Saturday, April 29, 2006

Tiny's: The American Dream is alive!

The American Myth Is Alive Too!

Tiny's story was great (even though I never got a ride in that Porsche and it has since been replaced by a truck - and that is SO WRONG Tiny!).

Here's a bit of how the MSM in the form of the Oprah Winfrey show (broadcast just a few blocks away from my place here in Chicago) tries to keep us feeling bad about our country and our economy.

Oprah recently had a show entitled: "Inside the Lives of People Living on Minimum Wage." Which would be great except that it went on to lie about it. Oh, you'd like an example, here you go:

Oprah claimed that 30 million Americans earn the minimum wage of $5 an hour. Well, the federal minimum wage is $5.15 but we'll cut her some slack on that one.

But here are some real numbers: "According to Current Population Survey estimates for 2004, some 73.9 million American workers were paid at hourly rates, representing 59.8 percent of all wage and salary workers. Of those paid by the hour, 520,000 were reported as earning exactly $5.15."

Wow, 30 million or 520,000? That's a huge difference! And all those Oprah watchers are now convinced that 30 million people live on the minumum wage, nice.

But wait, there's more: Workers earning the minimum wage or less tend to be young, single workers between the ages of 16 and 25. Only about two percent of workers over 25 years of age earn minimum wages.

"According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics: Sixty-three percent of minimum wage workers receive raises within one year of employment, and only 15 percent still earn the minimum wage after three years. Furthermore, only 5.3 percent of minimum wage earners are from households below the official poverty line; forty percent of minimum wage earners live in households with incomes $60,000 and higher; and, over 82 percent of minimum wage earners do not have dependents.

The U.S. Department of Labor also reports that the "proportion of hourly-paid workers earning the prevailing Federal minimum wage or less has trended downward since 1979."

Poor people are not poor because of low wages. For the most part, they're poor because of low productivity, and wages are connected to productivity. The effect of minimum wages is that of causing unemployment among low-skilled workers. If an employer must pay $5.15 an hour, plus mandated fringes that might bring the employment cost of a worker to $7 an hour, does it pay him to hire a person who is so unfortunate as to have skills that permit him to produce only $4 worth of value per hour? Most employers would view hiring such a person as a losing economic proposition.

Two important surveys of academic economists were reported in two issues of the American Economic Review, May 1979 and May 1992. In one survey, 90 percent, and in the other 80 percent, of economists agreed that increasing the minimum wage causes unemployment among youth and low-skilled workers.

The problem with the MSM is that they view things through a bizarre prism. The picture of poverty in America is not static. I was once one of those people working for less then the minimum wage, now I'm a fairly affluent young professional. People in America move progress through the income spectrum, usually according to their ability.

So yes, the American dream is alive! Just don't listen to the MSM!

Thursday, April 27, 2006

Women are on special!

Consumers aren't stupid. If there are two McDonald's pretty close together (after all there is one about every half mile) and one sells a Big Mac for 77% of the price of the other we know who will get the traffic. If we know we get the same exact thing for less we will choose the cheaper price even if we give up customer service.

Business is no different. Do you think a smart consumer goes to work and becomes a stupid businessman? Of course not. So lets apply this concept to people, workers, employees! First you need to ask yourself this question. Are all people with the same degree, with the same number of years of experience, worth the same salary? If you answer yes you have never hired a person, owned a business, been responsible for a team or a multi-person project. But if you answered yes, please keep reading. Come on people..think about all those union labor jobs. Union's are great right? They make sure every single person who has 8 yrs experience swinging a hammer makes exactly the same. Do all people with 8 yrs of framing experience do the same work in 8 hours? Are as smart and so tackle tricky situations equally well? Get along with others and so contribute to all those around them also doing a great job equally? I could go on for hours. HELL NO....there is not a single job on this planet where the degree, the years of experience or their GENDER make them automatically equal value to the business.

So back to the business person. This is another filtering question. Do you think a hiring managers frequently hire a man over a women, who would appear to actually be better at the job, just because he's a man? Do you think hiring managers frequently hire a women and then low ball the salary because it's common knowledge women have no clue what they're worth? COME ON! What the hell is wrong with you? You have no clue do you? You hire the best person for the job, PERIOD. You pay market for the position! How do we know what market is? Because we hire all the time in places where we have operations...we get salary surveys for the exact job in our exact city from sources like Radford Surveys. We don't have diffferent numbers for men versus women! We pay within a range sure but we pay the absolute highest salary we can pay without leaving a person no headroom.

