“The administration’s climate rule is far from perfect, but sweeping assertions of unconstitutionality are baseless,” Jody Freeman, director of the environmental law program at Harvard Law School, and Richard Lazarus, an expert in environmental law who has argued over a dozen cases before the Supreme Court, wrote in a rebuttal to Mr. Tribe’s brief on the Harvard Law School website. “Were Professor Tribe’s name not attached to them, no one would take them seriously.”...Tribe says that he's "very comfortable" representing Peabody Energy, because the arguments he needs to make "happened to coincide with what I believe." The NYT provides a quote to cast doubt on Tribe's veracity...
[A] number of legal scholars and current and former members of the Obama administration say that Mr. Tribe has eroded his credibility by using his platform as a scholar to promote a corporate agenda — specifically, the mining and burning of coal.
“Whether he intended it or not, Tribe has been weaponized by the Republican Party in an orchestrated takedown of the president’s climate plan,” said one former administration official.
“That a leading scholar of constitutional matters has identical views as officials of a coal company — that his constitutional views are the same as the views that best promote his client — there’s something odd there,” said Richard L. Revesz, director of the Institute for Policy Integrity at the New York University School of Law.... and a prediction of his social death...
The Republicans who are citing Mr. Tribe’s work are not surprised. Mr. McKenna, the Republican lobbyist, said dryly, “He’s about to be banned from a lot of cocktail parties.”Oh, you poor man, now the only friends you'll have are friends nobody wants.
IN THE COMMENTS: Fernandinande said:
"Were Professor Tribe’s name..."
I first read that as referring to the name of a tribe of "Were-professors," who attack when the moon is full.
पोस्ट्स
९४ टिप्पण्या:
“That a leading scholar of constitutional matters has identical views as officials of a coal company — that his constitutional views are the same as the views that best promote his client — there’s something odd there,”
That all the fixes to "climate change" just happen to comport with the left's goals of wealth redistribution - there's something odd there.
“Were Professor Tribe’s name not attached to them, no one would take them seriously.”
An anti-ad-hominem argument.
That a leading scholar of constitutional matters has identical views as officials of a coal company — that his constitutional views are the same as the views that best promote his client — there’s something odd there.
That argument is rather odd.
Why does that article make me giggle so?
Exquisitely detached amusement, I suppose.
Departing from the tribe's truth makes one a traitor.
They say Progressives have Selma envy.
What they really have is Salem envy.
"Tribe has been weaponized by the Republican Party..."
I hope that comes with a cool costume with a cape. And lasers. Obviously.
I am Laslo.
rector of the environmental law program at Harvard Law School, and Richard Lazarus, an expert in environmental law
Environmental law people gotta environment.
He’s about to be banned from a lot of cocktail parties
If the Left loses the cocktail cudgel, what do they have Left?
It's his penance for making Mr. Obama the president of the Harvard Law Review despite a lack of scholarly attainments.
The NYT provides a quote to cast doubt on Tribe's veracity...
Of course it does.
“Were Professor Tribe’s name ...
I first read that as referring to the name of a tribe of "Were-professors", who attack when the moon is full.
Telling that the cocktail party comment was even made. What a pack of superficial wankers the Left are.
The Logan Act is going to snap one of these days.
The Logan Act forbids law professors from negotiating on behalf of unauthorized polluters having a dispute with the US ;)
That a leading scholar of constitutional matters has identical views as officials of a coal company — that his constitutional views are the same as the views that best promote his client — there’s something odd there.
Replace "officials of coal company" with "known mass murderers" and the assertion above wouldn't even come to mind much less be thought of as "odd" in those same legal academic circles.
The green agenda is just as corporate, but more corrupt. Billions of dollars, largely government funding, is at stake along with the livelihood of people who have no other productive capacity. The green industry is just as greedy and seeks to have government mandate the I dominance over other industry.
Doesn't matter what the state of climate science is; unconstitutional is unconstitutional.
