The Ivy League Way

“Mr. Hanlon left after an hour and told the little tyrants that he welcomed a "conversation" about their ultimatums. They responded in a statement that conversations—to be clear, talking—will lead to "further physical and emotional violence enacted against us by the racist, classist, sexist, heterosexist, transphobic, xenophobic, and ableist structures at Dartmouth." They added: "Our bodies are already on the line, in danger, and under attack."

Source: http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303987004579479501134392562?mg=reno64-wsj&url=http%3A%2F%2Fonline.wsj.com%2Farticle%2FSB10001424052702303987004579479501134392562.html

Some clarity or explanation may be required if you are not familiar with the above subject matter.

Mr. Hanlon is Phil Hanlon, president of Dartmouth College, Hanover, New Hampshire.

Dartmouth College is a member in good standing of the eight colleges and universities that make up the Ivy League.  The Ivy League does not issue, extend or otherwise fund/finance/enable its student athletes other than the extent to which it assists any student with the combination of skills and potential to gain admission to one of the eight schools and a bona fide financial need.  Anyone wishing to solve the silliness of Division I men’s athletic programs at every other faux student athlete program elsewhere in the United States need only adopt the Ivy League student athlete admissions standards.  Here it is:

 

Ivy League schools share a tradition of academic excellence and broad-based, successful NCAA Division I athletics. The Ivy League annually finishes among the top Division I athletics conferences in national competitive rankings, and Ivy League student-athletes earn the country’s best records in the NCAA Academic Performance Ratings, operating under the Ivy League model of athletics as a significant educational component of the student's undergraduate experience. Ivy student-athletes grow from their athletics experiences to become national and community leaders across the spectrum of 21st century life in business and technology, education and philanthropy, law and government, medicine and research, and professional sports and entertainment.

As you pursue opportunities to study and compete in intercollegiate athletics, please keep in mind the following admissions and financial aid policies common to all Ivy League schools.

 

ADMISSIONS CRITERIA
Ivy League schools base admissions decisions on each candidate’s academic achievements as well as personal strengths and accomplishments, such as athletic achievement, other extracurricular activities and community service.

·         Remember:  To best prepare for admission to an Ivy League school, you should take the most challenging high school classes available to you.

FINANCIAL AID CRITERIA
Ivy League schools provide financial aid to students, including athletes, only on the basis of financial need as determined by each institution’s Financial Aid Office. There are no academic or athletic scholarships in the Ivy League. A coach may assist a prospective student-athlete to obtain an estimated financial aid award, however only the Financial Aid Office has the authority to determine financial aid awards and to notify students officially of their actual or estimated awards.

·         Remember:  A prospective student-athlete who receives an estimated need-based financial aid award is welcome to share it with other Ivy League schools. In some cases Ivy League financial aid offices may reevaluate and adjust an estimated financial aid award based on a written need-based award or estimate from another school.  Ivy League coaches may not discourage a prospect from sharing an award, or from obtaining an estimated award from another Ivy institution.

ADMISSIONS PROCESS
Ivy League coaches are knowledgeable about admissions policies, can be valuable resources in guiding prospects through the application process, and may offer advice and counsel based on feedback from admissions.  Coaches may make a commitment to support a prospective student-athlete’s application. However only the Admissions Office at each Ivy League school has the authority to admit an applicant and to notify an applicant of admission. Only formal correspondence from the Admissions Office should be considered an admissions decision.

ADMISSIONS FEEDBACK
Beginning July 1 prior to a prospective student-athlete’s senior year in high school, an Ivy League coach may ask the Admissions Office to review the prospect’s academic credentials, such as transcripts and standardized test scores, for a preliminary assessment.  The preliminary assessment may then be shared with the prospect. Any further positive assessment by the admissions office requires continued strong academic and personal performance, and will be based on a thorough final evaluation of a completed application, including recommendations regarding both academic achievement and personal qualities.