Most, not all, but most employers who will screw people for whatever reason (gender, race, looks) are screwing the employer! If the tone at the top all the way down to the lowest level hiring manager isn't hire the best person period...then it's a place you don't want to work anyway.

But hey let's say this goes on, frankly if a person doesn't know what a job should pay, or what they should get personally, then they deserve what they get. Nobody is holding a gun to your head to work there. If you think getting another job isn't possible then your limiting yourself and that's your problem and not mine.

Businesses worthy of your blood swet and teras the hire the best person. With each passing day that good employee becomes more and more valuable to you. Only an idiot would purposely screw an employee by paying them less than they should since they could be so easily woo'd away. It makes no sense, and it happens FAR less than advertised except in crap old companies that if you work for you deserve what you get. Any organized labor (union) related profession, well you're shit out F'ing get whatever the hell the guy next to you gets regardless of gender, race, religion and YES, HOW GOOD YOU ARE!

You're your own master...if you're a women and you're not getting what your worth go get another job. No two people are the same and no two people are worth the same in the same job. The jackass bitter women reporter who wrote this article, I'm sure, would be happy to make exactly the same as every other reporter with the same degree and experience in her city. Because, of course, they each would write equally well, write the exact same number of pieces, and would scoop the exact same number of stories of equal news worthyness!


Wednesday, April 26, 2006

The American Dream is alive!

Do you know a person who is perpetually negative and feeds on being that way? They suck the life out of a happy situation and the good fortune of others.

Take for example a neighbor of mine. A startup company I worked for 10 years ago was purchased by a large Japanese company. Knowing this was happening months ahead I started selling my wife on the idea that for me to fulfill my dream of owning a Porsche should be my reward for 5 yrs of 60-80 weeks. The calculated effort on my part paid off and when the payout check cleared job one was to pick up the brand new 1996 Porsche 911. The day I picked it up from the dealer my family was gathered at Mrs. Tiny's sisters house (who lives around the corner from us). So like a proud poppa I pulled my shiny Iris blue ride up to Tiny-sis-inlaw's curb. All the family came out to admire my prize, I was all smiles. Then nextdoor neighbor curmudgeon walked up and says "why would anybody spend that much on a car?". Nice..I went from smiles and feeling good to pissed...all I said to him was "shut the F up". What was the point of his statement? Did it serve any useful purpose? Was it a valid statement? Was this an example of excess? NO, NO, was just senseless negativity! Some negative people get their own personal life force by sucking it out of the rest of us. They feed off the result of their negativity....shoot them on sight I say.

While I risk the label of braggart using my acquisition of a fine German sports car as a setup for this be it....this is leading to something!

Most days I hunt the web for something to get fired up about and one of my favorite blood pressure rockets are societal studies. They're easy marks since nearly all of them are done by academics (ah, no bias there) and lets face it...most studies have a pre-study theory. Those doing the study probably believe they are executing in a neutral way, but they almost never do and will conclude the study proves what they already believed.

I know I found a good one just from the title "Rags-to-riches dream an illusion: study". Of course this the MSM is filled with those who bizarrely hate America, especially our ability to create wealth, and so are happy to print a story calling the American dream as an illusion. Firstly, rags-to-riches isn't a concept that I believe is part of the American lexicon....the more appropriate label would be the "American dream". It's not about being rich, it's about that white picket fence home, a family and being comfortable....maybe it's also about doing a bit better than the previous generation.

Now I don't have the study data, don't have their protocols, but the conclusion or message appears to be simply: hey America you're not so great, your rich stay rich, your poor stay poor and other countries do better! What a crock. The fact of the matter is that a gap between the richest and the poorest in a society growing is not a bad thing all by itself! If there wasn't anything in the middle, and a nice distribution, then you might have a problem. But that's not the case.

This study should have asked the question did each subject desire the American dream? Did they actually attempt to improve their economic situation? And was there any family influences to encourage it? If these factors were considered you would confirm what is common sense and so no study is needed. Most who are rich (and we'll leave that undefined) know how to get rich and instill that in their children. Sorry, very few of the rich inherit their wealth. Even for those that do, you still need a certain desire to make the money work for you and that too you pass to your children.