But to a judiciary that decided that growing your own food for your own consumption is "interstate commerce" and thereby subjected to Federal regulation, I don't know what can't be found constitutional.
That case was a long time ago, but not as long ago as 1868 when the Fourteenth Amendment legalized same-sex marriage; yet strangely didn't give women the vote.
It's hilarious that they think it's odd when a lawyer believes in his client's case.
Anger from within the Obama administration about Mr. Tribe’s actions is particularly fierce, although officials declined to comment on the record for fear of escalating the situation
Why does the Obama Administration always seem to act like Susan MacClare, Lady Flintshire?
To liberals it's not the written law that matters, only ones 'views'.
If the law does not follow their views then the law should be ignored.
And that's Obama's reasoning through out his presidency.
Sue him sand rub his nose in it.
Tell me again how elite institutions don't socially punish even well-established lawyers?
What really makes them mad is that Tribe is going against the narrative that there is only one legitimate point of view.
Tribe has been weaponized by the Republican Party
Dog whistle?
It's a very odd phrase. I don't understand why it would be said like that unless it was some sort of dog whistle.
We're gonna punish our enemies, and we're gonna reward our friends who stand with us on issues that are important to us
I am sure they already reserving his bunk in denier's re-education camp as we speak.
“The administration’s climate rule is far from perfect, but sweeping assertions of unconstitutionality are baseless,” Jody Freeman, director of the environmental law program at Harvard Law School, and Richard Lazarus, an expert in environmental law who has argued over a dozen cases before the Supreme Court, wrote in a rebuttal to Mr. Tribe’s brief on the Harvard Law School website. “Were Professor Tribe’s name not attached to them, no one would take them seriously.”...
The noted independence of the legal professor business is duly noted.
I'll note the critic didn't explain WHY it is constitutional.
“That a leading scholar of constitutional matters has identical views as officials of a coal company — that his constitutional views are the same as the views that best promote his client — there’s something odd there,” said Richard L. Revesz, director of the Institute for Policy Integrity at the New York University School of Law. ... and a prediction of his social death...
So, what businesses have views that are AUTOMATICALLY unconstitutional? Just curious.
Tell me again how elite institutions don't socially punish even well-established lawyers?
No joke. I also have to wonder how welcoming they are to possible professors of differing viewpoints. You'd think these Earls of Diversity would be more, you know, open minded.
Liberals acting as fascists once again.
and we're gonna reward our friends who stand with us on issues that are important to us
...by inviting them to cocktail parties!
Honestly, the cocktail party chatter must be insufferably dull if every one agrees on every thing.
I can't believe that young people with brains really think it is fun to join a movement that punishes thinking for one's self and any kind of stray from orthodoxy.
Remember when "Question Authority" was a sacred duty? Not lefties laugh at anybody who still takes it seriously. I wonder if this is the kind of world the young really want to inhabit. I will be gone in 30 years and my future is assured til then, but what about young people? How many philosophers will be banned? How many writers and artists who spout dangerous ideas? Who will be the George Carlin of this generation to point out the absurdities?
JSD said...
We're gonna punish our enemies, and we're gonna reward our friends who stand with us on issues that are important to us
That Obama quote just echos a much earlier admonition from Samuel Gompers:
He also encouraged the AFL to take political action to 'elect their friends' and 'defeat their enemies'. link
Gompers in turn probably echoed someone even earlier.
Remember when "Question Authority" was a sacred duty? Not lefties laugh at anybody who still takes it seriously. I wonder if this is the kind of world the young really want to inhabit. I will be gone in 30 years and my future is assured til then, but what about young people? How many philosophers will be banned? How many writers and artists who spout dangerous ideas? Who will be the George Carlin of this generation to point out the absurdities?