ADMISSIONS SUPPORT FROM COACHES
Coaches may communicate to the Admissions Office their support for candidates who are athletic recruits. Candidates are encouraged to ask coaches directly about the coach’s level of interest in them as potential athletic recruits, and should be prepared for coaches to inquire about the candidate’s level of interest as well.  Ivy League coaches may indicate the extent to which a candidate’s interest will affect their willingness to support an application, so that candidates can make informed decisions about potential opportunities.  Please note that while a coach may ask whether or not his or her school is a candidate’s top choice, a coach may not require a candidate to refrain from visiting or applying to other schools, or to withdraw applications to other schools, as a condition for support during the admissions process. Candidates should expect Ivy League coaches to be honest and forthcoming during the recruiting process. We ask candidates to be honest with coaches as well.

·         Remember:  A “verbal commitment” by a coach is not an offer of admission, as only the Admissions Office has that authority. An Ivy League coach can only commit his or her support in the admissions process.

APPLYING AND RECEIVING A DECISION
There are various options for submitting an application and receiving an admissions decision. Prospective students who have decided on their first choice may apply to one Ivy League school by November 1 in order to receive notice of Early Decision or Early Action in December.  Students may also apply under the Regular Decision application process to receive a decision in late March.  Under certain circumstances institutions may issue a letter prior to the final admissions decision indicating that a candidate is “likely” to be admitted. This letter means that as long as the applicant sustains the academic and personal record reflected in the completed application, the institution will send a formal admission offer on the appropriate notification date.  Only the Admissions Office can issue a likely letter, and only after receiving a completed application and all required materials. Likely letters may not be issued prior to October 1 of the prospect’s senior year in high school.

 

Good luck with your college search!  If you have further questions or if any problems or issues arise, please contact the Ivy League Office at admissionsinfo@ivyleaguesports.com.  © Council of Ivy League Presidents and The Ivy League. All Rights Reserved.

Source:  http://www.ivyleaguesports.com/information/psa/index

Oh, back to Mr. Hanlon and the above quote from the WSJ.  A bunch of punks, claiming to be students at Dartmouth, invaded Mr. Hanlon's office and issued that statement involving that list of modern day insults to anyone who believes in hard work, discipline and a few of the other fundamentals that we discuss on these pages.  This same group is demanding such important changes as funded sex change operations and more African American study programs and “womyn” issues nonsense.

Whatever Mr. Hanlon does to deal with idiots is his business – he took the job.  But, at least he has a job.  The idiots occupying his office have two choices looking forward:

1.     Continue on this path and join the pathetic ranks of the unemployed for a long, long time (well they possibly could seek “work” in politics/government/media/community organizing), or

2.    Hopefully grow up enough to realize that the world is producing gobs of graduates who are disciplined, work and study hard, and find a way to make peace with all the rest of us sexist, racist, etc. blah – blah – blah (transphobic ????) people who also are employed.

Good luck, Mr. Hanlon. 

For the rest of the NCAA corruption cabal – the answer is alive and well in the Ivy League.  By the way, don't you love the homey "reminders" the Ivy League offers its applicants? 

Lessons learned - and abandoned

A brief history lesson contrasting two view points; one from a successful general; one from a successful politician.

Dwight D. Eisenhower, January 17, 1961:

• Crises there will continue to be. In meeting them, whether foreign or domestic, great or small, there is a recurring temptation to feel that some spectacular and costly action could become the miraculous solution to all current difficulties. A huge increase in newer elements of our defense; development of unrealistic programs to cure every ill in agriculture; a dramatic expansion in basic and applied research -- these and many other possibilities, each possibly promising in itself, may be suggested as the only way to the road we wish to travel.
• But each proposal must be weighed in the light of a broader consideration: the need to maintain balance in and among national programs -- balance between the private and the public economy, balance between cost and hoped for advantage -- balance between the clearly necessary and the comfortably desirable; balance between our essential requirements as a nation and the duties imposed by the nation upon the individual; balance between actions of the moment and the national welfare of the future. Good judgment seeks balance and progress; lack of it eventually finds imbalance and frustration.
• In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.
• The prospect of domination of the nation's scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present and is gravely to be regarded.
• Another factor in maintaining balance involves the element of time. As we peer into society's future, we -- you and I, and our government -- must avoid the impulse to live only for today, plundering, for our own ease and convenience, the precious resources of tomorrow. We cannot mortgage the material assets of our grandchildren without risking the loss also of their political and spiritual heritage. We want democracy to survive for all generations to come, not to become the insolvent phantom of tomorrow.

