym substitution to reply.

Lucas Buck
November 25th 04, 12:02 AM
On Thu, 18 Nov 2004 10:55:15 GMT, Usenet Posting >
wrote:

>On 16 Nov 2004 12:47:27 -0800, (John
>WIlliams) wrote:
>
>>Considering how you view things this could be the start of a brain
>>drain from the US => Canada.
>>
>>
(Elzinator) wrote in message >...
>>> I don't know if anyone has already mentioned it here, but apparently
>>> Canada is expecting (and inviting) an exodus of disenchanted (and
>>> disillusioned) Americans into their country. Enough to give seminars
>>> in several Am. cities on how to immigrate into Canada.
>>>
>>> I have heard some serious considerations of leaving the US around
>>> here; the disenchantment is more a reality than just a media
>>> hyperbole.
>>>
>>> A group here is considering Australia (diving nerds), a couple already
>>> applied to universities in Vancouver.
>>>
>>> Interesting :)
>
>One can argue various demographics but it is clear that the PhDs lean
>heavily democrat.

Your source for this is... what?

I doubt that even all Doctorates lean "heavily Democrat", and when you look
specifically at Ph.D.s (vs Ed.D.s and JDs), they probably are majority
Republican.

Lucas Buck
November 25th 04, 12:02 AM
On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 20:55:25 -0600, John Hanson >
wrote:

>On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 20:18:38 -0600, "Richard Smith"
> wrote in misc.fitness.weights:
>
>>
>>"John Hanson" > wrote in message
...
>>> On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 19:28:14 -0600, "Richard Smith"
>>> > wrote in misc.fitness.weights:
>>>
>>> >
>>> >"John Hanson" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>> >> On 16 Nov 2004 06:36:53 -0800, (Elzinator) wrote
>>> >> in misc.fitness.weights:
>>> >>
>>> >> >I don't know if anyone has already mentioned it here, but apparently
>>> >> >Canada is expecting (and inviting) an exodus of disenchanted (and
>>> >> >disillusioned) Americans into their country. Enough to give seminars
>>> >> >in several Am. cities on how to immigrate into Canada.
>>> >>
>>> >> Mentioned? There is that thread that has about 673 posts at present
>>> >> count.
>>> >>
>>> >> >
>>> >> >I have heard some serious considerations of leaving the US around
>>> >> >here; the disenchantment is more a reality than just a media
>>> >> >hyperbole.
>>> >>
>>> >> I'm all in favor of it.
>>> >>
>>> >> >
>>> >> >A group here is considering Australia (diving nerds), a couple already
>>> >> >applied to universities in Vancouver.
>>> >> >
>>> >> >Interesting :)
>>> >>
>>> >> Yes. Here I thought it was just blather. Encourage more to move on.
>>> >Why yes, yes of course.
>>> >
>>> >America should be left to all those who feel they're entitled to multiple
>>> >SUVs financed through the equity in their houses and then bailed out when
>>> >the real estate markets finally tank. And oh yes, everyone should have
>>dual
>>> >income households to make the monthly payments because no one should do
>>> >without that which they feel they deserve.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >Then there's folks like me. We save. We don't buy everything on
>>> >credit...and we don't want our gubmint to lie to us about "weapons of
>>mass
>>> >destruction" to justify a war without an exit strategy but with a
>>gigantic
>>> >bill financed on "easy monthly payments". Morons. "Money for nothing
>>and
>>> >dolts for free".
>>> >
>>> >I've voted Republican since I could (in 1976) and this year I became fed
>>up
>>> >with the duplicity and out right bull**** lies fed to the happy sheep
>>that
>>> >represent the American people, i.e., just about everyone on this NG.
>>> >
>>> >Yes, I'm ready to take my money and energy and move.
>>> >
>>> >But Canada ain't it. America was. But "Uhmerika" has become another
>>> >entitlement state. By the "peepull" and for the "peepul"....fukin'
>>> >lemmings.
>>> >
>>> So where you moving to?
>>
>>I hate you. :-)
>>
>>I wish I knew.
>>
>>Proly will end up saving a bit more and doin' the ex-pat Amurrican thing in
>>Mexico.
>
>No private ownership of firearms in Mexico.

Heck, no private ownership of real estate, either, by noncitizens.

John M. Williams
November 25th 04, 01:39 AM
Usenet Posting > wrote:
>
> Lucas Buck > wrote:
>>
>> Usenet Posting > wrote:
>>>
>>> (John WIlliams) wrote:
>>>
>>>>Considering how you view things this could be the start of a brain
>>>>drain from the US => Canada.
>>>>
(Elzinator) wrote:
>>>>> I don't know if anyone has already mentioned it here, but apparently
>>>>> Canada is expecting (and inviting) an exodus of disenchanted (and
>>>>> disillusioned) Americans into their country. Enough to give seminars
>>>>> in several Am. cities on how to immigrate into Canada.
>>>>>
>>>>> I have heard some serious considerations of leaving the US around
>>>>> here; the disenchantment is more a reality than just a media
>>>>> hyperbole.
>>>>>
>>>>> A group here is considering Australia (diving nerds), a couple already
>>>>> applied to universities in Vancouver.
>>>>>
>>>>> Interesting :)
>>>
>>>One can argue various demographics but it is clear that the PhDs lean
>>>heavily democrat.
>>
>>Your source for this is... what?
>>
>>I doubt that even all Doctorates lean "heavily Democrat", and when you look
>>specifically at Ph.D.s (vs Ed.D.s and JDs), they probably are majority
>>Republican.
>>
>
>Dude, just read the widely publicized exit polls for crissakes. Why
>do you spout such stupidity without even a cursory understanding of
>how to do the least bit of research?
>
>It is tiresome...the stupid have that advantage, their ignorance is a
>sheer wall to climb.

Oh, eat **** and die, Mikey. The results of the elections show how
flawed your "widely publicized exit polls" were. Only a self-deluded
dip**** like you would put any stock in that. It was obvious from the
beginning that the exit polls were driven by the hyperactivity of the
anti-Bush voters, who were anxious to give pollsters their point of
view. The validity of a poll is determined by who is willing to
respond.

Now, as to political parties and education level, a Pew Research
Center study showed Democrats with a *slight* advantage over
Republicans in those with postgraduate studies: 33% to 31%.
http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?PageID=750

But where are all the liberals/Democrats? Academia. No, that's not
just a presumption. Although I haven't found a cite for this, CNN
recently referred to study which showed the following ratios of
Democrats to Republican in American universities:

Economics: 3:1
Sociology: 28:1
Anthropology: 30:1

Even better, I found another study which shows a truly horrific
skewing of academia in socially oriented university programs. An
American Enterprises study decided to determine the political
character of professors at multiple colleges, specifically those in
socially significant fields of study. Rather than asking the
professors to characterize themselves, which would be subject to
fudging, they cross-referenced faculty rosters with actual voter
registrations. The professors were categorized by department and
classified "Left" and "Right" using the following standards:

"Those who registered themselves in either the Democratic, Green, or
Working Families Party we classified as members of a party of the
Left--they are coded 'L' in the results below.

"Those registered in either the Republican or Libertarian Party we
classified as members of a party of the Right--they are coded 'R' in
the results below."

Here are the results:
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m2185/is_6_13/ai_90753087/pg_2
(http://tinyurl.com/6becr)

With those ratios in academia, and considering the fairly even
distribution in the Pew Research study, I would guess that the
distribtuion of those with postgraduate degrees in non-academic
positions, in both the public and private sectors, might actually be
skewed to the conservative.

Of course, even amongst academia, there are a few shining stars ...

Dr. Condoleezza Rice, for instance.

Don
November 25th 04, 01:57 AM
>Your source for this is... what?
>
>I doubt that even all Doctorates lean "heavily Democrat", and when you look
>specifically at Ph.D.s (vs Ed.D.s and JDs), they probably are majority
>Republican.
>

Education vs income, dems and repubs graphs, no mention of Phds, tho.
http://www.cs.umd.edu/class/spring2002/cmsc838f/Apps/presentations/Evren_Sirin
/

John M. Williams
November 26th 04, 05:29 AM
Usenet Posting > wrote:

> John M. Williams > wrote:
>
>>Usenet Posting > wrote:
>>>
>>> Lucas Buck > wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Usenet Posting > wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> (John WIlliams) wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>Considering how you view things this could be the start of a brain
>>>>>>drain from the US => Canada.
>>>>>>
(Elzinator) wrote:
>>>>>>> I don't know if anyone has already mentioned it here, but apparently
>>>>>>> Canada is expecting (and inviting) an exodus of disenchanted (and
>>>>>>> disillusioned) Americans into their country. Enough to give seminars
>>>>>>> in several Am. cities on how to immigrate into Canada.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I have heard some serious considerations of leaving the US around
>>>>>>> here; the disenchantment is more a reality than just a media
>>>>>>> hyperbole.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> A group here is considering Australia (diving nerds), a couple already
>>>>>>> applied to universities in Vancouver.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Interesting :)
>>>>>
>>>>>One can argue various demographics but it is clear that the PhDs lean
>>>>>heavily democrat.
>>>>
>>>>Your source for this is... what?
>>>>
>>>>I doubt that even all Doctorates lean "heavily Democrat", and when you look
>>>>specifically at Ph.D.s (vs Ed.D.s and JDs), they probably are majority
>>>>Republican.
>>>>
>>>
>>>Dude, just read the widely publicized exit polls for crissakes. Why
>>>do you spout such stupidity without even a cursory understanding of
>>>how to do the least bit of research?
>>>
>>>It is tiresome...the stupid have that advantage, their ignorance is a
>>>sheer wall to climb.
>>
>>Oh, eat **** and die, Mikey. The results of the elections show how
>>flawed your "widely publicized exit polls" were. Only a self-deluded
>>dip**** like you would put any stock in that. It was obvious from the
>>beginning that the exit polls were driven by the hyperactivity of the
>>anti-Bush voters, who were anxious to give pollsters their point of
>>view. The validity of a poll is determined by who is willing to
>>respond.
>>
>
>ANY poll is determined by who is willing to respond. Exit polls have
>the virtue of being immediately post-facto and thus are generally more
>reliable than other polls. Every time a state was called in this
>election a part of that decision used exit polls and was why you'd
>sometimes see a tiny % of the actual vote counted but the state called
>for a candidate.
>
>The initial reporting of the exit polls before the voting had even
>ended was a "mistake" and do not impugn the entire validity of exit
>polling (which has a long a reasonably good history of predicting
>winners).
>
>>Now, as to political parties and education level, a Pew Research
>>Center study showed Democrats with a *slight* advantage over
>>Republicans in those with postgraduate studies: 33% to 31%.
>>http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?PageID=750
>
>Who cares? I'm talking about people who actually voted. Pull your
>head out of your ass (or maybe you want to share Buck's tin hat).

