<Why, I wouldn't object to my sister marrying one.

At least he could support her.

A liberal -that word again- education prepares one only to think and gives him a basis to interpret the world. He is not trained to any useful purpose, he can't make anything--but he might be able to understand it. And somebody had to write those papers the engineers had to turn in.

You seem to be confusing a formal liberal arts education with knowing how to organize your thoughts and write clearly, which ideally is supposed to have been taught you by the government schools before you ever get to college. Obviously I am not saying that anyone in the liberal arts is a crackpot, any more than everyone who considers themselves an environmentalist is a crackpot. Unfortunately, in both universities and the environmental movement, it's the crackpots who tend to run the show. And in political sciences, it's the leftists who tend to float to the top. Like cream. And other things.

And those poly-sci types, I really don't understand them. They mostly think two of the silliest things: that change will happen, and that participatory government should be a rational engine to drive that change.

I'm sure that this is true of a number of poly-sci types. As for the ones I'm talking about, I find it difficult to place Marxism and "participatory government" in the same sentence. It sure never shows up in the same countries.

Any dimbulb knows change will happen. You need a college degree for this? And change can go two ways. It's not always for the better.