Wow, interning at the Heritage Foundation and at Claremont, getting society pics taken with Wolfowitz!! Covering issues like the Terry Schiavo case, the Child Interstate Abortion Notification Act and the Patriot Act (I wonder what her positions were on those??). Mr. Schramm is her "greatest mentor." A very successful indoctrination, indeed!

Here’s a little Freudian slip from her guest commentary on the Bolton nomination:

"Now let us consider the job for which he has received the nomination from the Chief Executor of our country..."

She probably meant to say chief executive, but perhaps she confused it with executor -another word for executioner; I presume she didn’t mean a lawyer who works out the details of a deceased person’s wills- based on Bush’s Christ-like record of "erring on the side of life" as governor in Texas, with his deep, contemptative, 15-minute clemency considerations for the executions of 152 death row inmates, fellow born-again Christians included. Funny when words slip past the writer, spell-check and the professor.

Prompted by the newspaper article, I read over her Ashbrook guest commentaries, which are pretty meandering and not at all cogent.
In addition to the rah-rah-Bolton piece, there’s a silly puff piece on the scandalously subversive fashions of Condi Rice, and a
pitiful "I was a waitress once" essay, which includes literary flourishes like "The night slowed down as suddenly as wheels on a racecar," two different, incorrect spellings of Nicomachean (Nicomachian and Nicomoccean), as well as, strangely, another reference to painful high-heel shoes. Not very serious stuff.

After reading those essays, two written as a graduate and one as a junior, I am pretty skeptical of Mr. Schramm’s promotional tagline that "The Ashbrook Scholar Program is for serious students and is very demanding." More like "Toe the line and you’ll be fine."

Oh, Rebeccah Ramey, another mediocre writer is getting attention from wrinkly conservatives who are starved for youth and pleasant faces.

Rebeccah, please give a pretzel to the Chief Executor from me.

The two earlier comments posted here are sad and pathetic. Should one wish to attack Dr. Schramm, then by all means do so with a legitimate argument. It is childish to attack Rebeccah for a spelling error in an attempt to throw dirt on the Ashbrook Program and Dr. Schramm. Shame on both of you, your mothers should have taught you better.

I should like to comment more on this whole situation but I feel it to be a waste as those I wish to chastise will not listen and the vast majority of this blog’s readers already know better.

I will leave with one final comment in support of Rebeccah. If anyone should have the pleasure to have spent time with her they will know as I do that she is an intelligent and very promising woman whose accomplishments in her short career are not to be belittled.

A smile spread across his face, revealing deep creases in his cheeks that were a moment ago hidden from me. “Good!” he responded, “I was so lonely, I wondered in here hoping for some good care and company.”

Actually, I don’t think the two previous posters were "attacking" Raney for making simple spelling errors (but while we’re talking about her spelling errors- what’s "wondered in" supposed to mean?). No, I think they were referring to her mediocre writing abilities and the fact that, despite her lack of skills, she’s being touted as this promising young acolyte.

Her work reads like the very best that Mrs. McGee’s 10th grade English class has to offer, but hardly qualifies as something to be crowed about.

Actually, I don’t think the two previous posters were "attacking" Raney for making...

What’s a Raney? You must be a pretty mediocre person yourself. It’s Rebeccah RAMEY. No matter, you’ll know the name pretty well before too long.

As for Mr. Bentsen and Ms. York (as well as you, Mr. Scalcott) none of whom are deserving of such titles, Mr. Carey is exactly right. Your petty, premature estimations of skill and worth entirely reveal your small and simple souls. I think the Ashbrook Center has a certain interest in taking a stance on party issues. Do you guys not?

Maybe you should read some of Ms. Ramey’s academic work before passing judgment...of course, that would take more time, consideration, and thinking than you all are probably capable of. Yeah, nevermind, just find some spelling errors. That ought to be sufficient.

What a joke. You all are pathetic.

This entire string reeks of immaturity.

I just want to make sure I’m clear about the nature of the relationship between Ms. Ramey and Mr. Schramm. She says he is a great "mentor" to her. What does that entail, exactly? I’ve heard about some of these wild professor/student relationships, so naturally I’m suspicious. Let’s clear this matter up!

Well said Doug, let’s clear this up:

Etymology: Latin, from Greek MentOr1 capitalized: a friend of Odysseus entrusted with the education of Odysseus’ son Telemachus
2 a : a trusted counselor or guide

Sounds pretty wild to me. Nice insinuation though. Pretty classy.

Now you’re just being an asshat.