You sure are a bitter little guy, Mikey. I note that you snipped the
rest of my post because it addressed actual registered voters and
caused you even greater cognitive dissonance. But that's OK. I try
to accomodate your psychopathologies.

I hope you and your family enjoyed your dysfunctional interaction this
holiday.

Jim
November 26th 04, 05:34 AM
"John M. Williams" > wrote in message
...
> Usenet Posting > wrote:
>
>> John M. Williams > wrote:
>>
>>>Usenet Posting > wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Lucas Buck > wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Usenet Posting > wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> (John WIlliams) wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Considering how you view things this could be the start of a brain
>>>>>>>drain from the US => Canada.
>>>>>>>
(Elzinator) wrote:
>>>>>>>> I don't know if anyone has already mentioned it here, but
>>>>>>>> apparently
>>>>>>>> Canada is expecting (and inviting) an exodus of disenchanted (and
>>>>>>>> disillusioned) Americans into their country. Enough to give
>>>>>>>> seminars
>>>>>>>> in several Am. cities on how to immigrate into Canada.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I have heard some serious considerations of leaving the US around
>>>>>>>> here; the disenchantment is more a reality than just a media
>>>>>>>> hyperbole.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> A group here is considering Australia (diving nerds), a couple
>>>>>>>> already
>>>>>>>> applied to universities in Vancouver.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Interesting :)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>One can argue various demographics but it is clear that the PhDs lean
>>>>>>heavily democrat.
>>>>>
>>>>>Your source for this is... what?
>>>>>
>>>>>I doubt that even all Doctorates lean "heavily Democrat", and when you
>>>>>look
>>>>>specifically at Ph.D.s (vs Ed.D.s and JDs), they probably are majority
>>>>>Republican.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Dude, just read the widely publicized exit polls for crissakes. Why
>>>>do you spout such stupidity without even a cursory understanding of
>>>>how to do the least bit of research?
>>>>
>>>>It is tiresome...the stupid have that advantage, their ignorance is a
>>>>sheer wall to climb.
>>>
>>>Oh, eat **** and die, Mikey. The results of the elections show how
>>>flawed your "widely publicized exit polls" were. Only a self-deluded
>>>dip**** like you would put any stock in that. It was obvious from the
>>>beginning that the exit polls were driven by the hyperactivity of the
>>>anti-Bush voters, who were anxious to give pollsters their point of
>>>view. The validity of a poll is determined by who is willing to
>>>respond.
>>>
>>
>>ANY poll is determined by who is willing to respond. Exit polls have
>>the virtue of being immediately post-facto and thus are generally more
>>reliable than other polls. Every time a state was called in this
>>election a part of that decision used exit polls and was why you'd
>>sometimes see a tiny % of the actual vote counted but the state called
>>for a candidate.
>>
>>The initial reporting of the exit polls before the voting had even
>>ended was a "mistake" and do not impugn the entire validity of exit
>>polling (which has a long a reasonably good history of predicting
>>winners).
>>
>>>Now, as to political parties and education level, a Pew Research
>>>Center study showed Democrats with a *slight* advantage over
>>>Republicans in those with postgraduate studies: 33% to 31%.
>>>http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?PageID=750
>>
>>Who cares? I'm talking about people who actually voted. Pull your
>>head out of your ass (or maybe you want to share Buck's tin hat).
>
> You sure are a bitter little guy, Mikey. I note that you snipped the
> rest of my post because it addressed actual registered voters and
> caused you even greater cognitive dissonance. But that's OK. I try
> to accomodate your psychopathologies.
>
> I hope you and your family enjoyed your dysfunctional interaction this
> holiday.

Probably better than your nothing John.

Jim

John M. Williams
November 26th 04, 07:59 AM
"Jim" > wrote:
>
>"John M. Williams" > wrote:
>>
>> Usenet Posting > wrote:
>>>
>>> John M. Williams > wrote:
>>>
>>>>Usenet Posting > wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Lucas Buck > wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Usenet Posting > wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> (John WIlliams) wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Considering how you view things this could be the start of a brain
>>>>>>>>drain from the US => Canada.
>>>>>>>>
(Elzinator) wrote:
>>>>>>>>> I don't know if anyone has already mentioned it here, but
>>>>>>>>> apparently
>>>>>>>>> Canada is expecting (and inviting) an exodus of disenchanted (and
>>>>>>>>> disillusioned) Americans into their country. Enough to give
>>>>>>>>> seminars
>>>>>>>>> in several Am. cities on how to immigrate into Canada.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I have heard some serious considerations of leaving the US around
>>>>>>>>> here; the disenchantment is more a reality than just a media
>>>>>>>>> hyperbole.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> A group here is considering Australia (diving nerds), a couple
>>>>>>>>> already
>>>>>>>>> applied to universities in Vancouver.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Interesting :)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>One can argue various demographics but it is clear that the PhDs lean
>>>>>>>heavily democrat.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Your source for this is... what?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I doubt that even all Doctorates lean "heavily Democrat", and when you
>>>>>>look
>>>>>>specifically at Ph.D.s (vs Ed.D.s and JDs), they probably are majority
>>>>>>Republican.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Dude, just read the widely publicized exit polls for crissakes. Why
>>>>>do you spout such stupidity without even a cursory understanding of
>>>>>how to do the least bit of research?
>>>>>
>>>>>It is tiresome...the stupid have that advantage, their ignorance is a
>>>>>sheer wall to climb.
>>>>
>>>>Oh, eat **** and die, Mikey. The results of the elections show how
>>>>flawed your "widely publicized exit polls" were. Only a self-deluded
>>>>dip**** like you would put any stock in that. It was obvious from the
>>>>beginning that the exit polls were driven by the hyperactivity of the
>>>>anti-Bush voters, who were anxious to give pollsters their point of
>>>>view. The validity of a poll is determined by who is willing to
>>>>respond.
>>>>
>>>
>>>ANY poll is determined by who is willing to respond. Exit polls have
>>>the virtue of being immediately post-facto and thus are generally more
>>>reliable than other polls. Every time a state was called in this
>>>election a part of that decision used exit polls and was why you'd
>>>sometimes see a tiny % of the actual vote counted but the state called
>>>for a candidate.
>>>
>>>The initial reporting of the exit polls before the voting had even
>>>ended was a "mistake" and do not impugn the entire validity of exit
>>>polling (which has a long a reasonably good history of predicting
>>>winners).
>>>
>>>>Now, as to political parties and education level, a Pew Research
>>>>Center study showed Democrats with a *slight* advantage over
>>>>Republicans in those with postgraduate studies: 33% to 31%.
>>>>http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?PageID=750
>>>
>>>Who cares? I'm talking about people who actually voted. Pull your
>>>head out of your ass (or maybe you want to share Buck's tin hat).
>>
>> You sure are a bitter little guy, Mikey. I note that you snipped the
>> rest of my post because it addressed actual registered voters and
>> caused you even greater cognitive dissonance. But that's OK. I try
>> to accomodate your psychopathologies.
>>
>> I hope you and your family enjoyed your dysfunctional interaction this
>> holiday.
>
>Probably better than your nothing John.

I deep-fried a turkey and had a wonderful dinner with my family,
including made-from-scratch mashed potatoes, gravy, cranberry relish,
and candied yams. How about you, Jim?