My parents were not rich, just your regular middle class family with a stay at home mom and an IBM manager type dad. While we didn't walk around in worn out shoes we were far from being spoiled. There was constant reinforcement that money wasn't an entitlement and that if you wanted something you work for it. So I did. As a kid I did chores around the house, and in the yard, for loose change and for a small allowance. Before my teens I had a paper route, I picked apricots, I worked at the local swim club, I fixed up and sold bicycles. There was a lesson in all that! You didn't have to be reliant on your parents or anyone else! I believed you could create your own economic success and took risks to achieve non linear economic success having worked at start-ups for the last 24 yrs. The spirit my parents instilled in me employs 50 high paid professionals today and could grow to thousands. And, yes, allowed me to buy a car that cost nearly 2 times what I paid for my first house. If I was part of a study like this and you didn't know this history what would you conclude? You couldn't determine a valid cause and effect.

If a child doesn't believe that they could do anything as a career or start their own business chances are they won't as an adult. Ok, sure that does happen but it happens more if that spirit, or a direct example of it, is set by the parents. It's no surprise that on average a child who is raised poor (again undefined) stays poor. If you teach and inspire a child they might cure cancer, or they might employ a city, or both. That teaching and spirit doesn't require you to be rich but it does require an environment that can allow it to happen and there is no better place than America.

I see no useful message in this study other than to piss on the American dream.

Tuesday, April 25, 2006

Lack of oxygen!

I recently commented on a blog post over on another blog site I enjoy called The Fifth Column. I was merely poking fun at one of the blogs contributors (Bacon Boy, or you can call him by any cute name relating to a pig or those smoky slices of heaven) living in Atlanta. Now, mind you I have only been in Atlanta for a single day for a business meeting...thank God...but nonetheless I took my infinitesimally small experience in Atlanta and proceeded to berate it as a shithole. Maybe this was harsh, but that short stay led me to only that conclusion!

I guess the Pork Lad took my comment in the all-in-fun manner it was intended since he didn't follow up...but then, I'm reminded that my fun poking may in fact be an accurate description of at least Atlanta's 4th district.

You see, I assume if a city was a bona fide shithole that all that fecal matter would result in a serious amount of methane displacing all that precious oxygen! As you know, with reduced oxygen the brain has a hard time with common sense and is susceptible to the funhouse effect. You know those bent mirrors in the funhouse that make you look 2 ft tall, or 8 ft wide...reality and what your brain registers are not on the same plane!

In the case of some Atlantans, the funhouse effect is surely the reason that they have voted to put Cynthia McKinney in our capital. I was reminded of this when I caught a story that today she filed papers to run for re-election. This women is an example of what's wrong with politics, with Washington and with those who still want a civil rights movement to be necessary. The Capital Police incident with McKinney isn't the issue....the issue is the racist attitude of this, and others, who pander to those still bitter for wrongs of the past and only stay relevant if race is an issue. Since she punched the fuzz there has been a lot of video on the net of McKinney holding a press conference, or really an evolution of press conferences as she ping-pong'd her position on the incident. Is it only me, or does this women ever walk with, stand with or associate with a white person?

Ok, lets put that hold a press conference, to address your having punched a cop, and standing at your side are two black actors (well known as socialists wackos) who didn't witness the incident. This gives you credibility?Tell me what crowd that works for? You see...oxygen deprivation is the only explanation. Her lawyer, having returned to his home in Texas, was breathing fresh air again and as his brain function returned to normal he dropped her as a client..makes sense.

If you're not convinced of the fun house effect, brought on by the shithole, being the only explanation for how McKinney got to congress...well check out this inarticulate pathetic race card dance she does as CNN hoty Soledad tries to get her to just tell us what happened that day (video from And another example of McKinney's skillful handling of the press was made available by CNN.

So, an oxygen starved shithole or something else? If you can clear this up with some other explanation me and my pal Swine Puppy would appreciate it!

Saturday, April 22, 2006

Global (fill-in-the-blank)ing

Did you know today was Earth Day? I sure didn't. The WSJ editorial board did, and put forward an optimistic view on our efforts in reducing what we put into the air. Since 1971 the output of carbon monoxide is down 55%, sulfur is down 50%, particulates by 80% and lead by 98%. As the Journal points out you won't hear the global warming crowd complimenting this achievement.