To clear things up further, an Executor is not another term for "executioner" Mr. Bentsen. The two definitions of Executor are:
1. A person who carries out or performs something.
2. Law. A person who is appointed by a testator to execute the testator’s will.

Why the hostility from Mr. Bentsen, Mr. Scalcott, and Ms. York? Dr. Schramm is showing pride in a favorite pupil, do you really find it necessary to react the way you did? Would comment further but I need to get to work.

Actually, executor does have an archaic usage meaning executioner. There’s even a Shakespeare reference if you check the 2nd definition listed.

...and since executor is a common noun, not a proper noun, it needn’t be capitalized.

To The Rebeccah Ramey Defense Coalition:

Peter posted an article for us to read (hey, I EVEN looked at the vintage motorcycle pages he linked to) about a former student of his. After reading the article and learning about her internships at some well-known right-wing think tanks (Heritage is especially famous) I began to further suspect that the Ashbrook program might be one which attracts primarily conservative students and grooms them for right-wing (mostly political) careers, perhaps in an effort to head off the liberal bias in the academy so hyped by Horowitz & Co. So then I decided to read some of Ramey’s commentaries at Ashbrook, which the article mentioned, to see if I could get some indication of the academic excellence cultivated by the Ashbrook program. True, her posted work might not represent, or be on par with, her best work for Ashbrook professors, but still, I expected to read something more serious than just rants regurgitated from conservative columnists, as in the Bolton piece ("I don’t want Mr. Rogers...". The other pieces were just poorly written, whatever their political points or lack thereof.

This is how it works. People write things, they get posted on websites, and as I’m sure Rebeccah knows -or quickly will learn in big, bad DC- they open themselves to criticism of all sorts. Rebeccah may indeed be an "intelligent and promising young woman," but I personally just saw low-grade ideological ramblings in those posted essays. Yes, I pointed out some spelling errors. These were hardly the ONLY things wrong with her essays, only the most humorous. Moreover, isn’t good spelling one crucial part of academic excellence? Or do you take some relativist stance, where different people can choose their preferred spellings? I mean, really, I would guess that in the Ashbrook program Nicomachean Ethics is one of the most important texts, constantly referred to.

Miss/Ms. Ramey is an ADULT woman now, a college graduate (thus, I don’t see my critique as being "premature"). It is also fairly clear that she is a budding right-leaning ideologue who has an axe to grind. She should be able to take some criticisms, however mild, without a host of knights in shining armor coming to her defense. I don’t feel that I’ve "thrown dirt" on the Ashbrook program; I have expressed skepticism.

But what exactly did Schramm teach young Ms. Ramey? That’s what I’m trying to figure out. I’m only bringing this up because I’ve been hearing a lot about how professors and teachers will take advantage of innocent, adoring young female students, and I want to make sure that’s not what we’re dealing with in this situation.

Both of your blurbs seem awfully smug for someone who incorrectly criticized her proper (albeit odd) use of "executor." Perhaps you should consult a dictionary before your next barrage of insults.

Bensten:

You may try to clarify your stance now as much as you like, but your original post was obviously spiteful and malicious (is it ok, in terms of academic excellence, to use repetitive redundencis?).

Your judgment is premature because you announce to the world that Ms. Ramey is obviously a poor excuse for a student, and is certainly the best the Ashbrook Center can produce (b/c of Dr. Schramm’s blog and her position in DC). Your evidence is based on essays she has written that are obviously toeing the party-line. You call them ideological ramblings and "rants regurgitated from conservative columnists." Is the work of conservative columnists not to be admired? So the work of Bill Buckley, George Will, Steven Hayward, et. al is not something towards which to aspire? (I would have said "worth aspire to," but I think you and your grammar friends would have taken issue with that.)

It is certainly true that Ms. Ramey does not need "knights in shining armor," to defend her. I know this from experience. She is an adult and can defend herself. She would not feel the need to lower herself to answer you petty critiques. I criticize your critiques not to defend her, but to defend you against yourself. Your smug accusations and insinuations make you look like an ass, and I thought it would be helpful to point out as much before you further mired yourself in your own filth.

As for the Ashbrook Center being "a program which attracts primarily conservative students and grooms them for right-wing (mostly political) careers, perhaps in an effort to head off the liberal bias in the academy so hyped by Horowitz & Co." I would say that is not quite complete. Being a former Ashbrookian myself, I was a member of the Young Democrats and helped increase membership from around 8 to about 65, all before November. Despite this, I was neither mocked nor forced to hold my tongue in any discussion or lecture Q&A period. I even held a leadership position in the Ashbrook Center and worked there.