Jim
November 28th 04, 12:05 AM
"John M. Williams" > wrote in message
...
> "Jim" > wrote:
>>
>>"John M. Williams" > wrote:
>>>
>>> Usenet Posting > wrote:
>>>>
>>>> John M. Williams > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Usenet Posting > wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Lucas Buck > wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Usenet Posting > wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> (John WIlliams) wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Considering how you view things this could be the start of a brain
>>>>>>>>>drain from the US => Canada.
>>>>>>>>>
(Elzinator) wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> I don't know if anyone has already mentioned it here, but
>>>>>>>>>> apparently
>>>>>>>>>> Canada is expecting (and inviting) an exodus of disenchanted (and
>>>>>>>>>> disillusioned) Americans into their country. Enough to give
>>>>>>>>>> seminars
>>>>>>>>>> in several Am. cities on how to immigrate into Canada.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I have heard some serious considerations of leaving the US around
>>>>>>>>>> here; the disenchantment is more a reality than just a media
>>>>>>>>>> hyperbole.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> A group here is considering Australia (diving nerds), a couple
>>>>>>>>>> already
>>>>>>>>>> applied to universities in Vancouver.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Interesting :)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>One can argue various demographics but it is clear that the PhDs
>>>>>>>>lean
>>>>>>>>heavily democrat.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Your source for this is... what?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>I doubt that even all Doctorates lean "heavily Democrat", and when
>>>>>>>you
>>>>>>>look
>>>>>>>specifically at Ph.D.s (vs Ed.D.s and JDs), they probably are
>>>>>>>majority
>>>>>>>Republican.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Dude, just read the widely publicized exit polls for crissakes. Why
>>>>>>do you spout such stupidity without even a cursory understanding of
>>>>>>how to do the least bit of research?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>It is tiresome...the stupid have that advantage, their ignorance is a
>>>>>>sheer wall to climb.
>>>>>
>>>>>Oh, eat **** and die, Mikey. The results of the elections show how
>>>>>flawed your "widely publicized exit polls" were. Only a self-deluded
>>>>>dip**** like you would put any stock in that. It was obvious from the
>>>>>beginning that the exit polls were driven by the hyperactivity of the
>>>>>anti-Bush voters, who were anxious to give pollsters their point of
>>>>>view. The validity of a poll is determined by who is willing to
>>>>>respond.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>ANY poll is determined by who is willing to respond. Exit polls have
>>>>the virtue of being immediately post-facto and thus are generally more
>>>>reliable than other polls. Every time a state was called in this
>>>>election a part of that decision used exit polls and was why you'd
>>>>sometimes see a tiny % of the actual vote counted but the state called
>>>>for a candidate.
>>>>
>>>>The initial reporting of the exit polls before the voting had even
>>>>ended was a "mistake" and do not impugn the entire validity of exit
>>>>polling (which has a long a reasonably good history of predicting
>>>>winners).
>>>>
>>>>>Now, as to political parties and education level, a Pew Research
>>>>>Center study showed Democrats with a *slight* advantage over
>>>>>Republicans in those with postgraduate studies: 33% to 31%.
>>>>>http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?PageID=750
>>>>
>>>>Who cares? I'm talking about people who actually voted. Pull your
>>>>head out of your ass (or maybe you want to share Buck's tin hat).
>>>
>>> You sure are a bitter little guy, Mikey. I note that you snipped the
>>> rest of my post because it addressed actual registered voters and
>>> caused you even greater cognitive dissonance. But that's OK. I try
>>> to accomodate your psychopathologies.
>>>
>>> I hope you and your family enjoyed your dysfunctional interaction this
>>> holiday.
>>
>>Probably better than your nothing John.
>
> I deep-fried a turkey and had a wonderful dinner with my family,
> including made-from-scratch mashed potatoes, gravy, cranberry relish,
> and candied yams. How about you, Jim?

I had a lovely dinner at the city mission,shared a bottle of Mad Dog with
some homeless guy and passed out in an alley.

Jim

John M. Williams
November 28th 04, 12:56 AM
"Jim" > wrote:
>
>"John M. Williams" > wrote:
>>
>> "Jim" > wrote:
>>>
>>>"John M. Williams" > wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Usenet Posting > wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> John M. Williams > wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>Usenet Posting > wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Lucas Buck > wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Usenet Posting > wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> (John WIlliams) wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Considering how you view things this could be the start of a brain
>>>>>>>>>>drain from the US => Canada.
>>>>>>>>>>
(Elzinator) wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> I don't know if anyone has already mentioned it here, but
>>>>>>>>>>> apparently
>>>>>>>>>>> Canada is expecting (and inviting) an exodus of disenchanted (and
>>>>>>>>>>> disillusioned) Americans into their country. Enough to give
>>>>>>>>>>> seminars
>>>>>>>>>>> in several Am. cities on how to immigrate into Canada.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I have heard some serious considerations of leaving the US around
>>>>>>>>>>> here; the disenchantment is more a reality than just a media
>>>>>>>>>>> hyperbole.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> A group here is considering Australia (diving nerds), a couple
>>>>>>>>>>> already
>>>>>>>>>>> applied to universities in Vancouver.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Interesting :)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>One can argue various demographics but it is clear that the PhDs
>>>>>>>>>lean
>>>>>>>>>heavily democrat.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Your source for this is... what?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>I doubt that even all Doctorates lean "heavily Democrat", and when
>>>>>>>>you
>>>>>>>>look
>>>>>>>>specifically at Ph.D.s (vs Ed.D.s and JDs), they probably are
>>>>>>>>majority
>>>>>>>>Republican.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Dude, just read the widely publicized exit polls for crissakes. Why
>>>>>>>do you spout such stupidity without even a cursory understanding of
>>>>>>>how to do the least bit of research?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>It is tiresome...the stupid have that advantage, their ignorance is a
>>>>>>>sheer wall to climb.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Oh, eat **** and die, Mikey. The results of the elections show how
>>>>>>flawed your "widely publicized exit polls" were. Only a self-deluded
>>>>>>dip**** like you would put any stock in that. It was obvious from the
>>>>>>beginning that the exit polls were driven by the hyperactivity of the
>>>>>>anti-Bush voters, who were anxious to give pollsters their point of
>>>>>>view. The validity of a poll is determined by who is willing to
>>>>>>respond.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>ANY poll is determined by who is willing to respond. Exit polls have
>>>>>the virtue of being immediately post-facto and thus are generally more
>>>>>reliable than other polls. Every time a state was called in this
>>>>>election a part of that decision used exit polls and was why you'd
>>>>>sometimes see a tiny % of the actual vote counted but the state called
>>>>>for a candidate.
>>>>>
>>>>>The initial reporting of the exit polls before the voting had even
>>>>>ended was a "mistake" and do not impugn the entire validity of exit
>>>>>polling (which has a long a reasonably good history of predicting
>>>>>winners).
>>>>>
>>>>>>Now, as to political parties and education level, a Pew Research
>>>>>>Center study showed Democrats with a *slight* advantage over
>>>>>>Republicans in those with postgraduate studies: 33% to 31%.
>>>>>>http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?PageID=750
>>>>>
>>>>>Who cares? I'm talking about people who actually voted. Pull your
>>>>>head out of your ass (or maybe you want to share Buck's tin hat).
>>>>
>>>> You sure are a bitter little guy, Mikey. I note that you snipped the
>>>> rest of my post because it addressed actual registered voters and
>>>> caused you even greater cognitive dissonance. But that's OK. I try
>>>> to accomodate your psychopathologies.
>>>>
>>>> I hope you and your family enjoyed your dysfunctional interaction this
>>>> holiday.
>>>
>>>Probably better than your nothing John.
>>
>> I deep-fried a turkey and had a wonderful dinner with my family,
>> including made-from-scratch mashed potatoes, gravy, cranberry relish,
>> and candied yams. How about you, Jim?
>
>I had a lovely dinner at the city mission,shared a bottle of Mad Dog with
>some homeless guy and passed out in an alley.

Ya done us proud, Jimbo!

John M. Williams
November 28th 04, 08:26 PM
Usenet Posting > wrote:
>
> John M. Williams > wrote:
>>
>>I hope you and your family enjoyed your dysfunctional interaction this
>>holiday.
>
>Man, you are like a specimen under a glass.

Perhaps the whole world looks like that because you're perceiving it
from the inside.

Lucas Buck
November 29th 04, 05:01 AM
On Fri, 26 Nov 2004 04:35:58 GMT, Usenet Posting >
wrote:

>On Wed, 24 Nov 2004 20:39:29 -0500, John M. Williams
> wrote:
>
>>Usenet Posting > wrote:
>>>
>>> Lucas Buck > wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Usenet Posting > wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> (John WIlliams) wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>Considering how you view things this could be the start of a brain
>>>>>>drain from the US => Canada.
>>>>>>
(Elzinator) wrote:
>>>>>>> I don't know if anyone has already mentioned it here, but apparently
>>>>>>> Canada is expecting (and inviting) an exodus of disenchanted (and
>>>>>>> disillusioned) Americans into their country. Enough to give seminars
>>>>>>> in several Am. cities on how to immigrate into Canada.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I have heard some serious considerations of leaving the US around
>>>>>>> here; the disenchantment is more a reality than just a media
>>>>>>> hyperbole.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> A group here is considering Australia (diving nerds), a couple already
>>>>>>> applied to universities in Vancouver.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Interesting :)
>>>>>
>>>>>One can argue various demographics but it is clear that the PhDs lean
>>>>>heavily democrat.
>>>>
>>>>Your source for this is... what?
>>>>
>>>>I doubt that even all Doctorates lean "heavily Democrat", and when you look
>>>>specifically at Ph.D.s (vs Ed.D.s and JDs), they probably are majority
>>>>Republican.
>>>>
>>>
>>>Dude, just read the widely publicized exit polls for crissakes. Why
>>>do you spout such stupidity without even a cursory understanding of
>>>how to do the least bit of research?
>>>
>>>It is tiresome...the stupid have that advantage, their ignorance is a
>>>sheer wall to climb.
>>
>>Oh, eat **** and die, Mikey. The results of the elections show how
>>flawed your "widely publicized exit polls" were. Only a self-deluded
>>dip**** like you would put any stock in that. It was obvious from the
>>beginning that the exit polls were driven by the hyperactivity of the
>>anti-Bush voters, who were anxious to give pollsters their point of
>>view. The validity of a poll is determined by who is willing to
>>respond.
>>
>
>ANY poll is determined by who is willing to respond. Exit polls have
>the virtue of being immediately post-facto and thus are generally more
>reliable than other polls.

But POLLS are totally irrelevant to your claim:

>>>>>(Mikey):
>>>>>One can argue various demographics but it is clear that the PhDs lean
>>>>>heavily democrat.
>>>>
>>>>(Me)
>>>>Your source for this is... what?
>>>>
>>>>I doubt that even all Doctorates lean "heavily Democrat", and when you look
>>>>specifically at Ph.D.s (vs Ed.D.s and JDs), they probably are majority
>>>>Republican.

Now, "it is clear that the PhDs lean heavily democrat" is a simple statement
of fact. Exit polling is TOTALLY irrelevant to this claim. To support such a
claim, you'd just need to cross-reference voter registrations to their
postgraduate degrees. Do you have such data or don't you? I bet you
don't have a CLUE about the actual facts of this matter and are just talking
out your infected ass.