Lyndon B. Johnson, May 22, 1964:

• The Great Society is a place where every child can find knowledge to enrich his mind and to enlarge his talents. It is a place where leisure is a welcome chance to build and reflect, not a feared cause of boredom and restlessness. It is a place where the city of man serves not only the needs of the body and the demands of commerce but the desire for beauty and the hunger for community. It is a place where man can renew contact with nature. It is a place which honors creation for its own sake and for what is adds to the understanding of the race. It is a place where men are more concerned with the quality of their goals than the quantity of their goods.
• It will be the task of your generation to make the American city a place where future generations will come, not only to live, but to live the good life.
• A second place where we begin to build the Great Society is in our countryside.
• A third place to build the Great Society is in the classrooms of America.  In many places, classrooms are overcrowded and curricula are outdated. Most of our qualified teachers are underpaid and many of our paid teachers are unqualified.
• These are three of the central issues of the Great Society. While our Government has many programs directed at those issues … we are going to assemble the best thought and the broadest knowledge from all over the world to find those answers for America.
• Will you join in the battle to build the Great Society, to prove that our material progress is only the foundation on which we will build a richer life of mind and spirit?

The America of General Eisenhower was one of massive accomplishment – discipline – common goals.  Four years later, the new leader had a vision – unattainable but so grandiose as to refute every principle of the General.  Every principle was abandoned – in a four or five year period and to this day, we chase unattainable visions of comfort and mythology at great cost to our financial condition and devastating cost to our societal community.

One politician – blathering about greatness – forgetting every lesson the man who actually attained it taught us all.

 

 

Amateur College Athletics – Knight Commission Reports – GREED

On July 24, 2012, TheFundamentals released an essay entitled – “Piling on JoePa.”  Please go to:  http://thefundamentalsus.blogspot.com/2012/07/piling-on-joepa.html

Here are excerpts from that essay:

"Over 20 years ago, the Knight commission on intercollegiate athletics started an investigative process that focused on the many documented derelictions in college athletic programs.  Here, taken directly from their own reports, are observations about the state of college athletics in America:

• In 1989, as a decade of highly visible scandals in college sports drew to a close, the trustees of the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation (then known as Knight Foundation) were concerned that athletics abuses threatened the very integrity of higher education.
• Except for the Ivy League, the schools which were involved were the most visible institutions of higher education in the country.
• Can colleges and universities continue their traditional posture of upholding the highest values of personal character and integrity when they themselves display so little of either?
• Public faith in higher education cannot be sustained if college sports are permitted to become a circus, with the institution itself little more than a supporting sideshow."

Our essay went on to say, “The Knight commission issued reports in 1991, 1992 and 1993.  Again, every report, every finding, every recommendation is available at:  http://www.knightcommission.org/  They issued a ten year status report in 2001 and we are offering below just one summary observation from that report –

“We find that the problems of big-time college sports have grown rather than diminished. The most glaring elements of the problems outlined in this report – academic transgressions, a financial arms race, and commercialization – are all evidence of the widening chasm between higher education’s ideals and big-time college sports.”