My point is, the purpose of the Ashbrook Center is academic excellence first and foremost. Talk to the professors at AU, right-leaning as well as left, and they will confirm that Ashbrook scholars are consistently among their best students. So here’s what should be considered:

Maybe, just maybe, the Ashbrook Center teaches what they believe is right. The result is that many students come to understand conservative philosophy, find a passion for pursuing a career in politics, and therefore find themselves in the Republican camp. Is that possible?

P.S. Spelling is not part of the pursuit for academic excellence for writers. Working as an editor for the Claremont Review of Books has confirmed as much.

you’re all child-touchers.

It is certainly true that Ms. Ramey does not need "knights in shining armor," to defend her. I know this from experience. She is an adult and can defend herself.

Then perhaps you should stop defending her.

I criticize your critiques not to defend her, but to defend you against yourself

That’s just nuts. I’ve got a hunch that you’re not fond of Bentsen. If you think he’s making himself look bad, just let it happen. If you’re always trying to "help" people in this way, life must be pretty difficult for you.

What the hell is this, an episode of Beverly Hills 90210? Reads like typical sorority sniping and plain ol’ garden-variety envy. Many more threads like this and I’ll have to find another blog.

Dain, is that a threat or a promise?

I noticed how even you, on your high road of sophistication and dignity, couldn’t resist some sniping of your own, with the "garden variety envy" comment.

Headline: "Dain Forsakes NoLeftTurns, Seeks New Blog"

Hey, Chris, grow up. I call ’em like I see ’em, and my comment was to remind all of you what this looks like from an "outsider." And yes, it is a promise...if all threads begin to look like this one (on some blogs they do), I’m gone (as would be a number of thoughtful people). Don’t know what you’ve got against Fred (or these other people against Ms. Ramey), but it certainly looks juvenile (i.e., childish, sans the ’cute’.) Push off, mate.

After reading that article about her, I couldn’t help but to think of this cartoon.

Grow up Jake/Chris/Erica. How much spare time do you have on your hands? Do you just sit around all day complaining, using psuedonyms to back up your own whiny attacks? Maybe you should spend some of that time reading the aforementioned dictionary.

ok, I guess I was a little harsh with Jake/Chris/Erica, there, sorry. Truth be told, I checked the link from Kelly Oliver, and executor CAN mean executioner. Further, I myself have been sitting in my basement for a couple years, drinking Tang and monitoring No Left Turns nonstop.

Erica, I think the cartoon is a cheap shot. How hard would it be to substitute liberal "kids" there...hey, we’ve got poverty in (fill in the blank). Let’s spend other people’s money and send stupid volunteers to help these poor people. Etc... you get the idea. This woman will be much more effective for the country in her present role than should would be behind the wheel of an army truck (which is about the only direct combat role she would have in Iraq...the other services are meeting their recruitment quotas).

So, again, lay off. I don’t know what personal beef you’ve got against Ms. Ramey, but it’s coming through loud and clear. It’s low, cheap, and .mean.

Thanks for proving my point by swiping my name. Thanks for also proving your ignorance again with another executor comment. Whether "executor" can mean "executioner" is not the issue. The issues were whether you were incorrect in criticizing someone else for properly using that word (yes) and whether you should consult a dictionary before running your mouth (yes). I guess we should also add "logical reasoning skills" to your list of necessities.

"Thanks for proving my point by swiping my name"

YOUR NAME?? Ohio Voter? If you have exclusive rights to that generic title, that’d certainly be news to a lot of other Ohioans.

Dain, you’re as ridiculous as always. Lecturing others on being "mean" while defending (oh, that’s right, ENDORSING) Brit Hume’s appalling comments after the London attacks... please.

Kim, are any of you above the age of 20? I’m beginning to doubt it. Hume was being HONEST (I know, hard for you to understand such an action). As for being "ridiculous," I suppose that’s right from your point of view -- teenagers seldom understand the views and actions of their elders (and betters). Fear not, Kimmy, you’ll grow up someday.

the blog...

We’re all looking at this article for content. Or are we?

Many on this blog have examined the article and picked out a minor detail, a mispelling. You should have also seen improper punctuation which included capitalization errors and misplaced periods and commas. If you’re going to read this article and criticize for punctuation and mispellings, please do a thorough job of it.

The article was written with facts and opinions that followed them. Do we have to agree with the opinion? Of course not, I know I do not.

Please criticize content because many of us know that this article was not typed into this website by Rebeccah Ramey. Let’s look at the finished article in a printed version and hold an intelligent analysis of Ramey’s work.