Lucas Buck
November 29th 04, 05:01 AM
On Sun, 28 Nov 2004 19:50:55 GMT, Usenet Posting >
wrote:

>On Fri, 26 Nov 2004 00:29:43 -0500, John M. Williams
> wrote:
>
>>Usenet Posting > wrote:
>>
>>> John M. Williams > wrote:
>>>
>>>>Usenet Posting > wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Lucas Buck > wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Usenet Posting > wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> (John WIlliams) wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Considering how you view things this could be the start of a brain
>>>>>>>>drain from the US => Canada.
>>>>>>>>
(Elzinator) wrote:
>>>>>>>>> I don't know if anyone has already mentioned it here, but apparently
>>>>>>>>> Canada is expecting (and inviting) an exodus of disenchanted (and
>>>>>>>>> disillusioned) Americans into their country. Enough to give seminars
>>>>>>>>> in several Am. cities on how to immigrate into Canada.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I have heard some serious considerations of leaving the US around
>>>>>>>>> here; the disenchantment is more a reality than just a media
>>>>>>>>> hyperbole.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> A group here is considering Australia (diving nerds), a couple already
>>>>>>>>> applied to universities in Vancouver.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Interesting :)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>One can argue various demographics but it is clear that the PhDs lean
>>>>>>>heavily democrat.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Your source for this is... what?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I doubt that even all Doctorates lean "heavily Democrat", and when you look
>>>>>>specifically at Ph.D.s (vs Ed.D.s and JDs), they probably are majority
>>>>>>Republican.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Dude, just read the widely publicized exit polls for crissakes. Why
>>>>>do you spout such stupidity without even a cursory understanding of
>>>>>how to do the least bit of research?
>>>>>
>>>>>It is tiresome...the stupid have that advantage, their ignorance is a
>>>>>sheer wall to climb.
>>>>
>>>>Oh, eat **** and die, Mikey. The results of the elections show how
>>>>flawed your "widely publicized exit polls" were. Only a self-deluded
>>>>dip**** like you would put any stock in that. It was obvious from the
>>>>beginning that the exit polls were driven by the hyperactivity of the
>>>>anti-Bush voters, who were anxious to give pollsters their point of
>>>>view. The validity of a poll is determined by who is willing to
>>>>respond.
>>>>
>>>
>>>ANY poll is determined by who is willing to respond. Exit polls have
>>>the virtue of being immediately post-facto and thus are generally more
>>>reliable than other polls. Every time a state was called in this
>>>election a part of that decision used exit polls and was why you'd
>>>sometimes see a tiny % of the actual vote counted but the state called
>>>for a candidate.
>>>
>>>The initial reporting of the exit polls before the voting had even
>>>ended was a "mistake" and do not impugn the entire validity of exit
>>>polling (which has a long a reasonably good history of predicting
>>>winners).
>>>
>>>>Now, as to political parties and education level, a Pew Research
>>>>Center study showed Democrats with a *slight* advantage over
>>>>Republicans in those with postgraduate studies: 33% to 31%.
>>>>http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?PageID=750
>>>
>>>Who cares? I'm talking about people who actually voted. Pull your
>>>head out of your ass (or maybe you want to share Buck's tin hat).
>>
>>You sure are a bitter little guy, Mikey. I note that you snipped the
>>rest of my post because it addressed actual registered voters and
>>caused you even greater cognitive dissonance. But that's OK. I try
>>to accomodate your psychopathologies.
>>
>
>{eye roll}
>
>Again, we're talking about exit polls that cover people who actually
>voted.

Again, you're full of ****.

Exit polls (IF conducted properly, and the data from this past election
do not support that) cover people who CLAIM to have voted in a
given election.

1) they make NO attempt to verify that the pollee actually voted, nor
does ANY major exit poll cross-check against the Statement of the Vote
records after the fact and discard those responses from non-voters
2) they have no way of verifying HOW the pollee voted, even IF
s/he voted
3) generally, they don't even ask the question that the pollee voted for
EACH SPECIFIC OFFICE OR ISSUE that is a subject of the poll.
Heck, I've seen an AP poll form that didn't even have a means of
noting that. (IOW, voting for a Presidential candidate but leaving a
down-ticket office or measure blank).

>Anyways, here is another poll that shows Doctoral level likely voters
>leaned heavily Kerry:
>
>http://www.pewtrusts.com/pdf/PRC_lateOct04_election_poll.pdf

You LYING SACK OF ****.

Aside from the points above, this poll DOES NOT EVEN DISTINGUISH
between

a) those with postgraduate studies without postgraduate degrees of any kind
versus
b) those with Master's Degrees
versus
c) those with Master's Degrees and additional postgrad study without Doctorates
versus
d) those who ACTUALLY ACHIEVED DOCTORATE DEGREES.

And yet you claim that it shows that "Doctoral level likely voters
leaned heavily Kerry".

You LYING SACK OF ****!

In fact, the clearest result of this study was that those idiots who DIDN'T
EVEN GRADUATE HIGH SCHOOL leaned heavily Kerry (55-38%).

Idie
November 29th 04, 06:24 AM
Usenet Posting > wrote in message
...
> On Mon, 29 Nov 2004 05:01:05 GMT, Lucas Buck
> > wrote:
>
> >On Sun, 28 Nov 2004 19:50:55 GMT, Usenet Posting
>
> >wrote:
> >
> >>On Fri, 26 Nov 2004 00:29:43 -0500, John M. Williams
> > wrote:
> >>
> >>>Usenet Posting > wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> John M. Williams > wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>>Usenet Posting > wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Lucas Buck > wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Usenet Posting > wrote:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> (John WIlliams) wrote:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>Considering how you view things this could be the start of a
brain
> >>>>>>>>>drain from the US => Canada.
> >>>>>>>>>
> (Elzinator) wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> I don't know if anyone has already mentioned it here, but
apparently
> >>>>>>>>>> Canada is expecting (and inviting) an exodus of disenchanted
(and
> >>>>>>>>>> disillusioned) Americans into their country. Enough to give
seminars
> >>>>>>>>>> in several Am. cities on how to immigrate into Canada.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> I have heard some serious considerations of leaving the US
around
> >>>>>>>>>> here; the disenchantment is more a reality than just a media
> >>>>>>>>>> hyperbole.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> A group here is considering Australia (diving nerds), a couple
already
> >>>>>>>>>> applied to universities in Vancouver.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Interesting :)
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>One can argue various demographics but it is clear that the PhDs
lean
> >>>>>>>>heavily democrat.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>Your source for this is... what?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>I doubt that even all Doctorates lean "heavily Democrat", and when
you look
> >>>>>>>specifically at Ph.D.s (vs Ed.D.s and JDs), they probably are
majority
> >>>>>>>Republican.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>Dude, just read the widely publicized exit polls for crissakes. Why
> >>>>>>do you spout such stupidity without even a cursory understanding of
> >>>>>>how to do the least bit of research?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>It is tiresome...the stupid have that advantage, their ignorance is
a
> >>>>>>sheer wall to climb.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Oh, eat **** and die, Mikey. The results of the elections show how
> >>>>>flawed your "widely publicized exit polls" were. Only a self-deluded
> >>>>>dip**** like you would put any stock in that. It was obvious from
the
> >>>>>beginning that the exit polls were driven by the hyperactivity of the
> >>>>>anti-Bush voters, who were anxious to give pollsters their point of
> >>>>>view. The validity of a poll is determined by who is willing to
> >>>>>respond.
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>ANY poll is determined by who is willing to respond. Exit polls have
> >>>>the virtue of being immediately post-facto and thus are generally more
> >>>>reliable than other polls. Every time a state was called in this
> >>>>election a part of that decision used exit polls and was why you'd
> >>>>sometimes see a tiny % of the actual vote counted but the state called
> >>>>for a candidate.
> >>>>
> >>>>The initial reporting of the exit polls before the voting had even
> >>>>ended was a "mistake" and do not impugn the entire validity of exit
> >>>>polling (which has a long a reasonably good history of predicting
> >>>>winners).
> >>>>
> >>>>>Now, as to political parties and education level, a Pew Research
> >>>>>Center study showed Democrats with a *slight* advantage over
> >>>>>Republicans in those with postgraduate studies: 33% to 31%.
> >>>>>http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?PageID=750
> >>>>
> >>>>Who cares? I'm talking about people who actually voted. Pull your
> >>>>head out of your ass (or maybe you want to share Buck's tin hat).
> >>>
> >>>You sure are a bitter little guy, Mikey. I note that you snipped the
> >>>rest of my post because it addressed actual registered voters and
> >>>caused you even greater cognitive dissonance. But that's OK. I try
> >>>to accomodate your psychopathologies.
> >>>
> >>
> >>{eye roll}
> >>
> >>Again, we're talking about exit polls that cover people who actually
> >>voted.
> >
> >Again, you're full of ****.
> >
> >Exit polls (IF conducted properly, and the data from this past election
> >do not support that) cover people who CLAIM to have voted in a
> >given election.
> >
>
> Your statement about exit polls not being conducted properly is false.
> Exit polls are taken as people are leaving the polling place and as
> such are as close as you are ever going to get, in a survey, to actual
> voters and who they voted for.
>
> >1) they make NO attempt to verify that the pollee actually voted, nor
> > does ANY major exit poll cross-check against the Statement of the Vote
> > records after the fact and discard those responses from non-voters
>
> Yes, Leroy, this is obvious.
>
> >2) they have no way of verifying HOW the pollee voted, even IF
> > s/he voted
>
> Other than the fact that the person just came out of the polling
> place.
>
> >3) generally, they don't even ask the question that the pollee voted for
> > EACH SPECIFIC OFFICE OR ISSUE that is a subject of the poll.
> > Heck, I've seen an AP poll form that didn't even have a means of
> > noting that. (IOW, voting for a Presidential candidate but leaving a
> > down-ticket office or measure blank).
> >
>
> Is this English?
>
>
> >>Anyways, here is another poll that shows Doctoral level likely voters
> >>leaned heavily Kerry:
> >>
> >>http://www.pewtrusts.com/pdf/PRC_lateOct04_election_poll.pdf
> >
> >You LYING SACK OF ****.
> >
> >Aside from the points above, this poll DOES NOT EVEN DISTINGUISH
> >between
> >
> >a) those with postgraduate studies without postgraduate degrees of any
kind
> >versus
> >b) those with Master's Degrees
> >versus
> >c) those with Master's Degrees and additional postgrad study without
Doctorates
> >versus
> >d) those who ACTUALLY ACHIEVED DOCTORATE DEGREES.
> >
> >And yet you claim that it shows that "Doctoral level likely voters
> >leaned heavily Kerry".
> >
> >You LYING SACK OF ****!
> >
> >In fact, the clearest result of this study was that those idiots who
DIDN'T
> >EVEN GRADUATE HIGH SCHOOL leaned heavily Kerry (55-38%).
> >
>
>
> Settle down Leroy, you're going to have a stroke! I looked at the
> table quickly and normally "post graduate" means people beyond their
> master's degree. In this case it may mean anyone beyond a
> baccalaureate.
>
> For Post Grad the breakdown was 41% Bush and 54% Kerry.
>
> By the way, why does it bug you that as people reach the upper
> echelons of education that they tend to vote democrat more often?
>
>

