I’m still somewhat amused by the way people tend to gravitate towards the school someone attended or the grades earned there when talking about politicians. If school is but the earliest preparation for the real tests that lie ahead, why so much emphasis, particularly from liberals? Granted, it can be a very formative process and one that I see as crucial in many ways to personal and professional development (over and over again you see successful results).
But still, what’s this nonsense about castigating Palin for attending Northern Idaho and Idaho? I’ve seen it posted earlier, but it’s a bit like benching Brett Favre because he went to Southern Miss or Jerry Rice for going to Mississippi Valley State. COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT given their accomplishments afterwards.
Speaking as someone who attended and graduated from a top 10 university in this country and who later attended a state college, if I had to do it over, I’d go state U the whole way. An education is but what you make of it and to which ends you apply it. God gave us all talents. It’s for us to develop them.
I just look at how much I changed from a cluelessly idealistic kid who voted for Al Gore in 2000 to a poster on FreeRepublic at this day and age. Maturity, success, and life happen.
Sure, go over the Columbia years. But Obama’s later dealings interest me far more.
William Ayers, of Weathermen terrorism fame, attended Columbia during the 1980s, earning a PhD. in Education (1989).
Obama is hiding his radical associations.