I am an intelligent waoman. I was one of only two National Merit scholars in my home town, and the only one to graduate from my high school. I attended an extremely selective college. But I never graduated. I left school to pursue "life." I did this for philosophical reasons. I resented the rarified air of academia. I felt I wasn't spending my time among "real" people. I eventually chose marriage and staying home to raise my children as the most ethical course for me to pursue with my life. And, given everything, I am happy I did stay home and raise my children. But I sure do wish I'd gotten my degree first.

I can not tell you how many times people have discovered I did not finish school and then summarily dismissed me as someone whose opinions were worth considering. I became "just a housewife" in their eyes. I had no worldly accomplishments which made my opinions and thoughts worth listening to. And yet I am an intelligent woman.

While graduate school is a far cry from undergraduate school, the same world forces apply. In our time and in our culture, people listen to credentials. Far more people will pay attention to what you have to say if you have a PhD after your name. Trust me on this. It is worth staying in school if you want to change the world, or at least our little corner of it. Besides, you are creating a lot of potential future activists in your job as a university professor. You may end up having far more impact through teaching others than you ever could by leaving school and agitating on your own.

Cary's response today left me in awe. Uncharacteristically speechless. But then again, I've got lots to add - so why not?

Today's answer reminded me why I pay my subscription to Salon just to read Since You've Asked. Cary remains one of the most fearless, honest voices I have found in the mass media. He makes me proud humans invented the internet.

This answer pulls no punches. It holds a clear, head-on gaze at one of the most tremendous, important questions a person can have. He listens to exactly what the LW is truly asking and he gives an inspiring, deeply optimistic response. And on top of that, he manages to respond on the largest scale, to the question within the question: to be or not to be, basically.

I had no idea I would get to work today and find such profound and long sighted words in the advice column.

This is an example of how the language we use with each other helps to create the world we live in. I think the prof should take his letter and Cary's response into his classroom and ask the students what they think of his predicament.

And then he should organise a general strike at the university to protest their impending serfdom to the Federal Student Loan Corporation.

Cary's response today left me in awe. Uncharacteristically speechless. But then again, I've got lots to add - so why not?

Today's answer reminded me why I pay my subscription to Salon just to read Since You've Asked. Cary remains one of the most fearless, honest voices I have found in the mass media. He makes me proud humans invented the internet.

This answer pulls no punches. It holds a clear, head-on gaze at one of the most tremendous, important questions a person can have. He listens to exactly what the LW is truly asking and he gives an inspiring, deeply optimistic response. And on top of that, he manages to respond on the largest scale, to the question within the question: to be or not to be, basically.

I had no idea I would get to work today and find such profound and long sighted words in the advice column.

This is an example of how the language we use with each other helps to create the world we live in. I think the prof should take his letter and Cary's response into his classroom and ask the students what they think of his predicament.

And then he should organise a general strike at the university to protest their impending serfdom to the Federal Student Loan Corporation.

How are you going to revolt without any guns?

Cary Tennis has got it right that there will soon be a time for real activism. The electoral system as it is now constructed is bogus. It is certainly not democratic. The ruling oligarchy has totally assumed power and they must be removed. This reform may well involve ammending the constitution (what? it can't be? horrors?)to ensure that all voters have equal input. Right now voters from Wyoming have more power than voters from, say, Calfornia or New York.

And the congressional districts have been organized in such a way that incumbents are too well protected.

The whole electoral system has to be revamped..and the accuracy of the votes needs to be ensured. The media conglomerates need to be broken up and political televison commercials prohibited, replaced by free air time for debates and the stating of positions about issues. (Free on OUR, the public's airwaves.)

Otherwise there will be a revolution and it won't be pretty.

If portions of the Constitution stand in the way of desired policies, rather than trying to change the Constitution, instead find someone with academic credentials to say that the Constitution doesn't say what it says, to make a halfway plausible, somewhat believable but basically pretend argument that it actually says something entirely different from what it appears to say and what we always thought it said. If the argument is weak, just sing it loud and stick to it! It is, in form at least, an argument! It was written by a law professor!

The Left has been doing this for years. For example, contorting the equal protection clause to somehow mean that there is unequal protection/discrimination in the form of affirmative action by government is not only permissible but required. Or finding the right to "privacy" when it simply is not there (something created in a law journal article from the late 1800s, talk about invention by an academic).

I am so intrigued by this and welcome the Left to the concept that if there's something in the Constitution you don't like, the solution is to put up an Amendment, not to get a court or academics to do it by fiat.