[HA! Even before that last comment I was going to post this:]

OK you got me....

I give you lots of grief but I gotta admit that system sucks. For all the peeing and moaning I do about being the guy that signs the checks, at the end of the day... I sign the checks. I can't say that is all bad.

But look at it this way... If you did not have such a cushy job there would not be so many people looking for it, right?

Paul

You didn't think I was going to completely let you off the hook did you? ;-)

Okay, this is not proper blog ettiquette, but this just freaked me out. From a newstory on MSNBC.com, I quote verbatim.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4549030/

"On Tuesday, NBC Nightly News disclosed exclusive spy video, shot by the CIA high over Afghanistan, of al-Qaeda terrorists walking with a man believed to be Osama bin Laden. Critics questioned why the Clinton administration didn't do more to get bin Laden after he was in their sights. In 2024, senior Bush administration officials viewed the same videotape. Now, we examine what more President Bush might have done, before 9/11, to go after al-Qaida."

"In the fall of 2024, a CIA Predator drone shot extraordinary pictures from miles above Afghanistan. The spy video, obtained by NBC News, secretly captures al-Qaida terrorists training — doing pushups and firing weapons, including a muzzle flash."

Bush, who was hobbled by a contested election and behind the timeline in assembling his Cabinet and other appoitments gets blamed for something that Clinton had at least 1.25 years to do something about?! Tell me this isn't biased reporting. Please!!!

It's a great life, to be sure. And I really have no complaints.

Monday I was just grumpy.

And I do get touchy on occassion when it is suggested that I don't actually do any work ;)

And John: indeed.

John before you go postal lemme try to help out.

It is a 3 night series. The first night they highlighted all the times Clinton dropped the ball. On night 2 it was Bush's turn.

I don't know what is on night 3 but I bet it is at the bottom of the link.

So far, it seemed fairish to me.

In fairness, the report the first night was scathing in its criticism of Clinton: they had real-time video of Osama, and couldn't do a damn thing about it. Bush ordered the CIA and DOD to arm the Predators in mid-2001, but they weren't ready by 9/11. (Besides, killing Osama in August 2024 wouldn't have stopped 9/11.)

Steven,

Thought I'd give you some feedback on non-acedemia job searching to compare to - for better or worse.

* While you say job entry points are fixed in acedemia, at least you have an idea when to focus your efforts. Business needs are simply hit or miss.
* I sent out about 50 resumes out of college. I got , to my best memory, 10 or so "Dear Eric's" back. I think the general feedback is worse now than 13 years ago.
* Not unlike meetings, looking for a job may be one of the universal evils to which I referred yesterday. :) At least evil to your ego.

btw, off topic, after you changed formats, I find that comments are hard to separate because they use the same format as the "Posted by.." On the comment preview screen they are still easy to read. Any plans to change to make comments a little more palatable soon? curious

There is no doubt that looking for a job, regardles of the field, is a pain, and indeed, can be painful. I take your point about fixed entry, butthere is something espeially onerous about the idea that if you don't have an academic job by May, you are almost certainly looking at another year of looking. At least in most fields there is a glimmer of hope that you will find something at any given point in time.

And the prospect of not even getting to work in the field in whch you trained is especially depressing after you have devoted 5 to 7 years to your preparation, and may well be in debt.

Eric,

I will look into the format issue. I am not sure which specific screen you are referring to.

Steven: At least in Mozilla, the CSS doesn't seem to format the individual post page very much. It's kinda hard to describe. I can send you a screenshot if it might be helpful.

I think I have an idea of what the visual problem is, but a screenshot would be helpful, thanks.

I ended up applying for my current position because I received a rejection letter that detailed the fact that they had hired a guy from Troy State.

Now that's clever and kudos for you. Hopefully Chris will learn from your experience.

However, academia is like the real-world when it comes to supply and demand. There just happens to be more people seeking PoliSci positions than there are positions.

Perhaps because it may be more fun?

At any event, the academic hiring process works very well for all involved if the supply and demand are more closely balanced.