The reasons are obvious and not flattering. The left (yep, I will lump them all together) is first and foremost negative as a group. They are the glass half empty club. I use to think this was just the case when the president happen to be Republican and it was just a refusal to acknowledge anything positive could happen under their reign. But a quick look at the rhetoric and unsubstantiated claims during periods when the Oval Office was occupied by a Democrat proves that theory wrong. It is clearly more obvious during Republican terms as it has been during the Bush years. While independent reports on the economy, health care, education, the environment or pretty much anything may show either positive progress, or just plain old good news, the left will not acknowledge and even claim the opposite is true.

Beyond just being a glum lot, liberals will not take note of the environmental progress because to do so takes the wind out of the global warming sails...or would even make the movement irrelevant. It's similar to the black leaders claiming nothing has changed since the '60's. What's interesting is that intelligent and educated liberals have made up their mind on global warming with a sample size (compared to the age of the planet) they would normally consider laughable.

There is a blind faith that global warming is a fact much like blind faith of an evangelical Christian makes the existence of God a certainty. I love to lump those two groups together! The emotional attachment the global warming crowd has to their position also blinds them on understanding those who don't buy it. They assume the opposition ignores their evidence and won't accept what it says. No, the evidence is thin and also ignores weather and geological cycles since earths creation. They assume opponents don't believe global warming exists. No, most believe man could be effecting climate, we just don't leap to that conclusion based on the evidence to date. There is also evidence ignored by the climate alarmist (gases and particulates put into the atmosphere by the planet and not man) and so the integrity of position is put in question.

Recently the comparisons and claimed links by such blind Chicken Littles as Al Gore are morally corrupt. Even indirect comparisons to Nazis, or Nazi sympathizers, is corrupt and irresponsible. To claim that Katrina is a direct result is simply politically motivated and not factual. Playing on the emotions of the intellectual challenged poor affected in the region shows the character of those involved. The Journal says Gore uses a W. Churchill line as his way of linking the evil of Nazi Germany to those who don't swallow global warming hook, line and sinker. And the label of fanatic the Journal gives Gore is just given the definition they quote, also from Churchill: "A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject." And of course somehow global warming is more Dubya's fault in the last 6 yrs than it was in Clinton's previous 8, or anybody before..funny how that worked out!

Living in Silicon Valley I am surrounded by hard core liberal global warming disciples in my neighborhood. Oblivious to their hypocrisy I watch a plethora of Hummers, Suburbans, Expeditions, Excursions and Range Rovers each weekday morning rushing to work from our tree lined streets with one occupant.

And on the strange and bizarre factless sheep following of liberalism rolls on.

Friday, April 21, 2006

Whites screwed, but it's ok!

It's interesting that none of the people, or groups, who complain about race and ethnic disproportionate representations are complaining about California's UC system. For years there has been a steady drumbeat, largely by liberals, of the lack of minorities in business management, sports management, the military, a presidents cabinet and in college admissions. The major argument used is, and has been, the particular minority's percentage of the population compared to the target group they claim disproportionate representation in. WELL, so tell me why those same folks are not complaining about 36% of the newly admitted freshman in California's UC system being Asian when they only make up 10.9% of California's population?

You won't hear any complaints about the Asian admissions! Most liberals will look at over-representing a minority as some kind of penance for the white population who should all pay for the theoretical wrong done previously!

Even though the Black and Hispanic admission percentages are only 5% and 9%, respectively, short of those for White freshman all the news stories will imply there is work to be done!..but not for "whitey"!

When you look at the admissions compared to population break down the Asians have an enormous over-representation of 330%. Anybody think that's unfair? Is that ok? I guess the fair (but unfair) un spoken preference to Asian's is working and screwing the majority from a fair represenation is ok?

I know, lets have the bottom 98% of earners pay 98% of taxes instead of the other way around! I would love that....I'm getting screwed, these days, all around!

Thursday, April 20, 2006

Who Says The Cold War Is Over?

Gotta love the Ruskies! They always know how to back a winner.

Pelosi's Pernicious Phoniness

Nancy's written a little piece for the LA Times titled "Hu's visit nothing to celebrate", while I agree with the title I'm not at all suprised with the main subject of criticism in her article. Is it China? Not really.

It is, of course, President Bush, who else?

"Finally, members of Congress of both parties will be watching to see if Bush kowtows to Beijing in ways that threaten our long-standing commitment to Taiwan."