And finally, “Their most recent report came out in 2010.  Here is part of their summary recommendations:

This report sets forth reforms that are achievable and that, if implemented, will create a foundation upon which future reforms can build.  Our blueprint for restoring educational values and priorities begins with strengthening accountability for intercollegiate athletics in three ways: 

1.  Requiring greater transparency, including better measures to compare athletics spending to academic spending

2.  Rewarding practices that make academic values a priority

3.  Treating college athletes as students first and foremost - not as professionals"

Well, the chickens are coming home to roost.   Money and the love of money (GREED) now dominate amateur athletics and the great joy of student athletes – seeking a good education and a degree – is now lost forever.  We place the blame at the doorstep of two corporations – NIKE and Adidas with Under Armour fighting desperately to lock up a solid share of the ruin.  Of course, they would argue that their greed is nothing other than a different version of the greed coming from other advertisers; other sport team suppliers; ESPN and its owners, Disney;  Comcast; rich, fat cat alumni, both real and adopted and, most high on our list – coaches and amazingly weak college and university presidents, chancellors and regents.  Or simply, "the NCAA."

Take your pick – greedy basterds all.

In government they take the form of bureaucrats and their greedy union master basterds.  Ditto for K- 12 education.  Soon, ditto for health care.

It’s not just the money folks.  After all they could try to do good with it.  It’s the love of money.  It's pure and simple GREED.  Pocket lining greed.

Another Amateur joins Team Obama

In case you don’t know, or in case Janet doesn’t know, she is not on the team to engage in press conferences; wasn’t asked to play right field because of her defensive skills; or, for that matter her very low batting average; and she sure doesn’t have much of a won/loss record.  Janet is on Mr. Obama’s team for one reason only – her strong and unthinking penchant to keep her index finger firmly pressing down on the “ON” button that runs the US bureau of engraving’s money printing machines.

You’d think she would understand that everything she says and does must always keep those big currency printing machines running 24/7.  Forget about her economic skills – they are illusory.  At least now we won’t need to keep hearing APKD style nonsense about the fed chiefs vast study of the 1930’s depression – Ben Bernanke was the perfect foil for a political party that discovered the joy of fiat currency.  We will not be too surprised if David Axelrod’s APKD or one of the other media management outfits comes up with a propaganda rollout to convince us that Janet is the second coming of J. Maynard Keynes.

Here is America’s new team player – the machine candidate – the heroine of the left – the darling of the party in power – the gal with her finger on the “ON” button – your great president’s choice to keep the dough rising, so to speak:

What message do you think Mr. Obama is sending to the world’s financial capitols and the boardrooms of the worlds banking and investment giants with Janet’s addition to his team?

 

Security Interests and Democracy

No, this is not an essay about the NSA, FBI, CIA and their diminution of the US Constitution.  Not directly or entirely.

It is an essay about security interests and democracy and the growing contradiction between stated US of A principles and legal positions versus those of the Jewish State of Israel (JSI).  And, the influence of JSI interests in directing US foreign policy.  And the implications of those policies looking forward.

TheFundamentals encourages an information gathering project by watching a video entitled, “The Gatekeepers,” and reading a new book entitled, “Goliath, Life and Loathing in Greater Israel.”  Here are references to these sources:

http://www.amazon.com/Goliath-Life-Loathing-Greater-Israel/dp/1568586345  Also available at your public library.

http://www.amazon.com/Gatekeepers-Yuval-Diskin/dp/B00DHNB8EO/ref=sr_1_1?s=movies-tv&ie=UTF8&qid=1394971326&sr=1-1&keywords=the+gatekeepers  Also showing on Amazon Video.

Today, we get a bit more specific.  And, a forewarning, what follows is a politically incorrect discussion meaning it does not abide by the JSI talking points which guide AIPAC and the adherence of American media management and money interests closely tying the US of A with the long term defense and all around support of JSI.

Is Israel (JSI) an open democracy?  Can a Christian go there and be treated equally as a Jew?  What about an Arab?  Or a Muslim?  Could an Arab be elected prime minister?  A Christian?