if true, it doesn't bother me at all

for a # of reasons. first of all, postgrads tend to be more pollyanna and
divorced from real society. see: academia and the Ivory Tower. they also
tend to be much less likely to have families and especially CHILDREN than
other people. women with children, for example, overwhelmingly supported
bush. single women and women without kids voted for kerry more than the
women with children.

in short, they tend to be more self-centered, and more divorced from the
reality of how america works - academics. the inability of many academics
to even FUNCTION outside academia is well documented, even IN ACADEMIA,
often in a joking sort of way,

i think that, for example, if you norm'ed for the children aspect, you would
find that the postgrad bush/kerry margin diminsished significantly. also,
it's well known that people in "real world fields" vs. the "social sciences"
tend to vote repub more often

i would way rather be part of the party that tends to attract family
oriented people, and the salt of the earth, and people who go to church
weekly, than the party that tends to attract the non-family people, atheists
(no offense, david) and felons

whit

> --
> The pain is pretty overwhelming, prolly
> comparable only to childbirth or kidney stones.
> --Brian L.

Proton Soup
November 29th 04, 06:37 AM
On Mon, 29 Nov 2004 06:20:50 GMT, Usenet Posting
> wrote:

>On Mon, 29 Nov 2004 05:01:02 GMT, Lucas Buck
> wrote:
>
>
>>Now, "it is clear that the PhDs lean heavily democrat" is a simple statement
>>of fact. Exit polling is TOTALLY irrelevant to this claim. To support such a
>>claim, you'd just need to cross-reference voter registrations to their
>>postgraduate degrees. Do you have such data or don't you? I bet you
>>don't have a CLUE about the actual facts of this matter and are just talking
>>out your infected ass.
>>
>
>Ok, adjust your tin-hat leroy. There are these things called polls
>and they are done using a science called statistics. Survey
>methodology and statistics have a long and well-tested history of
>being shown to be able to accurately represent large groups of people.
>In fact, it is why a poll of roughly 1,000 people can effectively
>measure the opinion of a nation of 300 million. In fact, the science
>is so reliable that you can even make statements based on it!
>
>I know you don't believe this and I know your tin hat is reflecting
>anything that might be reasonable.

Ja, everything looks good on paper, but that's because in your
textbook homework assignments, all the problems are idealized.

Once you factor in conditional probabilities, it all goes to ****.
You know, Reverend Bayes and all that.

For instance, what is the accuracy of my exit poll given that I only
took data in the morning, yet morning voters tend to favor candidate A
instead of B. Or, what if voters for candidate B are less likely to
submit to exit polling that voters for candidate A?

And on and on and on. Pollsters know about this, and regularly
introduce fudge factors to skew the data to what they think is
correct, but it's just a guess. Reality says that what you get is not
a random sampling of the data, it's a sample skewed by the inherent
bias of the sampling method.

-----------
Proton Soup

"Thanks for noticing that I didn't actually say anything." - Mike Lane

John M. Williams
November 29th 04, 06:54 AM
Usenet Posting > wrote:
>
>Settle down Leroy, you're going to have a stroke! I looked at the
>table quickly and normally "post graduate" means people beyond their
>master's degree.

That's bull****. What's more, you know it's bull****.

>In this case it may mean anyone beyond a
>baccalaureate.

You know damn well that's what it means.

Your desperation is taking your credibility to a new low.

David Cohen
November 29th 04, 07:12 AM
"Idie" > wrote
>
> i would way rather be part of the party that tends to attract family
> oriented people, and the salt of the earth, and people who go to church
> weekly, than the party that tends to attract the non-family people,
> atheists
> (no offense, david) and felons

JEWISH atheist: a very small, unusual, group of non-stereotypic atheists.
Not at all like those OTHER atheists. They're nuts!

David

Gossamer
November 29th 04, 04:06 PM
"David Cohen" > wrote in message
ink.net...
>
> "Idie" > wrote
> >
> > i would way rather be part of the party that tends to attract family
> > oriented people, and the salt of the earth, and people who go to church
> > weekly, than the party that tends to attract the non-family people,
> > atheists
> > (no offense, david) and felons
>
> JEWISH atheist: a very small, unusual, group of non-stereotypic atheists.
> Not at all like those OTHER atheists. They're nuts!
>
> David
>
>

the republican party is a big tent. we like jewish atheists who vote
republican

fwiw, note that the repub convention had several repubs as speakers who were
pro-choice

the dem convention certainly didn't DARE to have any dem speakers who were
pro-life

because, despite all this whinging about the repub party being shills for
the Religious Right, we're a bigger tent. the dems wouldn't DARE upset
NARAL/NOW lobby

whit

Lucas Buck
November 30th 04, 08:59 PM
On Mon, 29 Nov 2004 06:16:21 GMT, Usenet Posting >
wrote:

>On Mon, 29 Nov 2004 05:01:05 GMT, Lucas Buck
> wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 28 Nov 2004 19:50:55 GMT, Usenet Posting >
>>wrote:
>>
>>>On Fri, 26 Nov 2004 00:29:43 -0500, John M. Williams
> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Usenet Posting > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> John M. Williams > wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>Usenet Posting > wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Lucas Buck > wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Usenet Posting > wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> (John WIlliams) wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Considering how you view things this could be the start of a brain
>>>>>>>>>>drain from the US => Canada.
>>>>>>>>>>
(Elzinator) wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> I don't know if anyone has already mentioned it here, but apparently
>>>>>>>>>>> Canada is expecting (and inviting) an exodus of disenchanted (and
>>>>>>>>>>> disillusioned) Americans into their country. Enough to give seminars
>>>>>>>>>>> in several Am. cities on how to immigrate into Canada.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I have heard some serious considerations of leaving the US around
>>>>>>>>>>> here; the disenchantment is more a reality than just a media
>>>>>>>>>>> hyperbole.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> A group here is considering Australia (diving nerds), a couple already
>>>>>>>>>>> applied to universities in Vancouver.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Interesting :)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>One can argue various demographics but it is clear that the PhDs lean
>>>>>>>>>heavily democrat.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Your source for this is... what?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>I doubt that even all Doctorates lean "heavily Democrat", and when you look
>>>>>>>>specifically at Ph.D.s (vs Ed.D.s and JDs), they probably are majority
>>>>>>>>Republican.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Dude, just read the widely publicized exit polls for crissakes. Why
>>>>>>>do you spout such stupidity without even a cursory understanding of
>>>>>>>how to do the least bit of research?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>It is tiresome...the stupid have that advantage, their ignorance is a
>>>>>>>sheer wall to climb.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Oh, eat **** and die, Mikey. The results of the elections show how
>>>>>>flawed your "widely publicized exit polls" were. Only a self-deluded
>>>>>>dip**** like you would put any stock in that. It was obvious from the
>>>>>>beginning that the exit polls were driven by the hyperactivity of the
>>>>>>anti-Bush voters, who were anxious to give pollsters their point of
>>>>>>view. The validity of a poll is determined by who is willing to
>>>>>>respond.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>ANY poll is determined by who is willing to respond. Exit polls have
>>>>>the virtue of being immediately post-facto and thus are generally more
>>>>>reliable than other polls. Every time a state was called in this
>>>>>election a part of that decision used exit polls and was why you'd
>>>>>sometimes see a tiny % of the actual vote counted but the state called
>>>>>for a candidate.
>>>>>
>>>>>The initial reporting of the exit polls before the voting had even
>>>>>ended was a "mistake" and do not impugn the entire validity of exit
>>>>>polling (which has a long a reasonably good history of predicting
>>>>>winners).
>>>>>
>>>>>>Now, as to political parties and education level, a Pew Research
>>>>>>Center study showed Democrats with a *slight* advantage over
>>>>>>Republicans in those with postgraduate studies: 33% to 31%.
>>>>>>http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?PageID=750
>>>>>
>>>>>Who cares? I'm talking about people who actually voted. Pull your
>>>>>head out of your ass (or maybe you want to share Buck's tin hat).
>>>>
>>>>You sure are a bitter little guy, Mikey. I note that you snipped the
>>>>rest of my post because it addressed actual registered voters and
>>>>caused you even greater cognitive dissonance. But that's OK. I try
>>>>to accomodate your psychopathologies.
>>>>
>>>
>>>{eye roll}
>>>
>>>Again, we're talking about exit polls that cover people who actually
>>>voted.
>>
>>Again, you're full of ****.
>>
>>Exit polls (IF conducted properly, and the data from this past election
>>do not support that) cover people who CLAIM to have voted in a
>>given election.
>>
>
>Your statement about exit polls not being conducted properly is false.
>Exit polls are taken as people are leaving the polling place and as
>such are as close as you are ever going to get, in a survey, to actual
>voters and who they voted for.

