Barf:
Rumsfeld’s experience will assist the Hoover Institution’s research into terrorism, said institute director John Raisian.
“I have asked Don to join the distinguished group of scholars that will pursue new insights on the direction of thinking that the United States might consider going forward,” said Raisian.
This is the most perfect example of why I’m not sorry not to be in my former biz. Any institution that willingly associates itself with the creator of “how many vases can there be” and “unknown unknowns” should have its accreditation revoked. Not that I should talk, I know lots of “good” and “serious” and “scholarly” schools do this, but still. He’s going to do “research” because he’s got so much “experience.” With failure? Lying? Murder? Is that what “scholarship” is about these days?
Academics everywhere should hang their heads in shame. This is a new low. Even for the leeches/subs for the uberwealthy calling themselves “universities.”









Front page
Happens in every walk of life, it seems
When the Red Sox acquired “B.K.” Kim, I heard pundits say it was great because he had “big game experience.” The fact that he famously melted down in big games didn’t matter. WTF
is wrong with people?
was Kim responsible for the deaths of a million iraqis?
and the destruction of a nation’s cultural heritage? war crimes, bombing deaths, torture?
then i hardly think it’s the ’same thing,’ and baseball will survive some bad draft picks and wasted signing bonuses.
although i guess the Incompetence is Failing Up syndrome has infected other walks of american life, that’s no surprise when the only people with money or power these days are republicans.
But did Bush literally...
…give the finger to his own constituents? Oh, alright, he did that.
I think it’s useful to see how and where and why illogic and mismanagement and vapid media chatter permeate our culture, so I don’t think it’s gainful to pretend than analogs from more trivial matters are intended to imply equivalent weight.
What's the Palo Alto draw?
Why do all these losers end up at Hoover/Stanford? I think the lure (for the school) of bringing a ’name’ on campus outweighs the drag on their reputation. And Hoover? What a sad, sad excuse for a think tank.
Er, money and power?
It’s a Conservative
think tank, so Rummy is well paid, and listened to by teh Serious
. What’s not to like?
We. Are. Going. To. Die. We must restore hope in the world. We must bring forth a new way of living that can sustain the world. Or else it is not just us who will die but everyone. What have we got to lose? Go forth and Fight!—Xan
And at the Manhattan Institute...
… it’s Miller time:
Actually, these are rather good signs
It’s like…
When the weasels and the feral hogs go into hibernation: You know the winter is coming. (Feral hogs don’t hibernate, IIRC, but you know what I mean.)
If these guys were still on the upswing, Winger
Welfare wouldn’t putting them on the billionaire tit, right?
Of course, they will have to testify before the Truth and Reconcilation commission ….
We. Are. Going. To. Die. We must restore hope in the world. We must bring forth a new way of living that can sustain the world. Or else it is not just us who will die but everyone. What have we got to lose? Go forth and Fight!—Xan
Yeah, Murkin colleges are hot-beds of Librulism, aw-righty!
esad, david whorowitz.
Hoover Institute Not Stanford
Hoover is situated on the campus but has little or no relation to Stanford. Hoover plays on that association and we should not be perpetuating their play.
sorry, gmoke. it's "guilt by association" in this case
and not unfounded. staring at the hoover webpage, the words “STANFORD UNIVERSITY” appear right below the words “Hoover Inst” so it’s pretty clear what they want us all to think, both parties. gosh, look over to the left- they’re reporting that “real” incomes for the poorest have gone up 80% since bush took office. wow, great research there guys, i’m sure that utterly mirrors empirical truth!
like i said, i’m one to talk. but that doesn’t mean i have to like it, anymore than i’m sure you don’t. universities take on these associations for the money. which is what schools have always done, no real problem with that. but when that start sacrificing truth and facts and peer review for that money, they also sacrifice the right to call themselves ’research’ institutions. standards have to apply across the board, or they are so much BS.
hoover is the blatant example. what about stanford’s econ dept? or school of law? or biology department? after a while, it gets harder and harder to trust institutions despite the cloak of “peer review.” i mourn that loss.