And so Amanda Carpenter chooses to prove herself to be a fool rather than let us guess as to whether she is one or not. A cheap shot, indeed, saying that in academics we all "think about doing things, but never do."
Enough of this garbage.
My three-plus decades of being there and doing that have informed me that the people who say those t…
And so Amanda Carpenter chooses to prove herself to be a fool rather than let us guess as to whether she is one or not. A cheap shot, indeed, saying that in academics we all "think about doing things, but never do."
Enough of this garbage.
My three-plus decades of being there and doing that have informed me that the people who say those things the most and the loudest usually have the least actual experience in the environment to know what they are talking about. So I'll extend to Amanda the same offer that I do with other elitists, especially politicians, who see us as easy targets for underinformed but popular talking points: follow me around for a day, or a week, and see what actually happens. Be prepared to do without meals and stay up late at night, regularly. Be prepared to see little of your family while so many other people demand your time and attention with their many wants and needs that wind up superseding your own. And be prepared to be held accountable when you don't get the results that certain politicians want, with their partisan axes to grind, and budget cuts that make a challenging job that much harder under a constantly rising bar of doing more with less.
Better still, jump in and do it yourself, instead of criticizing. Be part of the solution to what you see as the problem, rather than being unnecessarily divisive and creating a problem where it doesn't exist. Or just keep making nonsensical, needlessly snarky comments that make ignorance and pettiness look cool and trendy. And keep on being a talking head who is overpaid and overpraised to think about things but never do them. Amanda Black Pot meets Amanda Black Kettle.
I didn't get the point of her comment, who she is zinging.
My best guess was Ben Sasse, leaving the harder Senate work (in this political environment?), to go back to his safe place in academia, where he is "not expected" to create work product.
Seems weird if she was zinging everyone who does not make something, because the Bulwark would fall under that umbrella, as well as many subscribers.
Agreed that administrative bloat, and in some cases also policy, in higher ed is fair game for analysis and criticism. But Amanda did not take the time to nuance her argument that way or articulate a strategy that involved anything more than snark. As Charlie appropriately noted, it was a cheap shot, nothing more. As a certain ex-President used to say (and whom I usually am loathe to quote, but she sank to his level here): "Sad."
Yes, I think you are right. I get the goal of zinging Sasse, and how he has earned that treatment. But there was no need to throw the rest of us under the bus with him. Too many conservative commentators too often resort to that in trying to make a statement. I expect better from those who inhabit the realm of The Bulwark because they certainly are capable of it.
I guess there aren't enough real enemies, posing real threats, for her in our midst now, so she feels the need to find a few more. I wish I had such idle time, and lack of accountability, on my hands. I have admired much of her work, but her intellectually lazy one-size-fits-all depiction here undermines it. It takes just once to eliminate the benefit of the doubt. Not sure if I can take her opinions seriously anymore if I have to rely solely on her perspective.
And so Amanda Carpenter chooses to prove herself to be a fool rather than let us guess as to whether she is one or not. A cheap shot, indeed, saying that in academics we all "think about doing things, but never do."
Enough of this garbage.
My three-plus decades of being there and doing that have informed me that the people who say those things the most and the loudest usually have the least actual experience in the environment to know what they are talking about. So I'll extend to Amanda the same offer that I do with other elitists, especially politicians, who see us as easy targets for underinformed but popular talking points: follow me around for a day, or a week, and see what actually happens. Be prepared to do without meals and stay up late at night, regularly. Be prepared to see little of your family while so many other people demand your time and attention with their many wants and needs that wind up superseding your own. And be prepared to be held accountable when you don't get the results that certain politicians want, with their partisan axes to grind, and budget cuts that make a challenging job that much harder under a constantly rising bar of doing more with less.
Better still, jump in and do it yourself, instead of criticizing. Be part of the solution to what you see as the problem, rather than being unnecessarily divisive and creating a problem where it doesn't exist. Or just keep making nonsensical, needlessly snarky comments that make ignorance and pettiness look cool and trendy. And keep on being a talking head who is overpaid and overpraised to think about things but never do them. Amanda Black Pot meets Amanda Black Kettle.
I didn't get the point of her comment, who she is zinging.
My best guess was Ben Sasse, leaving the harder Senate work (in this political environment?), to go back to his safe place in academia, where he is "not expected" to create work product.
Seems weird if she was zinging everyone who does not make something, because the Bulwark would fall under that umbrella, as well as many subscribers.
Right. Now, if we're going to zing Sasse by also impugning university administrators, that might be okay.
Agreed that administrative bloat, and in some cases also policy, in higher ed is fair game for analysis and criticism. But Amanda did not take the time to nuance her argument that way or articulate a strategy that involved anything more than snark. As Charlie appropriately noted, it was a cheap shot, nothing more. As a certain ex-President used to say (and whom I usually am loathe to quote, but she sank to his level here): "Sad."
Yes, I think you are right. I get the goal of zinging Sasse, and how he has earned that treatment. But there was no need to throw the rest of us under the bus with him. Too many conservative commentators too often resort to that in trying to make a statement. I expect better from those who inhabit the realm of The Bulwark because they certainly are capable of it.
I guess there aren't enough real enemies, posing real threats, for her in our midst now, so she feels the need to find a few more. I wish I had such idle time, and lack of accountability, on my hands. I have admired much of her work, but her intellectually lazy one-size-fits-all depiction here undermines it. It takes just once to eliminate the benefit of the doubt. Not sure if I can take her opinions seriously anymore if I have to rely solely on her perspective.