Hang on there Nance, wasn't it your guy, Bill Clinton, who sold the Chinese ballistic missile technology without ever bothering to check on how they would use it? The same missiles that may be used against Taiwan?

Why do I not recall you writing anything about that?

Tuesday, April 18, 2006

Cannibal or PR genius?

This morning for breakfast I had some banana nut crunch cereal with vanilla soy milk. For some reason about the time I hit 40 regular milk just didn't sit well with me. I could never use non-fat, 2% or low fat milk as they all seemed like water with flour mixed in. I use to love whole milk, or the sinful extra rich milk which I guess was nearly half-and-half. I would poor a big frosty glass and down it with a dozen chocolate chip cookies...those were the days. But alas maybe I've developed a lactose intolerance with age. So as I sit here with my banana nut crunch resting in my belly I felt it bubble and churn as I read a story that my pal "glock26" sent me.

And see the update at the bottom of the full post!

So what gave me that sickly feeling? Well it starts with eggs. I love eggs..I have them a lot. I like them hard boiled, deviled eggs, egg salad, scrambled, over easy and poached. I mostly go for the over easy or poached, usually 4 of them, over french bread toast or hash browns (or home fries). But when I crack those eggs I sometimes look at that little cloudy mass and the squiggly white cord and get a bit grossed out. Mind you, I'm not proud of that. I think of myself as a big strapping tough guy, so wish I never got that feeling as I those little aborted chicken embryos!

And so when I read that the king of Hollywood wack jobs Tom Cruise was quoted as saying of the pending silent birth of his child "I'm gonna eat the cord and the placenta right there" I got that sick feeling. That's just plain disgusting. And he says "right there", shit does that mean he's gonna eat it raw? Or maybe they're gonna make Katie silently push the baby out in the kitchen so Tom can quickly add the afterbirth goodies to some nice sweated shallots, sauteed chanterelles and a cabernet reduction! Or is it more appropriate to cook with a white when dealing with human flesh. Or is it an organ? or remains? YUUUCK!!!!!!!!!

Is Tom really this strange? Ok, he has completely lost touch with reality...if you want to really see how nuts scientology is go to and do a search on "scientology" and watch some of the material. There's even audio of L. Ron himself going on about Thetans and aliens and other galaxies. But can he really be this far gone? Are the increase in Tom Cruise rumors and strangeness originated by the public because one of his movies is coming out, or is he really just a PR genius and is laughing behind closed doors? I don't know for sure but I suspect everyone thinking he's a wack job will result in more box office. It reminds me of all the rumors about Marlon Brando being all bizarre when Apocalypse Now came only helped the movie.

I know this, if Katie Holmes is from a good loving family they have to be going nuts. They have to be plotting to try and deprogram the brain washing and the controlling grip Tom must have on her...I suspect if they can't get her to see how bizarre this all is in private we will see them take their case to the public. Of course the public will eat up any additional tidbits of wacky-doodle behavior by any Hollywood star with Cruise's stature (all 5ft-2 of him, or whatever he is!).

Update: TOM'S PALS WARP PARADE POLL (From NYPost online)
TOM Cruise's cronies seem to have put a lot of effort into skewing a Parade magazine poll in his favor. recently asked online readers whether they thought Cruise was responsible for his disastrous public relations year or if it was the media's fault. A shocking 84 percent of respondents blamed the press. But Parade publicist Alexis Collado tells us: "We at Parade found this a little bit fishy, so we did some investigating. We found out more than 14,000 (of the 18,000-plus votes) that came in were cast from only 10 computers! One computer was responsible for nearly 8,400 votes alone, all blaming the media for Tom's troubles. We also discovered that at least two other machines were the sources of inordinate numbers of votes. It seems these folks (whoever they may be) resorted to extraordinary measures to try to portray Tom in a positive light for the survey. There is even a chance they wrote a special 'bot' program for the sole purpose of skewing the results, rather than casting the votes by hand on a computer." Cruise spokesman Paul Bloch told us, "I know nothing about the poll, so we have nothing to comment on."

Thursday, April 06, 2006


This is unbelievable! This is political correctness and the desire by all the freaks and deviants of the world to get acceptance run amuck! Not only do I think the vast majority of liberals will think inserting a sexual (read GAY) agenda into our public school curriculum is insane but I bet a lot of gays will as well. In fact the example in this story about a gay black poet is ludicrous. While history of the civil rights movement might involve identifying a person as being black I see no reason to identify a black when the subject is anything else!

