Charles C. W. Cooke:
‘Were he to become president,” Howard Dean jeered this morning on MSNBC, Wisconsin’s Scott Walker “would be the first president in many generations that did not have a college degree.” This, Dean concluded was a disgrace. “He’s never finished,” he spluttered, and “the issue here is not just an issue of dancing around the question of evolution for political reasons, the issue is how well educated is this guy? And that’s a problem.”
Thus was one of the most successful politicians of recent years condemned for lack of a certificate.
It is unlikely that most of Walker’s critics will be as openly vicious as is Howard Dean, but, if Walker continues his march toward the presidency, Dean’s is an argument that is almost certain to be deployed elsewhere. Already, a search for the words “dropout” and “Scott Walker” reveals the taunt to be a favorite of left-leaning sites that are angry with Walker for his education reform; while Twitter has a sizeable contingent of users who are convinced that the republic will fall if the “uneducated” “dropout” “loser” gets anywhere near the reins of federal power. (An amusing number of these accounts have “Dr.” or “Ph.D” or “university” in their handles. The educated doth protest too much, methinks.)
How effective the approach would be during a general election is anybody’s guess, for at present Americans exhibit a strange and inconsistent attitude toward their dropouts. In theory, this is a nation that was built by the rebels and the nonconformists — more specifically, by the recalcitrant revolutionaries of Valley Forge, the chippy entrepreneurs of the frontier and of Silicon Valley, and by the ambitious Lincolnian auto-didacts who looked at their conditions and sought to improve them on their own terms. In practice, however, America is becoming increasingly rigid and Babbit-like. When a given individual makes it without school, we lavish him with praise and with adulation and we explain his rise with saccharine appeals to the American spirit; when our own children suggest that they might wish to dropout, however, we tut-tut and roll our eyes and make sneering jokes about Burger King. Likewise, when a chippy little self-starter eschews Harvard and starts a billion-dollar company, we applaud him for his derring-do; and yet, when a smart high-school graduate applies to work on the reception desk of that company, we send him away in search of a B.A. (in anything at all). Politically, we talk romantically of those who have made the journey from log cabin to White House, but when there is a possibility that the United States might have its “first president in many generations [who does] not have a college degree,” the likes of Howard Dean feel entirely comfortable throwing pejoratives his way, and making it clear that his eccentricity would be a mark against him. Want to become a hairdresser in a town that lacks barbers? Go and get a qualification, loser.
This is no accident. Rather, it is the product of an increasing tendency among college-educated Americans to regard the letters after their names as a distinguishing mark that renders them as part of a special, exclusive class. By willfully conflating their established educational achievements and their presumed intellect or societal worth — in Dean’s words, their “education” per se — these people extract every last ounce of social value from their investment, and make it appear as if the only way to compete with them is to join them. Sure, the clerisy concedes, you might be acceptable within your own field, but you will never be able to compete with us for the jobs that we prefer. Why? Well, because we have decided that they require a college degree, and you have an unfortunate background in trade. Sorry, Mr. Walker, you have the wrong colored dot on your forehead to run for higher office.
Putting to one side the obvious benefits that this tendency accords to its practitioners, the conflation of ideas that is at the heart of our present education mania is predicated upon a misunderstanding of both what a college education actually does for a person, and of which skills are pre-requisite to first-class political leadership. Broadly speaking, university prospectuses promise that students will gain two things from their attendance: The first is information and the capacity to think critically; the second is application — namely, how to stick with something, how to manage their time, and how to work through problems methodically. Of late, the latter promise has been transformed a little, from “college can give you this skill,” to “only college can give you this skill.” In turn, the word “dropout” has been infused with an even more potent sting. “You didn’t finish college,” the charge holds. “What are you, some kind of bum?”
This is not, of course, to say that universities do not teach their charges how to apply themselves (although for the process to be effective students will have to be intellectually challenged in a manner that most contemporary universities would never consider). But itis to pour cold water on the presumption that the campus is the best or even the only venue within which these skills can be learned. Are we honestly to propose that, as a result of my education, someone such as myself is more disciplined or hardworking than a business owner or a military veteran or a single mother or a baseball coach?
Or, say, than the governor of Wisconsin?
Gee, President Obama graduated cum laude (we are told) from Harvard, was editor of the Harvard Law Review (though never edited anything) and is generally stunning brilliant (so the legend goes).
So, why does he act so stupid? How does someone like Walker succeed?
How else would you expect a stupid person to act? But Dean’s statement:’‘Were he to become president,” Howard Dean jeered this morning on MSNBC, Wisconsin’s Scott Walker “would be the first president in many generations that did not have a college degree.”
Well, except for the present one. While there may be some evidence he did actually attend Harvard Law, there is no proof he obtained a degree there. After all, his qualifications when questioned by the Bar in Illinois resulted in him not being allowed to practice law. But in any case, he certainly doesn’t have an undergrad degree. Perhaps two years at Occidental could not have resulted in a degree and he has never attended any other college or university. No school has ever ‘claimed’ he has a college degree. He has specifically ordered that none of his records be realeased. There is a reason for that. There are no records.
I’m kind of curious how it can be that Scott Walker balanced the Wisconsin state budget, when they’re now looking at a $1.8 billion shortfall over the coming 2-year term. I think I might have noticed this discrepancy between rhetoric and reality even without a college degree.
Wisconsin state budget shortfall projected at nearly $1.8 billion
Is academic brilliance measured by budget shortfall? how much is Obozo’s shortfall?
I don’t recall Obama ever claiming that he balanced the federal budget, or eliminated the federal deficit without raising taxes.
@Greg: He said he was going to cut the deficit in half; of course, he did not specify that he was going to triple them first, THEN cut them in half (after Republicans forced him to).
Do you remember Obama promising we could keep our insurance and doctor? He also claimed Obamacare would be deficit neutral without raising taxes on the middle class “one dime”.
Walker has achieved very positive results. Obama… not so much.
So he cut taxes and still has reduced the shortfall in half in only 3 years. They also state that planned spending cuts would eliminate the deficit, therefore continuing to have a balanced budget. Obozo spent his whole campaign saying that deficit spending was traitorous while continuing to increase deficit spending. A real loser.
Correct, he is just saddling us with more debt than all other presidents combined. 20 trillion by the time he leaves office. Debt that we will be paying interest on forever. Why when GWB had it up to 9 it was unamerican and unpatriotic according to Obama. But 20 trillion will be just fine for Obama. No amount of tax raising will solve this issue when presidents keep calling for more spending. GWB was a big spender but not in the same league as Obama.
@Greg: did you read the entire pre-election article at your own link?
(Burke is the woman whose OWN FAMILY fired her from her ”job” at Trek Bicycle for her gross incompetence.)
Even a college degree in an actual discipline with academic rigor (i.e. science,medicine, engineering) doesn’t mean you’ll be a good president. Jimmy Carter was an engineer after all.
For most of the rest, considering the lefty bias of the university today, I’d say not having a college degree was a plus.
Walkers actions/results, not his lack of degree, speak volumes.