Politics isn't something that can be taught. It has to be learned through experience and observation. Being taught just leads to being influenced in ones political thought process rather than actually learning.
You have a great point there, although I would disagree that all variations of being taught lead to a political bias. It is important to take some political history courses, and some civics courses. Which give you an understanding of the system, how it got here, and why it is the way it is. I agree more than anyone that independent study has its place, I have tested out of college level courses every chance I've got, due to independent study. It can be more efficient, and saves time and money. But, not every person has the capacity for effective independent study. Plus, you do miss out on not only learning the subject, but learning the experience the instructor has with the subject, when being formally taught (assuming you have a good instructor, which is not always the case)
Depends on the specialty. Alot of them are either useless, or something you can train yourself in 90% savings of money and time. Take "criminal justice" majors. "Business management" majors, etc.
I agree college degrees are more or less relevant depending on the specialty they are in. There are majors that are a blatant waste of money. That does not change the concept that having a Bachelors degree and especially having a Masters or Doctorate degree speaks to how intelligent a person is about a specific subject. If I met someone with a PHD in criminal justice or business management, I would probably safely assume that individual is well suited to teach me a thing or two about those topics. So, not only does relevance rise or fall in relation to the major of the individual, but also with how deeply a person goes into their educational career. At least in my opinion.
Depends on what they had to say......What they SAY is more important than some document that they would have earned 25+ years ago.
Again, depends on what they had to say. Just because someone didn't graduate high school doesn't mean that haven't learned through those hard experiences what NOT to do.... Sounds like I would take that persons's advice OVER some shrewd person who goes around thinking their college degree automatically makes what they say more important.
This is an over-simplification. But, what they say is obviously paramount. However, someone with a degree in law, who has been a lawyer for 25 years, is probably far more qualified to be the next Supreme Court justice, than someone who has never been a lawyer, who has not studied law formally, and has not passed their bar exam, but has talked to people about law on a regular basis. Putting something over that time frame its only reasonable to assume that the person with the degree has been working in their field for that many years. If you extrapolate this, the odds are the individual with the degree is much more knowledgeable and well-suited to give advice. Even in the case of less important degrees, like those you referenced earlier.
You definitely got me here, but, what are the odds that in the modern era someone without a degree got elected? (actually not that bad, including all presidents; about 22% of them haven't had a degree. Although, that is inflated due to college educations not being a norm in the early days of the US) I will say, times were different then, from what they are now. But, by the sounds of it, he was a farmer, turned senator, turned president. Who got elected based on his being a normal guy. Which is semi-similar to why many people say George W. Bush got elected.
He is a pundit. Tell me a pundit, or hell even a politician, who doesn't talk in half-truths.....
His lack of a college education has nothing to do with that.
I'm not saying his lack of college education is why he is often found to be misleading or lying. Nor am I saying that having a college education automatically makes you an honest person on all topics. I agree that lying is the name of the game in politics, its disgraceful and repulsive, but true. I will say however, that I stick to my previous statement, once a person is found to be repeatedly abusing the public with lies and half-truths they should be banned from national public broadcast until they regain some credibility with the public. By extension, I think it is absurd that people give a damn what Glenn Beck says based on his high level of half-truths, non-truths, and partial-truths. It sickens me to see him throwing a rally and giving advice to more than 100K people, politifact has not yet published their article on the restoring honor rally, but I'll read over it at that point. But based on his track record, I'm going to assume there are more lies than truths.
Me personally, if I am presented with two 20 year olds, one with a bachelors degree in the subject we are talking about, and one with 4 years experience working the field we are discussing. I will probably take the advice of the one with the experience. If I am presented with two 40 year olds, in the same position, but one has 24 years experience and one has 20 years experience. I will probably take the advice from the one with the degree. That's just me though.
But, this discussion deviates from my original topic that Glenn Beck is unqualified to give people life advice, or to tell people how to "restore honor" to America. Up until 10 years ago the only experience he had was with offending the public and getting fired from various radio stations. I guess he found his identity with conservatives around that time, and went on to use incendiary statements and powerful rhetoric to build up a following. So, people just watch in awe of what he's saying because it echoes their often uneducated fears about society. Most of the time, aren't we all just looking for some confirmation about our personal opinions of things that go on around us? I don't blame him for doing what he does, if I could get rich spouting off crap to people, I would probably do it too. But, what he is doing is certainly not news and should be presented with a disclaimer at the beginning of his broadcast that most of things he says are fictitious opinionated assumptions based on a set of loose facts.
I do want to correct myself, since I referenced Bill Gates honorary Harvard degree. Glenn Beck also received an honorary degree from Liberty University (...the largest and fastest growing Christian Evangelical university in the world... for those of you who have also never heard of this school) in 2010.