The problem is that gays associate to much of their identity with how and who they have sex with. Most of us are defined by our personality, our family (children), our careers, and how we contribute to society. Frankly if any of those categories is somehow tied to homosexuality you're probably a deviant and sadly you've been the unfortunate victim of a genetic defect. Does this sound cruel? Why should it? I'm not saying to round up the gays and put them on an island somewhere. I'm saying that the natural order of things involves propagation of a species. When elements in a species can't naturally procreate to do this they die off. Therefore by definition it's a defect. Hey, I have defects too...I'm color blind, I get low blood sugar and then become a mean son-of-a-bitch, I like food way too much, etc.

Sexual orientation is COMPLETELY irrelevant to every f'ing topic in school. In fact, I'm in the camp of leaving the birds and bees to the parents. But I'm not going to get my way in the public schools. You liberals who are so much more enlightened than me must protect the rest of the public from themselves. Teach them to masturbate (like they won't figure it out on their own), teach them to use a condom (and not abstinence), teach them being gay is natural and normal. I could see the "orientation" video the gay lobby would love to be required view..."hey Bob, who are you taking to the spring dance? Oh, not sure...either Mary or Jeff...I haven't decided".

This isn't good people! This is insane....a revolution is coming....and Bob's parents don't belong to the NRA like I do.

Monday, April 03, 2006

Inspiring our enemies!

If you don't think members of our own Congress, or House, speaking of impeachment and censor of our president hurts our efforts with the Muslim world think again. In most western countries you won't find bizarro freak show Richard Galloway being treated by the media like a serious geopolitical or international relations expert...but in the Arab world they eat up his bullshit. Just check this video I found on Powerline where he delivers a deranged diatribe condemning mostly America. There is no question that this fans the anti-American flames among the illiterate and illinformed Muslims. The media in that part of the world takes a page from the playbook of our own MSM and it has, or will, cost American lives I'm sure.

If we assume media outlets, such as Dhabi television, are in fact informed, literate and have access to the material that shows Galloway for what he is...then we see how truly diabolical it is to use him as an apparent western mouthpiece critical of the west. To the viewers they believe Galloway is part of the evil American-UK machine but who is a dissenter and speaks the evil truth. He affirms the propaganda they have been feed to hate us and he gives credibility to that message.

Where is a good special forces sniper when you need one?

Denego Lux et veritas

In 1701 a group of Christian ministers created Yale University along with it's seal (pictured here with my modification) in about 1736. The seal is somewhat of a mystery. The words on top of the book in the seal are Hebrew (Urim v'Thummim), appear in the Hebrew Bible are thought to be oracular gems worn by the high priest Aaron. Some believe these words placed, as such, suggest the book in the Yale seal is the Bible itself. I'm not sure of the date, but the Yale motto "Lux et Veritas" was added to the seal about this time. It's meaning of "light and truth" can be interpreted in various ways, but I believe the spirit and meaning of this once esteemed institution have been obliterated.

Recently 1300 undergraduate acceptance letters have made their way from Yale to eager young sponges ready to take on the world. While I hope some of these 1300 youngsters, having heard that Taliban mouth piece Sayed Rahmatullah Hashemi was a student at Yale, would reject their acceptance letter and pursue higher learning elsewhere. It's probably too much to hope that a teenager could be this informed and also capable of such a bold move so I'm hoping some parents stepped in.

Thankfully the WSJ's John Fund is hammering on Yale nearly every time he has something in the Journal. It's fine that after college, after working for a living, after paying taxes for a while, that we choose to be liberal or conservative, or some where inbetween. But, while we mold our children from K thru college we should be doing our best to give them an unbiased education. That can include examples of the spectrum of thought on all subjects but shouldn't include the severe onesidedness we see today. The bias and an enlightened elitism has grown in the last few decades in our universities to the point where they see their closed mindedness as being open! How else can you explain the duplicity of Yale's position on things like military recruitment and the Taliban student?

I for one say Reject (Denego) Yale! I suspect their $15B+ endowment keeps them feeling high and mighty and immune from these outside pressures. But if significant numbers of students said thanks but no thanks it would hurt....I'm not holding my breath though!