More Mikey lies.

they do NOT attempt to even check against the sign-in sheets, which would
at least weed out the utter non-voters. That info is public and available to
pollsters in real time.

>>1) they make NO attempt to verify that the pollee actually voted, nor
>> does ANY major exit poll cross-check against the Statement of the Vote
>> records after the fact and discard those responses from non-voters
>
>Yes, Leroy, this is obvious.
>
>>2) they have no way of verifying HOW the pollee voted, even IF
>> s/he voted
>
>Other than the fact that the person just came out of the polling
>place.
>
>>3) generally, they don't even ask the question that the pollee voted for
>> EACH SPECIFIC OFFICE OR ISSUE that is a subject of the poll.
>> Heck, I've seen an AP poll form that didn't even have a means of
>> noting that. (IOW, voting for a Presidential candidate but leaving a
>> down-ticket office or measure blank).
>>
>
>Is this English?

Perhaps you should have an adult explain it to you.


>>>Anyways, here is another poll that shows Doctoral level likely voters
>>>leaned heavily Kerry:
>>>
>>>http://www.pewtrusts.com/pdf/PRC_lateOct04_election_poll.pdf
>>
>>You LYING SACK OF ****.
>>
>>Aside from the points above, this poll DOES NOT EVEN DISTINGUISH
>>between
>>
>>a) those with postgraduate studies without postgraduate degrees of any kind
>>versus
>>b) those with Master's Degrees
>>versus
>>c) those with Master's Degrees and additional postgrad study without Doctorates
>>versus
>>d) those who ACTUALLY ACHIEVED DOCTORATE DEGREES.
>>
>>And yet you claim that it shows that "Doctoral level likely voters
>>leaned heavily Kerry".
>>
>>You LYING SACK OF ****!
>>
>>In fact, the clearest result of this study was that those idiots who DIDN'T
>>EVEN GRADUATE HIGH SCHOOL leaned heavily Kerry (55-38%).
>
>
>Settle down Leroy, you're going to have a stroke! I looked at the
>table quickly and normally "post graduate" means people beyond their
>master's degree.

You lying sack of ****.

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=postgraduate
postgraduate

\Post*grad"u*ate\, a. [Pref. post- + graduate.] Of, pertaining to, or
designating, the studies pursued after graduation, esp., after receiving the
bachelor's degree at a college; graduate. -- n. A student who pursues such
studies.


>By the way, why does it bug you that as people reach the upper
>echelons of education that (sic) they tend to vote democrat more often?

You claim is false, you lying sack of ****.

By the way, why does it bug you that as people fail to achieve
even GRADE SCHOOL graduation, they tend to vote Democrat more often?

Lucas Buck
November 30th 04, 08:59 PM
On Mon, 29 Nov 2004 06:20:50 GMT, Usenet Posting >
wrote:

>On Mon, 29 Nov 2004 05:01:02 GMT, Lucas Buck
> wrote:
>
>
>>Now, "it is clear that the PhDs lean heavily democrat" is a simple statement
>>of fact. Exit polling is TOTALLY irrelevant to this claim. To support such a
>>claim, you'd just need to cross-reference voter registrations to their
>>postgraduate degrees. Do you have such data or don't you? I bet you
>>don't have a CLUE about the actual facts of this matter and are just talking
>>out your infected ass.
>>
>
>Ok, adjust your tin-hat leroy. There are these things called polls
>and they are done using a science called statistics. Survey
>methodology and statistics have a long and well-tested history of
>being shown to be able to accurately represent large groups of people.
>In fact, it is why a poll of roughly 1,000 people can effectively
>measure the opinion of a nation of 300 million. In fact, the science
>is so reliable that you can even make statements based on it!

Again, Mikey the Pathological Liar dodges the question.

Let's try again, and see if you can answer the ACTUAL QUESTION:
WHERE is your data that supports your claim that "PhDs (sic) lean
heavily Democrat"??? Do you have any actual supporting data
or not?

John M. Williams
December 1st 04, 04:30 AM
Usenet Posting > wrote:
>
> John M. Williams > wrote:
>>
>>Usenet Posting > wrote:
>>>
>>>Settle down Leroy, you're going to have a stroke! I looked at the
>>>table quickly and normally "post graduate" means people beyond their
>>>master's degree.
>>
>>That's bull****. What's more, you know it's bull****.
>>
>
>No, in higher ed a post grad is generally a person past a master's
>degree.

You're desperate, Mikey. Here is a series of lexical definitions
which establish that fact:

http://www.hyperdictionary.com/dictionary/postgraduate
http://www.wordreference.com/definition/postgraduate
http://www.bartleby.com/61/3/P0470300.html

>>>In this case it may mean anyone beyond a
>>>baccalaureate.
>>
>>You know damn well that's what it means.
>>
>>Your desperation is taking your credibility to a new low.
>
>The way they set up the table makes it look that way but that does not
>change the fact that in higher ed, post graduate usually means past
>the masters.

I just showed you three references to the contrary. Show me one that
supports your definition. If it is defined as such in "higher ed,"
that shouldn't pose too much of a challenge for you.

>Graduate work is your masters and post-grad is your doctorate.
>post-degree can be any work done after your last degree. Sometimes
>people coming back for another BS/BA after their first one are called
>post-bac.

Show me a reference, Mikey.

John M. Williams
December 1st 04, 04:58 AM
Usenet Posting > wrote:
> Lucas Buck > wrote:
>>>
>>>Settle down Leroy, you're going to have a stroke! I looked at the
>>>table quickly and normally "post graduate" means people beyond their
>>>master's degree.
>>
>>You lying sack of ****.
>>
>>http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=postgraduate
>>postgraduate
>>
>>\Post*grad"u*ate\, a. [Pref. post- + graduate.] Of, pertaining to, or
>>designating, the studies pursued after graduation, esp., after receiving the
>>bachelor's degree at a college; graduate. -- n. A student who pursues such
>>studies.
>
>Generally a postgrad is past their masters but it CAN mean both
>masters and doctorate. Postgrad is a pretty ambiguous term.

We're waiting for a reference which complies with your definition,
Mikey. You keep repeating it, but you have not produced any evidence
that anyone agrees with you.

Lucas Buck
December 1st 04, 08:14 AM
On Wed, 01 Dec 2004 05:18:01 GMT, Usenet Posting >
wrote:

>On Tue, 30 Nov 2004 20:59:48 GMT, Lucas Buck
> wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 29 Nov 2004 06:20:50 GMT, Usenet Posting >
>>wrote:
>>
>>>On Mon, 29 Nov 2004 05:01:02 GMT, Lucas Buck
> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Now, "it is clear that the PhDs lean heavily democrat" is a simple statement
>>>>of fact. Exit polling is TOTALLY irrelevant to this claim. To support such a
>>>>claim, you'd just need to cross-reference voter registrations to their
>>>>postgraduate degrees. Do you have such data or don't you? I bet you
>>>>don't have a CLUE about the actual facts of this matter and are just talking
>>>>out your infected ass.
>>>>
>>>
>>>Ok, adjust your tin-hat leroy. There are these things called polls
>>>and they are done using a science called statistics. Survey
>>>methodology and statistics have a long and well-tested history of
>>>being shown to be able to accurately represent large groups of people.
>>>In fact, it is why a poll of roughly 1,000 people can effectively
>>>measure the opinion of a nation of 300 million. In fact, the science
>>>is so reliable that you can even make statements based on it!
>>
>>Again, Mikey the Pathological Liar dodges the question.
>>
>>Let's try again, and see if you can answer the ACTUAL QUESTION:
>>WHERE is your data that supports your claim that "PhDs (sic) lean
>>heavily Democrat"??? Do you have any actual supporting data
>>or not?
>
>Oh I suppose you could start with
>
>http://www.ncpa.org/iss/edu/2002/pd011502b.html


Another SURVEY of OPINIONS, not actual data.

>If post-grad is meant to be post baccalaureate then that figure is
>only an indicator.

Not even THAT. This is a survey of Professors and Administrators (and
only Ivy League at that, and even a small sample size among that universe),
which is hardly the Ph.D.-specific audience you claimed originally.

You don't have to be a Ph.D. to carry the title Professor.

And I'll bet only a MINORITY of those Administrators have Ph.D.s

Let's try again:

Again, Mikey the Pathological Liar dodges the question.

Let's try again, and see if you can answer the ACTUAL QUESTION:
WHERE is your data that supports your claim that "PhDs (sic) lean
heavily Democrat"??? Do you have any actual supporting data
or not?

rick++
December 1st 04, 03:56 PM
(Elzinator) wrote in message >...
> I don't know if anyone has already mentioned it here, but apparently
> Canada is expecting (and inviting) an exodus of disenchanted (and
> disillusioned) Americans into their country. Enough to give seminars
> in several Am. cities on how to immigrate into Canada.

You can just read the web page. Theres even a Skilled Worker quiz that tells
whether you likely get a visa or not. Brush up on your Francias.

John HUDSON
December 1st 04, 05:17 PM
On 1 Dec 2004 07:56:04 -0800, (rick++) wrote:

(Elzinator) wrote in message >...
>> I don't know if anyone has already mentioned it here, but apparently
>> Canada is expecting (and inviting) an exodus of disenchanted (and
>> disillusioned) Americans into their country. Enough to give seminars
>> in several Am. cities on how to immigrate into Canada.
>
>You can just read the web page. Theres even a Skilled Worker quiz that tells
>whether you likely get a visa or not. Brush up on your Francias.