I'll quote Jonah Goldberg:
“My single biggest complaint about the majority of college campuses is the widespread myth that being liberal is rebellious somehow. I always like to ask students something like: ‘So, let me get this straight. Your professors are liberal. The administration here is liberal. Your high school teachers were liberal. The mainstream media is liberal. The music industry is liberal. Hollywood is liberal. The art community is liberal. The fashion and publishing industries are liberal. And yet you people think you’re sticking it to the Man by agreeing with them?’ Being liberal is just about the least rebellious thing you can do on an elite college campus.”
I remember when "speaking truth to power" was fashionable among progressives.
Perhaps the progressives haven't noticed they are now the establishment.
"That a leading scholar of constitutional matters has identical views as officials of a coal company — that his constitutional views are the same as the views that best promote his client — there's something odd there," said Richard L. Revesz, director of the Institute for Policy Integrity at the New York University School of Law.
I could actually visualize Mr. Revesz sneering as he said this.
This graphic from Watts Up With That today is instructive:
https://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2015/04/grahams-hierarchy-of-disagreement.png
Laslo Spatula said...
"Tribe has been weaponized by the Republican Party..."
I hope that comes with a cool costume with a cape. And lasers. Obviously.
I am Laslo.
4/7/15, 8:56 AM
Should that not read "And frickin lasers"?
The Cracker Emcee said: "Telling that the cocktail party comment was even made. What a pack of superficial wankers the Left are."
A Republican said that.
Rush Limbaugh frequently speaks of the Left in terms of their desire to go to the right cocktail parties.
It's the outsiders to the parties who seem to be thinking in terms of cocktail parties. Whether there really are such great parties where over-50 people are getting major life satisfaction, I do not know. I have my doubts.
Here'a bit from Prof. Revesz, of the "Institute for Policy Integrity":
"When done correctly, the numbers often support strong government protections for important issues like the environment, health and safety, and consumer protection.
But too often, cost-benefit analysis has been used in a biased fashion, leading to deregulation or watered down rules. This imbalance should be reset to produce unbiased analyses that can show what some have been trying to hide: smart government protections are often cost-benefit justified.
Policy Integrity can help groups use economics to reach their advocacy goals."
Of course, economics used to obstruct those "advocacy goals" lacks "integrity." "Unbiased" analysis shows that more government usually works; naturally, analyses showing the opposite are merely "biased."
>> great parties where over-50 people are getting major life satisfaction, I do not know. I have my doubts.
Read 'Radical Chic'. It may not be the case now, but it certainly was true in the 70's.
Perhaps that's the basis of the belief that lefties care about such things?
Tribe is fortunate to be doing this now. Unless there is a cultural shift, in 10 years or so this kind of apostasy could result in beheading.
@MadisonMan:Honestly, the cocktail party chatter must be insufferably dull if every one agrees on every thing.
I don't think you'll find a primate that doesn't enjoy gathering with an in-group to exclude an out-group.
To the people who agree, they find each other and their views terribly interesting. If you find them dull, you don't belong there.
“Whether he intended it or not, Tribe has been weaponized by the Republican Party in an orchestrated takedown of the president’s climate plan,” said one former administration official.
What sort of asshole talks like that? This is from a former, and if Hillary wins, no doubt future, member of our ruling class!
Can we go back to old, fat, white guys sitting around in the drawing room smoking cigars & deciding the fate of the plebs? 'Cause I really doubt they were bigger asswipes than their modern equivalents....
This reminds me of an Althouse post from the other day. About a professor who hides his Christianity.
This is very clever of the climatistas. The way to shut up anyone who disagrees with you is to go after the Tribes. This keeps everyone on the reservation. Its like othering black people who vote Republican. Or othering fox news. You don't want to be "those people" do you?
In my office I've stated I support Ted Cruz for President. A lot of eye rolling, tin foil hat comments followed. I asked people to explain their objection to Ted Cruz. It was all about how crazy he is. A fire breather. When asked for examples, all they could say was he shut down the government. When pressed on if we should be spending so much money, the response is, of course not. When asked how else Cruz should go about it, no answers.
