For instance, last year there were large numbers of HS graduates submitting applications, so large they overwhelmed colleges and universities. Meaning, there were large numbers of rejections solely because of volume. Other than being redirected to community colleges, what are the options for aspiring HS grads. Applicants for nursing are being rejected because of lack of capacity in schools. In recession/depression citizens using go back to college to acquire new skills, but the question is new skills for what industry?

H1-B workers are here replacing U.S. workers at ALL levels: colleges: grad student teachers and adjuncts, etc , doctors, nurses, medical technicians, IT, accountants, and teachers, while educated U.S. workers are languishing.

So, following the yellow brick road from HS to college, graduating HS students face admission capacity limits. From college to mainstreet, poor job creation creates bottlenecks forcing PHDs into downgrade schools to learn how to function as bachelor graduates, college graduates compete with HS graduates for bartending and waitresses jobs.

Where are the options in a shrinking job marketplace since 80s?

Most people are not hustlers, therefore they need all the options they can get.

This 2010 not 1864

Love,

The NFL

The issue of the President being committed to the public option is one thing. The strategy of having a healthcare bill regardless of its provisions is another. Where these two intersect is where the problem lies and answering it isn't being helped by name calling.

This is my take on what you are saying on the passing of bills:
The Senate has two bills. One from HELP and the other from the Finance Committee. If the HELP bill alone passed the Senate it could not be used to reconcile w/ the house bills. The reason is under Senate rules unless money is allocated for a bill through the finance committee any bill passed would have no money to enact its provisions and as a consequence mean nothing.

I have never seen this argument about the importance of the finance committee argued here before. I have always seen the arguments about the finance committee bill be whether or not the public option is in the bill for the Senate floor vote. The Senate floor vote passing w/ the public option being the end all and be all of the issue so when it comes down to the 51 vote “reconciliation ” vote in the Senate the public option comes into being. The money issue has always been one of inside baseball.

If I understand the strategy WRB is advocating. The public option is in the HELP bill and can be put into the Senate bill through the Senates version of making the finance and help committees bills final. With the House versions all having the public option the Houses final bill and the Senates final bill can then be reconciled w/ one another and voted on. since the final vote takes place in the SEnate at this point w/ 51 votes the Democrats can pass a healthcare bill w/ the public option. this is what you call Presidnet obama playing chess on 20 levels and having faith he'll get it done

Rikyrah and I believe that the public announcements of the WH have always worked to undermine the public option regardless of what is going on in committee. I base it on what happened to cram downs for primary mortgages in the final version of the bankruptcy bill. It never happened. This is what I think will happen in regards to the public option.

I'lllet rikyrah give her own defense in regards to the tactics used outside and inside of the committee structure.

HA HA HA HA!!!

Just let everyone snicker about her tracks and keep it moving.

10. In a section devoted to “future leaders,” there were none.

9. In the subsequent rush to get up a “future leaders” page, they choose “you.”
8. The last GOP accomplishment cited on the accomplishment page was from 2004.
7. The what's up page — hip! starts with this sentence: “”the internet has been around for a while now”
6. Administrator passwords were accidentally posted.
5. When the RNC hosted a kick-off conference call, the website was down.
4. The website cites Jackie Robinson as a GOP hero. Robinson wasn't a GOPer, and he criticized the GOP on race. Robinson left the party because of its views on race. He had been, as a reader points out, a Republican for many years.
3. The first question on the conference call was from an Hispanic Republican who asked why the GOP site didn't have a Spanish-language page and noted that the White House had one.
2. Bragging about web redesigns is so 2004.

1. It's not timed with the start of any major advocacy campaign — or political campaign. And it portrays itself as something it's not: diverse and ready to embrace new ideas. That may be what the party leadership aspires to, but, at least when it comes to diversity, a few pictures of Hispanics and African Americans doesn't make up for … well, the history of the party.