That's not a very good example of the language froglais!! ;o)

Lucas Buck
December 1st 04, 08:57 PM
On Wed, 01 Dec 2004 05:18:01 GMT, Usenet Posting >
wrote:

>On Tue, 30 Nov 2004 20:59:48 GMT, Lucas Buck
> wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 29 Nov 2004 06:20:50 GMT, Usenet Posting >
>>wrote:
>>
>>>On Mon, 29 Nov 2004 05:01:02 GMT, Lucas Buck
> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Now, "it is clear that the PhDs lean heavily democrat" is a simple statement
>>>>of fact. Exit polling is TOTALLY irrelevant to this claim. To support such a
>>>>claim, you'd just need to cross-reference voter registrations to their
>>>>postgraduate degrees. Do you have such data or don't you? I bet you
>>>>don't have a CLUE about the actual facts of this matter and are just talking
>>>>out your infected ass.
>>>>
>>>
>>>Ok, adjust your tin-hat leroy. There are these things called polls
>>>and they are done using a science called statistics. Survey
>>>methodology and statistics have a long and well-tested history of
>>>being shown to be able to accurately represent large groups of people.
>>>In fact, it is why a poll of roughly 1,000 people can effectively
>>>measure the opinion of a nation of 300 million. In fact, the science
>>>is so reliable that you can even make statements based on it!
>>
>>Again, Mikey the Pathological Liar dodges the question.
>>
>>Let's try again, and see if you can answer the ACTUAL QUESTION:
>>WHERE is your data that supports your claim that "PhDs (sic) lean
>>heavily Democrat"??? Do you have any actual supporting data
>>or not?
>
>Oh I suppose you could start with
>
>http://www.ncpa.org/iss/edu/2002/pd011502b.html


Another SURVEY of OPINIONS, not actual data.

>If post-grad is meant to be post baccalaureate then that figure is
>only an indicator.

Not even THAT. This is a survey of Professors and Administrators (and
only Ivy League at that, and even a small sample size among that universe),
which is hardly the Ph.D.-specific audience you claimed originally.

You don't have to be a Ph.D. to carry the title Professor.

And I'll bet only a MINORITY of those Administrators have Ph.D.s

Let's try again:

Again, Mikey the Pathological Liar dodges the question.

Let's try again, and see if you can answer the ACTUAL QUESTION:
WHERE is your data that supports your claim that "PhDs (sic) lean
heavily Democrat"??? Do you have any actual supporting data
or not?

John M. Williams
December 2nd 04, 04:11 AM
Usenet Posting > wrote:

>On Tue, 30 Nov 2004 23:30:22 -0500, John M. Williams
> wrote:
>
>>Usenet Posting > wrote:
>>>
>>> John M. Williams > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>Usenet Posting > wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>Settle down Leroy, you're going to have a stroke! I looked at the
>>>>>table quickly and normally "post graduate" means people beyond their
>>>>>master's degree.
>>>>
>>>>That's bull****. What's more, you know it's bull****.
>>>>
>>>
>>>No, in higher ed a post grad is generally a person past a master's
>>>degree.
>>
>>You're desperate, Mikey. Here is a series of lexical definitions
>>which establish that fact:
>>
>>http://www.hyperdictionary.com/dictionary/postgraduate
>>http://www.wordreference.com/definition/postgraduate
>>http://www.bartleby.com/61/3/P0470300.html
>>
>>>>>In this case it may mean anyone beyond a
>>>>>baccalaureate.
>>>>
>>>>You know damn well that's what it means.
>>>>
>>>>Your desperation is taking your credibility to a new low.
>>>
>>>The way they set up the table makes it look that way but that does not
>>>change the fact that in higher ed, post graduate usually means past
>>>the masters.
>>
>>I just showed you three references to the contrary. Show me one that
>>supports your definition. If it is defined as such in "higher ed,"
>>that shouldn't pose too much of a challenge for you.
>>
>>>Graduate work is your masters and post-grad is your doctorate.
>>>post-degree can be any work done after your last degree. Sometimes
>>>people coming back for another BS/BA after their first one are called
>>>post-bac.
>>
>>Show me a reference, Mikey.
>
>From www.m-w.com
>
>Main Entry: 2graduate
>Function: adjective
>1 : holding an academic degree or diploma
>2 : of, relating to, or engaged in studies beyond the first or
>bachelor's degree <graduate school> <a graduate student>
>
>
>Main Entry: post-
>Function: prefix
>Etymology: Middle English, from Latin, from post; akin to Lithuanian
>pas at, Greek apo away from -- more at OF
>1 a : after : subsequent : later <postdate> b : behind : posterior :
>following after <postlude> <postconsonantal>
>2 a : subsequent to : later than <postoperative> b : posterior to
><postorbital>
>
>Put em together jonnieboy.
>
>You will note that none of your references specifically denote even
>the "postgraduate" form to be specifically Master's related study. It
>is a fairly ambiguous word in either form and CAN mean either graduate
>education or doctoral education.

Which is exactly what I have been saying, and that "postgraduate
studies" do not imply a doctoral degree, or for that matter, the
attainment of any degree -- only studies after the attainment of a
baccalaureate.

You made it equivalent to a doctoral degree. You were wrong. Get
over it.

Lucas Buck
December 2nd 04, 11:22 AM
On Wed, 01 Dec 2004 21:24:56 GMT, Usenet Posting >
wrote:

>On Wed, 01 Dec 2004 00:14:07 -0800, Lucas Buck
> wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 01 Dec 2004 05:18:01 GMT, Usenet Posting >
>>wrote:
>>
>>>On Tue, 30 Nov 2004 20:59:48 GMT, Lucas Buck
> wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Mon, 29 Nov 2004 06:20:50 GMT, Usenet Posting >
>>>>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On Mon, 29 Nov 2004 05:01:02 GMT, Lucas Buck
> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>Now, "it is clear that the PhDs lean heavily democrat" is a simple statement
>>>>>>of fact. Exit polling is TOTALLY irrelevant to this claim. To support such a
>>>>>>claim, you'd just need to cross-reference voter registrations to their
>>>>>>postgraduate degrees. Do you have such data or don't you? I bet you
>>>>>>don't have a CLUE about the actual facts of this matter and are just talking
>>>>>>out your infected ass.
>>>>>
>>>>>Ok, adjust your tin-hat leroy. There are these things called polls
>>>>>and they are done using a science called statistics. Survey
>>>>>methodology and statistics have a long and well-tested history of
>>>>>being shown to be able to accurately represent large groups of people.
>>>>>In fact, it is why a poll of roughly 1,000 people can effectively
>>>>>measure the opinion of a nation of 300 million. In fact, the science
>>>>>is so reliable that you can even make statements based on it!
>>>>
>>>>Again, Mikey the Pathological Liar dodges the question.
>>>>
>>>>Let's try again, and see if you can answer the ACTUAL QUESTION:
>>>>WHERE is your data that supports your claim that "PhDs (sic) lean
>>>>heavily Democrat"??? Do you have any actual supporting data
>>>>or not?
>>>
>>>Oh I suppose you could start with
>>>
>>>http://www.ncpa.org/iss/edu/2002/pd011502b.html
>>
>>
>>Another SURVEY of OPINIONS, not actual data.
>>
>
>Why do you keep saying this? The vast majority of information in the
>modern world comes fron survey data.

That sentence is so ridiculous, it deserves to stand on its own.

>There are few situations where
>you will have actual census data that allows you to study the entire
>population based on using their unique ID and doing matches with other
>databases. In fact, in many, if not most cases, this is illegal.
>You'd know this if you had every done much real-world research.

Oh bull****.
Most degrees from US universities are publicly available, and ALL voter
registrations are public data. The ACTUAL DATA are there, you just won't
bother to look at the real data because they will show you to be a liar.

>>>If post-grad is meant to be post baccalaureate then that figure is
>>>only an indicator.
>>
>>Not even THAT. This is a survey of Professors and Administrators (and
>>only Ivy League at that, and even a small sample size among that universe),
>>which is hardly the Ph.D.-specific audience you claimed originally.
>>
>>You don't have to be a Ph.D. to carry the title Professor.
>>
>>And I'll bet only a MINORITY of those Administrators have Ph.D.s
>
>You think Ivy League professors do not overwhelmingly have the title
>of PhD?

That's not what I wrote, is it?

The poll doesn't even say what %age of the pollees were professors and
what %age were administrators -- the latter outnumber the former in most
institutions.

As for Administrators, absolutely. Probably a minority have doctorates,
and many of those would be Ed.D, JD, etc.

Most Ph.D. holders are in industry, not academia.

>>Let's try again:
>>
>>Again, Mikey the Pathological Liar dodges the question.
>>
>>Let's try again, and see if you can answer the ACTUAL QUESTION:
>>WHERE is your data that supports your claim that "PhDs (sic) lean
>>heavily Democrat"??? Do you have any actual supporting data
>>or not?
>
>http://www.ncpa.org/iss/edu/2002/pd011502b.html
>
>If you choose to tighten your tin hat and say survey based data is
>worthless then there is really nothing more worth saying to you.

Right, just keep repeating the same bogus survey that in itself doesn't
even address the problem statement. "Earth to Leroy" indeed.
It doesn't appear that you are capable of ANY real-world research.