Its not like people think this through. They just don't want to be other.
Honestly, the cocktail party chatter must be insufferably dull if every one agrees on every thing.
Can you imagine a liberal who isn't insufferably dull? Except maybe for the Professor. In my experience liberals believe that the right way to engage someone in conversation is to lecture them from a position of absolute moral authority. Watching them lecture each other must be beyond painful.
It's the outsiders to the parties who seem to be thinking in terms of cocktail parties. Whether there really are such great parties where over-50 people are getting major life satisfaction, I do not know. I have my doubts.
It's certainly fair to criticize the metaphor and question what satisfaction is derived. I can say within the Boston/Cambridge leftie power circles obsession over the social hierarchy is real and probably worse than most people imagine.
Laurence Tribe Fights Climate Case Against Star Pupil From Harvard, President Obama
Hilarious!! Star pupil!?!?...and then they had to remind us.
I think I've seen this movie.
Girl at the top of the in crowd at the local high school shocks her mean girl peers by befriending the social outcast because its the right thing to do.
Liberalism is a fashion statement, and Tribe made a big fashion faux pas.
That's the lighthearted view. The darker one is that leftist elites are natural totalitarians. It's no longer amusing. They are perfectly comfortable with destroying those they disagree with.
Oh, you poor man, now the only friends you'll have are friends nobody wants.
"But don't ask me to defend freedom of speech. I already catch shit from my peers for letting you people comment on my blog"
I suspect that if Tribe decided instead to dedicate himself to freeing all the prisoners on death row, he would be applauded by the crowd attacking him now.
David said...
Liberalism is a fashion statement, and Tribe made a big fashion faux pas.
Tribe and Dershowitz are both liberals, but neither is a Leftist hack without principles...
The rest of HLS? Best left unsaid...
Whether there really are such great parties where over-50 people are getting major life satisfaction, I do not know. I have my doubts.
There are in Washington, though probably the parties are not all that great. Think Hollywood too. The delicious power of exclusion is not just a liberal trait, but they give it a fine political edge.
The point here is to silence everyone who doesn't bow to liberal/green dogma.Tribe himself may be immune as he is elderly, has tenure and is at the end of a long and distinguished career. (However, don't underestimate the power of social and cultural pressure. No one wants to be shunned.)
But the real target is not Tribe but all the younger, more vulnerable scholars who will read the Times article and understand what could happen to them if they fail to toe the line. Ninety-seven percent consensus indeed.
Agreed, Sarge. There are exceptions but the masses are fashionistas.
A lot of these people are really smart, really smart. And you are supposed to be impressed. But they may be too smart, they think they are always right.
Laurence Tribe Fights Climate Case Against Star Pupil From Harvard, President Obama
I thought he was from Hawaii.
Laurence Tribe Fights Climate Case Against Star Pupil From Harvard, President Obama"
That word "star" doesn't means what you think it means...
Consider the source: NYT. That makes this quite rich: "[A] number of legal scholars and current and former members of the Obama administration say that Mr. Tribe has eroded his credibility by using his platform as a scholar to promote a corporate agenda ...."
None of those guys every uses his "platform" in service of an "agenda," now does he.
Richard Dolan wrote: Consider the source: NYT
Which is what makes the word "traitor" most exquisite. Ms. Davenport pulls a reveal.
"star pupil, Barack Obama"
I'd like to see some evidence of that assertion.
Isn't it funny that anyone that opposes a lefty position has "an agenda" but no one that supports a lefty position ever does?
Bush's government had "an agenda" but Obama's does not.
Today Tribe has "an agenda" but a couple of years ago, he did not.
Home schooler's have an agenda but the teacher's union does not.
The Tea Party has an agenda but open border supports & big gov types do not.
The examples abound...
Most of these academics are socially awkward.
I work with tons of Phd's/Economists and they barely talk.