The answer is no.  JSI is founded and governed as a Jewish state.  Just as Pakistan and Iran and Saudi Arabia are Islamic states.  They are not democracies, in any meaningful sense of the word.  They exist to provide a closed political environment for those who adhere to a common set of beliefs or values or history or all of the above.  Or, at least, try to or claim to.

They do not believe that all are created equal – not when it comes to political power.   Which is a very convenient way or saying – we may tolerate you in our country under certain limited circumstances but do not attempt to proselytize your views or seek political power.  You will be stopped.

Now, should that be a concern in American foreign policy which theoretically advances both our national security interests as well as our political belief in democratic rule?  By concern we mean, can we openly support with money, arms, and other forms of economic, military and commercial activities non democratic states?

Our answer is thus – the reason America finds itself wandering from pillar to post among many focused and parochial interests today, in a totally reactive mode, around the world, is our illogical separation from a few very profound founding principles of this country:

·         All people are created equal

·         No state religions can be imposed on the people

·         People have the right to determine their government

Now we are not so naïve as to think some limited involvements and accommodations will be made along the way.  But America’s embrace of JSI in every possible manner is a direct and very visible violation of our both our founding and evolved principles.  The same statement is true of most every other aspect of America’s internally imposed decline – we have moved too far from our principles:

·         Limited government

·         Individual responsibility

·         Limited foreign entanglements

Here too, there will always be a need for some involvements and accommodations.  The true security interests of America are now at risk – not because of external events.  Simply because we have lost our belief and adherence to the very principles on which we came to be.

Europe needs to make its own accommodations with Russia – but both have much larger demographic and security issues with their Islamic neighbors and residents.   In case you have forgotten, Japan needs to make accommodations with China – the Chinese have not forgotten.   Israel is now so far from an accommodation with those who surround it that all that remains is hope.  The Chinese are moving into Africa and into the western hemisphere.  They dominate Asia economically and militarily – it does not take much to anticipate that Africa and Central/South America are next.  American security interests are no longer based in Europe, Russia and the Middle East – they are right here in our backyard and we had better get about making them our number one priority.

John Kerry’s unfortunate remarks about Barack’s disinterest in the Monroe Doctrine will haunt America for many, many years to come.

American foreign policy under both Bushes, both Clintons and the Obama/Kerry team has neither advanced our national security interests nor our democratic beliefs.  Our focus needs to be here at home, implementing the above principles and then in our hemisphere – not scattered inconsistently around the globe in wars we never win and alliances we cannot maintain.   

Chances of common sense prevailing?  Inversely related to the size of the bureaucracies that set all the bad policy discussed above.

 

Leaderless: both Democrats and Republicans

America has two large, ruling political parties as most of us know.

For at least six years, the party out of power (POOP) has been leaderless.  That party has managed to secure control of the House of Representatives and done little with that significant power for the last four years.  It has lap dog followed the party in power (PIP) by behaving or misbehaving depending on your view and begrudgingly or maybe not so by going along with their budgets, their debt increases, their record levels of spending and their various social programs, handouts and special interest arrangements (read:  public money is traded for special interest votes.)  This is not leadership – it is not a directed movement with a described philosophy or governing manner – it is pure treading water hoping for an opportunity.

The party in power (PIP) chose a man who is self described as not being a leader.  He has variously described himself as lazy; as a community organizer; as a “constitutional” professor or some such thing; and as the past winner of two political positions – state senator from Chicago meaning he clicked his heels and did the bidding of the political machine because that is the only way you attain elected positions in Chicago and Illinois and then as US senator from Illinois (ditto.)   That is a very limited resume and it shows – shows more and more each day that he occupies the white house.  He has built no alliances – at home or abroad; dealt with even one major issue he “inherited” or challenged even one special interest that votes for his party’s candidates.   What he has gotten done is, using the techniques of Chicago politics, one piece of legislation that is now deemed his “signature legislation” and it stinks; his own party candidates are running away from it even though they obediently supported it and voted for it.  Mr. Obama does not grasp the concept of national or international power – all he can do is read speeches written by others that sound good but are now ignored by all except the captive American media (we call this group of stooges – the Hollywood media.)  The party in power does not have a leader – it has a mouthpiece with no portfolio – no following – just a bunch of hack politicians who don’t know where to go or what to do unless someone tells them where to be; at what time; and how to vote when they get there.