--
Luke sbcpark AT earthlink.net
"many dems of the time were so-called yellow dog which
just meant they were actually republicans." Mikey "Usenet Posting" Lane

Lucas Buck
December 2nd 04, 11:22 AM
On Wed, 01 Dec 2004 23:16:34 GMT, Usenet Posting >
wrote:

>On Wed, 01 Dec 2004 21:19:27 GMT, Usenet Posting
> wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 30 Nov 2004 23:30:22 -0500, John M. Williams
> wrote:
>>
>>>Usenet Posting > wrote:
>>>>
>>>> John M. Williams > wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>Usenet Posting > wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Settle down Leroy, you're going to have a stroke! I looked at the
>>>>>>table quickly and normally "post graduate" means people beyond their
>>>>>>master's degree.
>>>>>
>>>>>That's bull****. What's more, you know it's bull****.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>No, in higher ed a post grad is generally a person past a master's
>>>>degree.
>>>
>>>You're desperate, Mikey. Here is a series of lexical definitions
>>>which establish that fact:
>>>
>>>http://www.hyperdictionary.com/dictionary/postgraduate
>>>http://www.wordreference.com/definition/postgraduate
>>>http://www.bartleby.com/61/3/P0470300.html
>>>
>>>>>>In this case it may mean anyone beyond a
>>>>>>baccalaureate.
>>>>>
>>>>>You know damn well that's what it means.
>>>>>
>>>>>Your desperation is taking your credibility to a new low.
>>>>
>>>>The way they set up the table makes it look that way but that does not
>>>>change the fact that in higher ed, post graduate usually means past
>>>>the masters.
>>>
>>>I just showed you three references to the contrary. Show me one that
>>>supports your definition. If it is defined as such in "higher ed,"
>>>that shouldn't pose too much of a challenge for you.
>>>
>>>>Graduate work is your masters and post-grad is your doctorate.
>>>>post-degree can be any work done after your last degree. Sometimes
>>>>people coming back for another BS/BA after their first one are called
>>>>post-bac.
>>>
>>>Show me a reference, Mikey.
>>
>>From www.m-w.com
>>
>>Main Entry: 2graduate
>>Function: adjective
>>1 : holding an academic degree or diploma
>>2 : of, relating to, or engaged in studies beyond the first or
>>bachelor's degree <graduate school> <a graduate student>
>>
>>
>>Main Entry: post-
>>Function: prefix
>>Etymology: Middle English, from Latin, from post; akin to Lithuanian
>>pas at, Greek apo away from -- more at OF
>>1 a : after : subsequent : later <postdate> b : behind : posterior :
>>following after <postlude> <postconsonantal>
>>2 a : subsequent to : later than <postoperative> b : posterior to
>><postorbital>
>>
>>Put em together jonnieboy.
>>
>>You will note that none of your references specifically denote even
>>the "postgraduate" form to be specifically Master's related study. It
>>is a fairly ambiguous word in either form and CAN mean either graduate
>>education or doctoral education.
>
>Just a few links where post-grad is used synonymously with doctoral
>level.
>
>http://www.classesusa.com/featuredschools/programs/featured_postgrad.cfm
>http://www.egs.edu/main/phdplanofstudies.html
>...

Apparently, Mikey failed basic syllogistic logic.
A implies B does NOT necessarily mean B implies A.

Nobody is disputing the idea that doctorate degrees are postgraduate degrees.
It's the CONVERSE (your idea that all postgraduate work => holding a doctorate
degree), which is of course bogus, and none of your links refutes THAT.

Tua Mater
December 5th 04, 06:03 AM
Usenet Posting > wrote in message
...
> On Wed, 01 Dec 2004 23:11:48 -0500, John M. Williams
> > wrote:
>
> >Usenet Posting > wrote:
> >
> >>On Tue, 30 Nov 2004 23:30:22 -0500, John M. Williams
> > wrote:
> >>
> >>>Usenet Posting > wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> John M. Williams > wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Usenet Posting > wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>Settle down Leroy, you're going to have a stroke! I looked at the
> >>>>>>table quickly and normally "post graduate" means people beyond their
> >>>>>>master's degree.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>That's bull****. What's more, you know it's bull****.
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>No, in higher ed a post grad is generally a person past a master's
> >>>>degree.
> >>>
> >>>You're desperate, Mikey. Here is a series of lexical definitions
> >>>which establish that fact:
> >>>
> >>>http://www.hyperdictionary.com/dictionary/postgraduate
> >>>http://www.wordreference.com/definition/postgraduate
> >>>http://www.bartleby.com/61/3/P0470300.html
> >>>
> >>>>>>In this case it may mean anyone beyond a
> >>>>>>baccalaureate.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>You know damn well that's what it means.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Your desperation is taking your credibility to a new low.
> >>>>
> >>>>The way they set up the table makes it look that way but that does not
> >>>>change the fact that in higher ed, post graduate usually means past
> >>>>the masters.
> >>>
> >>>I just showed you three references to the contrary. Show me one that
> >>>supports your definition. If it is defined as such in "higher ed,"
> >>>that shouldn't pose too much of a challenge for you.
> >>>
> >>>>Graduate work is your masters and post-grad is your doctorate.
> >>>>post-degree can be any work done after your last degree. Sometimes
> >>>>people coming back for another BS/BA after their first one are called
> >>>>post-bac.
> >>>
> >>>Show me a reference, Mikey.
> >>
> >>From www.m-w.com
> >>
> >>Main Entry: 2graduate
> >>Function: adjective
> >>1 : holding an academic degree or diploma
> >>2 : of, relating to, or engaged in studies beyond the first or
> >>bachelor's degree <graduate school> <a graduate student>
> >>
> >>
> >>Main Entry: post-
> >>Function: prefix
> >>Etymology: Middle English, from Latin, from post; akin to Lithuanian
> >>pas at, Greek apo away from -- more at OF
> >>1 a : after : subsequent : later <postdate> b : behind : posterior :
> >>following after <postlude> <postconsonantal>
> >>2 a : subsequent to : later than <postoperative> b : posterior to
> >><postorbital>
> >>
> >>Put em together jonnieboy.
> >>
> >>You will note that none of your references specifically denote even
> >>the "postgraduate" form to be specifically Master's related study. It
> >>is a fairly ambiguous word in either form and CAN mean either graduate
> >>education or doctoral education.
> >
> >Which is exactly what I have been saying, and that "postgraduate
> >studies" do not imply a doctoral degree, or for that matter, the
> >attainment of any degree -- only studies after the attainment of a
> >baccalaureate.
> >
> >You made it equivalent to a doctoral degree. You were wrong. Get
> >over it.
>
> Heh, well it should be! Especially the post-grad form. Many times
> have I seen the progression as undergrad, grad, post-grad and
> post-doctoral. However, since the CNN list goes right from
> baccalaureate to postgrad is is clear, upon reflection, they probably
> did not specifically mean PhD students but rather master's and beyond.
>

translation: I was wrong

hth

whit

>
> --
> The pain is pretty overwhelming, prolly
> comparable only to childbirth or kidney stones.
> --Brian L.

Tua Mater
December 5th 04, 08:56 PM
Usenet Posting > wrote in message
...
> On Sun, 05 Dec 2004 06:03:10 GMT, "Tua Mater" >
> wrote:
>
>
> >translation: I was wrong
> >
> >hth
> >
> >whit
>
> On the specific issue of what the CNN exit poll showed on education
> level, probably.

your statement was not supported by data, mike

you drew a FALSE conclusion based on your misunderstanding of a term

screw the probably stuff

for pete's sake, it'snot a big deal unless you make it so

whit





I think their "progression" on how they rank
> education level sucks. And I say "probably" because it may have been
> explained to the respondents that "college graduate" means bachelor's
> and master's and "postgrad" means doctoral level. That would not be
> technically wrong.
>
> This does go back to my issues with their being hardly any
> documentation for how these exit polls are conducted.
>
> If the info is out there it is not easy to find. This site has no
> detailed info:
>
> http://www.exit-poll.net/
>
>
> --
> The pain is pretty overwhelming, prolly
> comparable only to childbirth or kidney stones.
> --Brian L.

Tua Mater
December 6th 04, 12:23 AM
Usenet Posting > wrote in message
...
> On Sun, 05 Dec 2004 20:56:54 GMT, "Tua Mater" >
> wrote:
>
> >
> >Usenet Posting > wrote in message
> ...
> >> On Sun, 05 Dec 2004 06:03:10 GMT, "Tua Mater" >
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> >translation: I was wrong
> >> >
> >> >hth
> >> >
> >> >whit
> >>
> >> On the specific issue of what the CNN exit poll showed on education
> >> level, probably.
> >
> >your statement was not supported by data, mike
> >
>
> My point is that is it hard to make ANY definitive statement about the
> data. Had I read it more carefully I would have noticed how poorly
> the levels were constructed.
>
> >you drew a FALSE conclusion based on your misunderstanding of a term
> >
>
> Incorrect. My understanding of the term is perfectly adequate. It is
> simply a matter of the word being poorly defined. To draw a FALSE
> conclusion there must be an alternate TRUE conclusion to be drawn. I
> do not believe that is true in this case and in the absence of
> detailed description of how the poll was conducted there is no
> definitive true statement. It is entirely possible that respondents
> were instructed that college graduate covered the bachelor's and
> master's level and postgrad was for people doctoral or post doctoral.
>
> I made an unsupportable assertion but one that is not demonstrably
> false. There is a difference.
>
> >screw the probably stuff
> >
> >for pete's sake, it'snot a big deal unless you make it so
> >
>
> Nor it is a big deal if one is not groping for a "gotcha".
>

evasion and wanking noted. not like i expected anything less.

:l

whit

> >whit
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > I think their "progression" on how they rank
> >> education level sucks. And I say "probably" because it may have been
> >> explained to the respondents that "college graduate" means bachelor's
> >> and master's and "postgrad" means doctoral level. That would not be
> >> technically wrong.
> >>
> >> This does go back to my issues with their being hardly any
> >> documentation for how these exit polls are conducted.
> >>
> >> If the info is out there it is not easy to find. This site has no
> >> detailed info:
> >>
> >> http://www.exit-poll.net/
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> The pain is pretty overwhelming, prolly
> >> comparable only to childbirth or kidney stones.
> >> --Brian L.
> >
>
> --
> The pain is pretty overwhelming, prolly
> comparable only to childbirth or kidney stones.
> --Brian L.