Their basically nerds.
There aren't any cocktail parties for these folks in Cambridge.
What I noticed the most in the NYT article was what wasn't said: There was nothing in the article about whether the clean air act should or should not apply to Carbon dioxide.
The article attacks Tribe's motives, gives examples of people who think his arguments are faulty, find his use of words odd or point out that he is not a clean air act expert. They never spell-out what the law says and why CO2 and its role in climate change would (or would not) apply.
Telling.
He's lucky. He'll shed all his friends that are crummy without effort.
That a leading scholar of constitutional matters has identical views as officials of a coal company — that his constitutional views are the same as the views that best promote his client — there’s something odd there
Because ... coal companies are axiomatically wrong and evil?
That's the only thing I can carry away from that claim that it's "odd" that a coal company (hiss!) could ever be in the right, in the eyes of a constitutional scholar.
Can we get a cite for the "star pupil" language?
A short story about a tribe of were-professors who change in the middle of a cocktail party and devour a dissenter. He, uneasy, trying to work out as the party goes on what the were-professors are hiding from him. Last words as he runs for door - which sadly is locked - "Oh, God, I thought you said: 'We're professors party.' " Shot of full moon. Sound of wolves howling.
Tribe is a fraud. The "Constitutional scholar" should know well that Obama is not eligible, and never informed the public.Same with this blog's "law prof" (what a joke).
His definition of natural born Citizen, used in Resolution 511, as "one born WITHIN the territory and ALLEGIANCE of as nation," clearly shows that he knows that Hussein Obama is not eligible, since Hussein Obama was born with allegiance to Britain, through his father. Allegiance is singular. Even our naturalization oath requires the relinquishing of allegiance to all other nations, so how could it be lesser allegiance for a future POTUS? Even Revised Statutes 1872 defines "citizen" as one "subject to the jurisdiction of the US and no other foreign power" (after the 14th Amendment).
He used the smokescreen of Res. 511 to cover Obama's ineligibility by questioning McCain's, and by "legalizing" McCain with Naturalization Act 1790, which created a statutory nbC ("shall be considered as natural born Citizens"-- not that they ARE Constitutional natural born Citizens) for the benefit of military families who served in the early Republic. Of course he knows that that statutory stipulation was REPEALED 4 years later.
He also never mentioned law of nations, which is the Original Common Law of the US, and from which the exact term, natural born Citizen, comes. He preferred to refer to BCL and Blackstone, which required the mental gymnastics of making a "subject " a "citizen".
He also never mentions the precedent of Minor v. Happersett, 88 US 162, 167 (1874).
His fraudulent analysis was repeated over and over by cowardly treasonous judges all over the nation.
Tribe has committed treason. He is a fraud, and a scumbag. May he rot in hell for allowing the republic killer, Hussein Obama, to inhabit the White House.
"Liberalism is a fashion statement, and Tribe made a big fashion faux pas.
That's the lighthearted view. The darker one is that leftist elites are natural totalitarians. It's no longer amusing. They are perfectly comfortable with destroying those they disagree with."
As Jonah Goldberg wrote, "scratch a lefty, and underneath you'll find a fascist every time."
I remember during the Lewinsky wars that, in the midst of all of the controversy about whether the President had committed an impeachable act, that no one had gone to the then-Liberal Media Go-To-Guy for all constitutional questions, Professor Tribe.
So I went back and looked at my con law hornbook, 1978 first edition, written by Tribe.
Then I understood why no MSM outlet was quoting him: what he wrote about impeachment at best did Clinton no favors. A fair reading would've supported impeachment and removal from office.
He probably was persuaded to take his phone off the hook and go on sabbatical in Mongolia.
Fernandinande said...
“Were Professor Tribe’s name ...
I first read that as referring to the name of a tribe of "Were-professors", who attack when the moon is full.
Werewolves = people who aren't wolves, but who act like them when the moon is full.