On the sidelines, mostly, are more of the same; regardless of PIP or POOP.  There are a lot of bit players on the sidelines.  Any one of whom could fill the occupant’s shoes – by which we mean, fill the vacuum with their physical personage.  We don’t see one of them who can fill the decade’s long leadership vacuum that is now American national politics.  We don’t see one of them grasping this fundamental of leadership – getting followers to do that which they don’t want to do but what is needed given the times, the circumstances and the consequences.

We so much wish to be wrong.

There is one simple need in the United States of America today – we need leadership that grasps that leadership is not about what the rights of the followers are but what the responsibilities of the followers are and speaks and leads and executes to that view and secures the acceptance and enthusiasm of the followers in the process.

Anyone can buy votes or give away other people’s money or add so much debt to the nation that our children and grandchildren will never know independence much less freedom.  Their rights will be gone because the only way they would ever have been able to secure those rights is if we, their moms and dads, grandpas and grandmas, aunts and uncles, had fulfilled our responsibilities when it was our time.  We have not.  We demand what we want, today – no one demands that those wants are subordinated to what we must do for those who follow.   Instead we pretend that we are building a better society.

We are leaderless in a changing and challenging America and world. 

 

This Business about Feinstein and the CIA and NSA

September 4, 1957.  Do you remember what happened on that day?

November 19, 1959.  How about on that day?

As you can tell, about two years passed between the two dates.   That is how long it took the Ford Motor Company to introduce its new car – the Edsel and put an end to it.

A little over two years.

Here are two more dates for your consideration:

April 23, 1985.

July 11, 1985.

Can you guess?  Do you know?

Not even three full months between the two dates.

Those dates are the introduction of New Coke and the end of New Coke.

So what do these two business failures and their respective introduction dates and ending dates have to do with Senator Feinstein and the CIA and NSA?

We use them to illustrate both the timing and finality of market decisions versus government decisions.    We particularly wish to emphasize that one word – finality.  When the markets, the open market, the free market, call it what you will sends a message it happens quickly but most important it is decisive.  There is no wishy washy rhetoric, explanation, discussions, excuse making and, most importantly, there is no continuation of bad decisions, bad plans, bad personnel, bad products, bad services.  The market produces finality.

We all know that the CIA and NSA are way off the reservation.  Unless you work there.  Or you run them.  Or you are too terrified to make a change, a real change.  Too political.  Too worried that if you cut back or eliminate and something happens someone will point the finger of responsibility toward you.

There are too many bad bureaucracies now in America – these two are at the top of the heap but they are simply more visible right now.  They need change or flat out termination.

Feinstein claims to have realized it in the last few days which means she simply has not been doing her job – literally asleep on the job.  The market, such as it is in this case, has spoken years ago about these two outfits.  But they continue, they expand, they prevaricate, they violate the law, shred the constitution, become a power above all else.  The market, the people would do just fine without them at least with a much smarter, more focused, more technological spy outfit.  We would do just fine without any NSA.  The NSA and CIA are jokes – led by jokesters.

Feinstein just woke up to it this last week.  If you wish to believe her carefully worded observations.

Solutions:  term limits possibly.  But who knows?  There is a bench full of Feinstein’s waiting for their chance to join the go-along, get-along cabal that is now our federal government.  Government is not a business.  It’s now a club.  A high school club.  So far removed from the people; the market and rational decision making as to be a great accumulation of bad ideas and plans and people and products and services.  This club operates outside the law with no limits and no priorities.  If they can do it; they do it.

The last leader of this country who at least recognized this situation was five star general and president Dwight D. Eisenhower.  That was almost 60 years ago.