Mitt's "free tuition" scholarship
 

Not sure why he would tout such a thing, considering that Rs are against a) govt involvement with anything, b) college, and c) education.
But Mitt bragged about how he promoted college education as governor:

"When I was governor of Massachusetts, to get a high school degree you had to pass an exam. If you graduated in the top quarter of your class, we gave you a John and Abigail Adams scholarship—four years tuition-free to the college of your choice in Massachusetts that's a public institution."

Sounds pretty sweet, except that in Mass., "tuition" = fees and fees = tuition.

So what he left out was that the scholarship doesn’t cover fees, which in the Massachusetts state university system are much greater than tuition. In Romney's last year as Gov. (2006), at the flagship University of Massachusetts (Amherst), a year of in-state tuition was $1714. Fees for a year--$7881.

Mitt's never fond of the details.

Well that's why they were able to afford to give out so many scholarships.

If they paid the fees then they'd go broke.

Fees = living on campus.

You are an imbecile.

Nope--doesn't include room and board. Imbecile.

This thread smells of desperation.

So recieving $1,700.00 is bad?

The tuition claim was Obama's main blunder in this debate. If what you post about the fees is true, Obama could have used that against Romney, but he didn't. Instead, he tried to claim that it was the work of Romney's predecessor. From what I understand, Romney's predecessor did institute educational reforms which began the education level rising, but it was Romney's John and Abigal Adams program that did what Romney said. Therefore, Obama got that one wrong.

I thought Romney should have turned around and quoted it at him. Instead, he just muttered, "No, Mr. President, that was one of mine," or something like that. He missed the chance to score major instant points.

To be honest, if you were in need the pell would take care of the rest. A $1700 scholarship is nothing to scoff at.

It is misleading to tell the country that 100% of tuition is covered when 95% of the population understands that term to mean the cost of attending classes, that is--the most expensive part of attending college (perhaps along with housing, which isn't included either).

Really?

Originally Posted by cosmo20002
Massachusetts (Amherst), a year of in-state tuition was $1714.

Really. Tuition, in the Mass. system, is what most people think of as fees. In Mass., the fees part, about $8000, is what most people would call tuition.

Normally...I think of tuition as tuition. And fees as fees. But maybe that's just me.

Who cares if it's a small amount. He didn't mislead or lie to anyone on this point.

Um, he said, "tuition-free."

cosmo is turning into one of the saddest posters here. He's going to scream for the whole four years Mitt is President if Mitt wins.

The son of a good friend of ours got a full tuition free ride at ISU.

He pays for his own books, room and board.