Wereprofessors = people who aren't (law) professors, but who act like them when the moon is full. Such as the commentariat here.
"... and a prediction of his social death… "
Careful. That meme's taken.
See O. Patterson, Slavery and Social Death.
I'm in awe of progressives, total awe. Not only are they unassailable authorities on questions of science and morality, they know more about my motives than I do.
That a leading scholar of constitutional matters has identical views as officials of a coal company — that his constitutional views are the same as the views that best promote his client — there’s something odd there.
Suppose Tribe said he was just in it for the money, would the Left be friends with him again?
Whether there really are such great parties where over-50 people are getting major life satisfaction, I do not know. I have my doubts.
It's not the parties that are great, or even enjoyable, it's the fact that you're invited and someone else isn't.
Titus: "I work with tons of Phd's/Economists and they barely talk."
You are HR. You don't "work" with any of them. You share the same building and you process paperwork.
For which we thank you.
Quaestor: "Suppose Tribe said he was just in it for the money, would the Left be friends with him again?"
Not without the necessary "reeducation" and sustained public contrition and humiliation that the left would require to get back on the good side of the "tolerant" ones.
The Bos/Was corridor is where all public policy at the federal level is made.
You peons in flyover states live with what we tell you to do.
My admin processes the paperwork Drago; I am a high paid VP. I have an additional staff of 8 throughout the country that I tell what to do.
I tell the Economists what to pay their peeps, how much their increase/promotion increases should be and tell them when to fire someone. If they want to add 1% or subtract 1% to the increase I fight back and always win. I also tell them what bonus and stock options every employee in our fab Cambridge should get-I don't negotiate. I determine someone's career advancement. I have lots of leniency too.
I also hire lots of people-and I determine their offers.
In my first HR job I did process paperwork though. I was the ass't to the VP of HR for Time Warner Publishing group for 2 years. Little, Brown publishers to be exact. They published books by J.D Salinger, Louisa May Alcott and David Sedaris.
In previous HR positions I have worked with SVP of Sales to create new sales terrorities internationally for multiple rare disease lyposomal distorder new product roll-outs; compensation analysis to determine base/bonus salary; and make lists of people to fire.
Their are HR peeps that just push paper but I could not work in that environment. Think of me as your HR partner!
HR was probably Personnel when you worked; it's changed Helen. The value of an HR person all depends on the industry they work in. I could never work with non-exempt, union, manufacturing, less educated, blue collar workers-ick
And thank you!
Whether there really are such great parties where over-50 people are getting major life satisfaction.
These kinds of cocktail parties, where the newcomers to D.C (or Cambridge or Palo Alto) hope to be introduced to all the right people.
the left is really showing its true colors today. several articles that show an unhinged quality
Titus: "........"
Shorter Titus: I know I'm just HR but darn it I matter! I create value too! Just like all the big boys and girls!
LOL
This was my favorite line from Titus' last post: Titus: "In my first HR job I did process paperwork though. I was the ass't to the VP of HR for Time Warner Publishing group for 2 years. Little, Brown publishers to be exact. They published books by J.D Salinger, Louisa May Alcott and David Sedaris."
Note to self: publishers publish books written by authors.
Well, you learn something new everyday.
@ Drago
There's something to be said for a rich fantasy life... not much, but something.
Titus: "I work with tons of Phd's/Economists and they barely talk."
That's a hint, Titus.
Titus wrote -
"My admin processes the paperwork Drago; I am a high paid VP. I have an additional staff of 8 throughout the country that I tell what to do."
And I'm sure all 8 would love to tell you where you could go. That quote right there is the very definition of a crappy boss.
CWJ: "And I'm sure all 8 would love to tell you where you could go. That quote right there is the very definition of a crappy boss."
Quite so.
The best bosses hire competent performers who either know what to do or are fully capable of figuring out what to do.
Titus gives much away with his transparently hilarious braggadocio.
