It was not that important at the time of the last presidential race and is obviously of less important now, but it is amusing after all the fuss that was made about the difference between Kerry and Bush in college at Yale, Kerry’s grades for Yale were finally released and they are pretty much the same as Bush’s. From The Boston Globe :

During last year’s presidential campaign, John F. Kerry was the candidate often portrayed as intellectual and complex, while George W. Bush was the populist who mangled his sentences.

But newly released records show that Bush and Kerry had a virtually identical grade average at Yale University four decades ago.

In 1999, The New Yorker published a transcript indicating that Bush had received a cumulative score of 77 for his first three years at Yale and a roughly similar average under a non-numerical rating system during his senior year.

Kerry, who graduated two years before Bush, got a cumulative 76 for his four years, according to a transcript that Kerry sent to the Navy when he was applying for officer training school. He received four D’s in his freshman year out of 10 courses, but improved his average in later years.

Bush on the other hand did seem to have the better photographer. Ouch John, you should have burned that one.

Popularity: 4% [?]

I should probably precede any comments that include the word racism with my opinions on the matter. I think racism is stupid. Thinking you know about individuals and and judging them based on their race is just not thinking very hard at all. Also, as a Christian I find the practice of particularly abhorrent. That being said I have noticed that as our society has made progress (though slowly and belatedly to be sure) in a direction away from racism the charge of racist has been thrown out with too little ease and insufficient care in political circles.

I was reminded of this by this articleby David Horowitz in response to quote about Mr Horowitz in Al Franken’s recent book. In the book, Mr Franken refers to Mr Horowitz as a “guest racist” on the show Hannity & Colmes.

The “guest racist” bit, of course, was entirely gratuitous, It was casually interjected as though it referred to an obvious and widely recognized fact. This is typical fairness for Franken.

As it happens I marched in my first civil rights protest in 1948 before Al Franken was born. For more than fifty years I have supported minorities and defended their civil rights in public word and deed, and raised millions of dollars to help inner city minorities whom racism has scarred. In fact there is no single cause - except America’s wars against totalitarian foes - to which I have devoted myself more consistently that than that of racial equality. Not a shred of evidence exists to the contrary. I have written more than a million words on racial and political matters — all of them public record. There is not a single sentence, or phrase, or comment of mine that could be cited to justify Franken’s attack.

I write not in defense of any opinion Horowitz may have expressed on the show. I would not be surprised to find out that his politics are more conservative than mine as I am certain that Franken’s are more liberal. But I was sensitive to the libel in the accusation (not legally libel as it falls in what the courts consider opinion). I have also heard the accusation raised against President Bush recently as if it were a well known fact that he is a racist. Now, I did not vote for Bush in the last election as i have mentioned previously, but I don’t find the accusation consistent with either his appointments nor with the personal stories I hear from those who know him. Can there ever be a day when we can disagree with people without assuming they are stupid or bigoted or unpatriotic?

Popularity: 3% [?]

In today’s New York Times Editorial on Amtrack titled “The Railroad To Nowhere “, the editors argue for pulling the plug on the problem plagued subsidize system. They point out at least one former Amtrak official-turned-critic who agrees. When the New York Times op ed and the president come down on the same side of an argument I find it worth listening.

Popularity: 3% [?]

The president wants to reform social security. Social security needs to be reformed or the system will collapse when the baby boomers retire. That is what I hear being debated in the congress. And that seems to make sense. What is not always explained is that how big the crisis is, or if there is a crisis at all, depends on the productivity of U.S. workers. Recently the productivity per work has been growing. When this happens it pushes off the social security doomsday. With sufficient growth in the U.S. GNP it could push off that date indefinitely. But will it?

What I also don’t hear in the debate is the risk associated with giving me the option of investing some of the money that I now put in social security. Do I think I would be better off if i had that freedom? Yes. Do I think i would have more money for retirement? Sure. But what about the people who are still sending checks to people who send them emails from Nigeria? Giving people the freedom to invest their own money also gives them the freedom to lose their own money. My fear is that the people most in need of social security are also those most at risk.

Popularity: 3% [?]

As a belated item for President’s Day I have created this mousepadwith Lincoln’s picture and a quote from his second inaugural address. Although something with words like “with malice toward none, with charity for all” hardly seems like it should be posted in the Politics category.

Popularity: 3% [?]