I don't think there are too many principled liberals who could stand up to this kind of coordinated character assassination from their own side.
Tribe might be one of the few.
He's always struck me as a man of principle and intellect, and a patriot. Sure, the conservatives who post here probably have a beef or two with him -- but I doubt you've ever had a reason to doubt his integrity.
Look, I'm not a fan of coal. But it's the basis of our economy right now, and it won't be switched out quickly unless we want massive economic dislocations that would hurt the poor first. That's just me, my preference. But I'm most inspired by those who defend the processes that undergird this country's political decisions. I am most happy that he is fighting this battle for the Constitution's sake. I've always admired people who stand up for principles and who part company with their ideological tribe to do so.
Titus
Dude, if you are in your twenties you can brag about being a "VP". If you are a "VP" in your thirties it is a bit sad, certainly nothing to brag about. Over thirty it is laughable. Be quiet about it if you are over thirty.
If you are in your forties and a "VP" you are done. Toast.
Don't brag about being lame.
I can tell Professor Tribe from my own experience that the neo Stalinists of today's alleged "liberalism" will never forgive him; and they will find numerous sneaky, cowardly ways to get even with him.
Misinforminimalism said...
Can we get a cite for the "star pupil" language?
Actually, for all those who mocked this description, the cite is from Mr. Tribe himself. From the article:
“He was one of the most amazing research assistants I’ve ever had,” Mr. Tribe said in a recent interview.
Actually the VP title means something very different in organizations.
In a bank everyone is a VP and means nothing.
But if you work in the creative economy in a coastal fab elite organization surrounded by Ivy's it means something. Especially if out of 2000 employees there are maybe 20.
If you live in a grossy southern redneck state no one really gives a shit because you don't matter.
OK Titus,
So you're a centurion then.
Titus said...
The Bos/Was corridor is where all public policy at the federal level is made.
You peons in flyover states live with what we tell you to do.
My admin processes the paperwork Drago; I am a high paid VP. I have an additional staff of 8 throughout the country that I tell what to do.
I tell the Economists what to pay their peeps, how much their increase/promotion increases should be and tell them when to fire someone. If they want to add 1% or subtract 1% to the increase I fight back and always win. I also tell them what bonus and stock options every employee in our fab Cambridge should get-I don't negotiate. I determine someone's career advancement. I have lots of leniency too.
I also hire lots of people-and I determine their offers.
In my first HR job I did process paperwork though. I was the ass't to the VP of HR for Time Warner Publishing group for 2 years. Little, Brown publishers to be exact. They published books by J.D Salinger, Louisa May Alcott and David Sedaris.
In previous HR positions I have worked with SVP of Sales to create new sales terrorities internationally for multiple rare disease lyposomal distorder new product roll-outs; compensation analysis to determine base/bonus salary; and make lists of people to fire.
Their are HR peeps that just push paper but I could not work in that environment. Think of me as your HR partner!
HR was probably Personnel when you worked; it's changed Helen. The value of an HR person all depends on the industry they work in. I could never work with non-exempt, union, manufacturing, less educated, blue collar workers-ick
And thank you!
You just stay fabulous there sparky.
Only in DC and among progodytes addicted to the "appeal to authority" argument does a Harvard degree hold much of a cachet.
What matters is what the Harvard graduate does with that degree.
A useful insight into the Proglodyte Mind:
http://accordingtohoyt.com/2015/04/08/social-ignorance-warriors-bill-reader/#comments
" tim in vermont said...
I can't believe that young people with brains really think it is fun to join a movement that punishes thinking for one's self and any kind of stray from orthodoxy."
Young people are herd animals, desperate not to be cut out.
Titus
VP is a shit title, especially in Boston, especially in HR.
I was an EVP in San Francisco by the time I was 35.
Those of us who sped through the VP stage can live wherever we wish. You have no choice.
You can take the hick out of Wisconsin but you cannot take the Wisconsin out of the hick.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा