BillL
Full Member
RIGHT ON !!!!
Posts: 172
|
Post by BillL on Oct 19, 2005 12:12:28 GMT -5
I thought I'd start a new thread since this will be the second time we've maxed out the number of pages (per DPK's suggestion at the begining of #2).
|
|
|
Post by Mike on Oct 21, 2005 12:32:44 GMT -5
Well alright then..thanks Bill, let's dive right in.
With any luck, on Fridays I'm back in my "home office" working and either have tunes going or CNN turned down low. The "news" of the day (so far) is a couple of idiots in DC that apparently mouthed off something about a bomb in their car to the cops. So...they pull them over, arrest them, fix CNN cameras on a grey 2005 Chevy Impala for hours, then finally blow the shit out of the back seat of said Chevy. We can all breath easier now.
And I'm thinking..."I wonder how much Delay paid these guys to bogart the news on his first day in court?" ;D
|
|
|
Post by Mike on Oct 22, 2005 21:44:38 GMT -5
HELLO..hellooo..helloooo... There's an echo in here! OK, the fun has begun it seems. Tom Delay and his lawyer Dick DeGuerin are pretty offended and have asked for a new judge and a change of venue for Delay"s trial because the judge is a Democrat. It's a good thing it's not a Democrat asking for that crap or it would appear absurd!!! BTW Bill, if ever there is an Independent Party, I'm there. Kinky is running on an Independent ticket. I guess you can see how exciting my Saturday nite is.
|
|
|
Post by Scott Hays on Oct 26, 2005 10:24:37 GMT -5
I don't know the odds (but am pretty sure someone is laying them), but it would be kinda fun to guess who -- if anyone -- actually will be indicted in the "CIA leak case". Rove? Libby? Cheney? Bush?
I think Scooter's goose is cooked, and put my money on him. He's the lowest level of the bunch, and probably will be quite happy with whatever disgraced mansion they have offered him to take the fall!
I think that will be it, though would be happy to be wrong
|
|
|
Post by Mike on Oct 26, 2005 11:25:11 GMT -5
Scott, Surely you're not suggesting that this honorable ;D administration would throw one of their own under the bus! Just kidding...it's to be expected with this bunch of creeps. I saw a poll this morning that 90% feel that this administration ;D has behaved illegally or unethically but....so what.
|
|
|
Post by chadgumbo on Oct 26, 2005 21:19:02 GMT -5
Once or towice before, I believe I've alluded to a local (Mpls./St. Paul) morning talk show that I like to listen to ... Ron Rosenbaum and Mark O'Connell. As I'm usually working, I only am able catch snippets of the show if I happen to be out driving from one place to another. This morning I needed to make a trip to the local courthouse, and caught just enough of their show to catch up to what the day's topic was. Apparently, a high school in the metro area is planning an "anti-war protest" in which the students who wish to participate will remain on campus, but not attend classes. Those students who don't wish to participate are free to not come to school that day. It's an all-day event, and it's been categorized by the high school staff as a "learning event." I have to admit that I have some problems with this. If the genesis of this idea came from the high school staff (and I wasn't able to catch enough of the show to know for sure whose idea it was), then it seems to me that the message being sent to the students is 'You may choose to participate, or not, but we have already decided for you how you should feel about our presence in the Middle East.'Anybody who has been a regular participant or visitor to this thread probably knows my feelings about our war effort. I support the war in Afghanistan, and I also felt that going to war in Iraq was wrong. And although I believe we're in so deep in Iraq now that we have to finish what we started, I still feel our premise for invading was incorrect. However, there are people who would disagree with me... people who very much support not only the war effort in Iraq, but the premise for the invasion as well. We can't both be right, and I realize that it may be possible that I'm the one who could be wrong. What I'm trying to say is this: despite how I feel about the war in Iraq, were I a person in a position of authority and active in the day to day activities of high school kids, I would never presume to decide how a young man or woman should feel about the war efforts. Again, though, I wasn't able to tune in long enough to discern how the idea was originated, or even which high school it is that is planning the administration approved 'walk-out.' One caller thought it would be a good idea to have an area reserved for students who do support the war efforts. Sounded perfectly logical to me, but as I understand it, the way the event is currently planned - this is a unilateral anti-war event.
|
|
|
Post by Mike on Oct 26, 2005 22:44:03 GMT -5
Apparently, a high school in the metro area is planning an "anti-war protest" in which the students who wish to participate will remain on campus, but not attend classes. Those students who don't wish to participate are free to not come to school that day. It's an all-day event, and it's been categorized by the high school staff as a "learning event." I support the war in Afghanistan, and I also felt that going to war in Iraq was wrong. And although I believe we're in so deep in Iraq now that we have to finish what we started, I still feel our premise for invading was incorrect. Chad, I get pretty excited these daze to see young people with something other than "Bush '04" on their cars. I too have a problem with an administration organized protest. They need to be organizing school! The kids with "something to say" should be grown up enough and have the cajones to get out and say it!!! Those that don't need to scurry their little butts off to class and study accounting or something. School is what it is. There is a danger of administration changing that concept (IMO). As far as finishing the "project" in Irag. There was definitely a beginning, but there is no end. It is an extremely costly mistake (lie), and in the interest of survival the focus needs to be shifted from Irag to a more global effort. We can't afford both. Besides that, If we "gifted" the Iraqis with a perfect democracy tomorrow, they will have screwed it up by next week. I'm not saying that because I buy Dubya's bullshit reason of that's why we're there, but even if it were true, it is still weak logic for a "commander in chief".
|
|
|
Post by Scott Hays on Oct 31, 2005 12:40:07 GMT -5
Well, clearly some details about this event -- not only its implementation, but also its planning -- are missing from your account, Chad. But I notice this doesn't stop otherwise well-informed and concerned individuals from drawing conclusions. Hmmm ... I guess everyone is an expert on schools.
Which is one of the biggest problems facing schools, by the way ... as if they didn't have enough problems in the very nature of their business without every Tom, Dick and Harriet knowing what is best (or what is wrong) about what it is that they do, or try to do?
I cannot even begin to speak for the administration of this school (and probably district, since I am sure whatever administrative decisions were made were first run by the district office ... and maybe even higher ... before announced). I don't know whose idea the protest was. I don't know the policies of the school/district in regard to protest (or even if such policies exist ... though in this day and age, most schools have them). I don't know if those policies were followed. I don't know who was involved in the decision: Was it unilateral, dictated by policy? ... did the principal make the call on his own? ... was the principal advised by anyone (other administrators, district personnel, attorneys, staff, students)? ... did the staff make the decision? ... were students involved in the process? ... if so, were students pro- and con- allowed to participate? ... is this a compromise solution? ...
And those are just a few of the questions I would ask ...
Still, I notice that students are notified that they do not have to attend school that day. They are not told to stay home. Students with particular beliefs are not told to stay home. It is advertised as an "anti-war protest", but I don't see anything that prevents "pro-war" students from attending school. The gist seems to be that the day will be used as a "learning event". This suggests that opposing points of view will be (?)tolerated? ... allowed? ... encouraged? ... provided?(?) The point is, I don't see anything in the information Chad posted that suggests the school, school staff, or anyone else is imposing a particular point of view on anyone. Yes, it is called an "anti-war protest" ... but couldn't that be because the students who proposed it proposed just that? I have a hard time imagining ANY group of students (let alone people) holding a "pro-war" rally.
I have seen "anti-anti-war" rallies ... but so far, I have yet to see a single weasel come out of the woodwork and lead a rally promoting the war.
|
|
|
Post by Scott Hays on Oct 31, 2005 12:54:58 GMT -5
Oh ... and back to the indictment bet; doesn't look like anyone was willing to take me up on it. So guess what? I WIN!!! As a prize, I claim free drinks for my entire stay at Grand Lido Negril!
Poor Scooter's ass is cooked. But the rest aren't out of the running, no matter how the conservative geeks try to parse the language. I HATE weasel worders, and Washington is full of them (on both sides of the aisle, he said, nodding towards Bill L). I mean, give me a break ... the VP, Libby and his press secretary are on a plane talking about Valerie Plame and Joe Wilson, and the VP tells them she works for the CIA and probably is the one who got him his job [this is documented]. Within hours of landing, Scooter spills the "news" to Cooper. Remembering that Scooter is a behind the scenes type of person who never ever puts himself out in the limelight and makes an individual decision or initiates an individual act without first receiving permission from his boss, who in the world cannot see that this revelation (about which he later "forgot") was more than just "coincidental", and not part of a bigger plan? Especially since documented evidence exists -- and has been made public -- that both Cheney and Scooter had been trying -- for a couple of months -- to find out just who gave Wilson his African assignment, and what connections his wife had to those decisions. And why, for gosh sakes, did the name Valerie Plame even pop into the conversation aboard Air Force 2 in the first place?
Someone is going to start talking, somewhere, and the whole pile of cards will come tumbling down. It will be someone small and seemingly insignificant (my guess is one of the lower level lobbyists that Jack Abramoff hired from some Congressman's staff), but when it does, at least some of the chickens are going to come home to roost. When you build an entire administration on (1) rewarding your buddies, (2) lying about that, and everything else, and (3) punishing those who dare question your practice ... well, at some point it starts to unravel.
Again ... pointing to Bill L ... if lying about blowjobs is enough to be impeached ("the rule of law" ... it's not so much the nature or type of offense that matters, but the fact that the letter of the law has been broken), what about lies that cause a war, cripple the economy, cement the power of the elite corporations, and ... small, in comparison, but huge in a metaphorical sense ... endanger the safety and/or life of an employee of the system?
|
|
|
Post by Mike on Oct 31, 2005 18:10:48 GMT -5
But I notice this doesn't stop otherwise well-informed and concerned individuals from drawing conclusions. Hmmm ... I guess everyone is an expert on schools. I have seen "anti-anti-war" rallies ... but so far, I have yet to see a single weasel come out of the woodwork and lead a rally promoting the war. Well, I'm not an expert on schools, but I did stay in a Holiday Inn last night. ;D All I know is what I said.."Administration needs to stay away from politics and run the school." In Crawford, TX a couple of months ago I saw about 300 "John Wayne Type Weasels" come out of the woodwork to "promote the war", but actually they were protecting their hero from that dastardly and dangerous Cindy Sheehan. Real chest thumpers going on about what a great thing the war in Iraq is. But since they didn't think of a protest rally and she did, I guess you would call that a counter-protest rally. But lemme say this again...if we were talking about a focused war on Bin Laden etal, I would have been on their side of the road, but to prop up Bush's corporate fundraiser... not me.
|
|
|
Post by Mike on Oct 31, 2005 18:43:35 GMT -5
And why, for gosh sakes, did the name Valerie Plame even pop into the conversation aboard Air Force 2 in the first place? Well, they were having one of their "members only" meetings and planning how they were going to make this guy pay for challenging them and.....
|
|
|
Post by chadgumbo on Oct 31, 2005 22:56:24 GMT -5
From Scott Hays on October 31st. Scott, I just wanted to take this opportunity to address a couple of your concerns about my post of October 26th. With regard to the first sentence, I admitted not once, but twice, that due to time constraints on my day's work that I was indeed lacking for information. And as to the second sentence, I am most definitely not an expert on schools. However, as long as I have a couple of sons who are students in the Minnesota public educational system, you can be assured that I am going to, at times, have some opinions. More from Scott: I can sympathize with you, the educator, to a point here. I have no doubt that there are a great many parents who whine far too often about everything from the contents of the curriculum to the unfair treatment of their child to... just about anything that can possibly be imagined. I have a sister-in-law who is a schoolteacher in the Iowa public schools, and some of her stories do cause me to shake my head in wonder. However, the above quote suggests that parents should either have no opinion at all, or if they do they should just keep it to themselves. It reminds me of President Bush's attitude of only a week or so ago... the "trust me on this one" stance that he assumed with Harriet Miers. Surely Scott, you would not close the doors on the lines of communication between parents and educators would you? I do know there have been many a time when my sister-in-law has fantasized about that very thing. Additionally from Scott: I will again, for the third time, make this very clear: neither do I. I wasn't able to catch enough of the show. And while I did draw some conclusions about the things I did hear... from chadgumbo on October 26th: Please note that I began that statement with the word "if". I know, I know, I'm starting to sound like Clinton here "define the word is" . However, using that word was very intentional. The use of the word was meant to imply exactly what it does... "If the genesis of this idea..." which is to admit that I am not certain whose idea it was. That in itself should imply the flip side of that coin as well... "If it was not the idea of the adminstration - then disregard the following comment." If that was not clear enough to readers of my post, then I wish to offer my sincere apologies to the administration of that school (even though the late great Warren Zevon said it best... if they heard this song, which I doubt they will But seriously, I don't wish to condemn that school or its administrators if it wasn't their idea, and I will admit that my comments did sound very judgmental and were premature. In that, Scott is very correct. However, if, and I wish to stress the word IF it was their idea (which I don't know)... but if I were able to discern that that was the case, then I would say that I stand by my comments. Because I did catch enough of the show to know that it was to be a unilateral demonstration. There were to be no provisions made for the opposite point of view. And while I agree with Scott that there really isn't anyone that could be taken seriously if they were "pro-war", I do feel that a person can endorse the current policies and actions of our military without being "pro-war". They're simply supportive of the effort and endorse the reasons behind those efforts. I, for one, do not agree with those people, but do try to respect their point of view. But Scott, thanks for calling me on that one. I wanted to provide a new topic for this thread, but was thwarted from gathering enough information to be able to formulate a reasonable opinion. I probably should have kept it on the back burner, or at least refrained from tossing about any conclusions. Until next time - chadgumbo
|
|
|
Post by Mike on Nov 2, 2005 1:13:46 GMT -5
A while back on the other Politics thread somewhere I alluded to Tom Delay and his cowboy lawyer Dick DeGuerin being offended because the Judge for their case was a Democrat and they wanted a new judge, and a change of venue from Austin cause it's a liberal Democratic majority city. I think I also stated that it was a good thing a Democrat wasn't demanding these things because then it would seem absurd. Well...today a "visiting" judge heard the request from the Delay team and granted a recuse from Judge Bob Perkins, the original judge. DELAY GOT HIS JUDGE REMOVED BECAUSE HE WAS A DEMOCRAT!!!!!!! Now they have demanded a change of venue, and from the way it's looking will get it. They're already yanking this trial around like OJ and have set it back a long way!!! That'll give em time to buy some TV ads about how persecuted poor Tom is. A gag order won't mean shit to these thugs. That's just about the weakest form of bullshit I've ever seen. Judge Perkins was recused because he had contributed to the Kerry campaign and moveon.org. He can be a Democrat if he want's to, but as a Democrat he can't preside over King Delay's trial. Spanked the Democratic Judge and sent him home! So much for bi-partisanship. Repubs, Dems, neo-cons, and libs...we're all fucked and some people dig it, some don't have a fucking clue, and some just have to watch it happen sadly knowing that there is nothing they can do. I didn't want to accept it but, I'm finally seeing that these assholes really are above the law. I guess "the hammer" really is "the hammer". He's come a long way for a bug exterminator from Sugarland, TX. Just one of the good ole boys! Puke.
|
|
|
Post by Scott Hays on Nov 2, 2005 1:23:05 GMT -5
Nothing to apologize for, Chad ... I think you made it very clear in your original post that you were merely speculating and, if your speculations were correct, then ...
By the way, if your speculation was correct, then I probably would agree with you 100% ... no one in a public school has the right to impose their personal belief system on the children they are entrusted to teach or help. This is not to say that discussion of beliefs is not an important part of schooling (nor do I think you implied that, at all), but the discussion has to be for the purpose(s) of learning, not indoctrination.
That said, my point is that schools are much more complex than most people give them credit for. What you see is not always what transpired. Too often, people jump to conclusions and forget all the different variables at work in school decision-making. They impose their own beliefs or preferences (or assumptions), and substitute them for reality.
As to the notion that "parents should either have no opinion at all, or if they do they should just keep it to themselves" ... well, I have to admit that many school workers are a little bit paranoid about public opinion, a little peeved that their expertise is not recognized, and some are flat-out nonresponsive to the opinions or suggestions of parents or members of the community. In some respects, they are correct. Teachers are professionals, they do know what they are doing. Mommy and daddy are looking out after their little Johnny, and often have no conception of how little Johnny's treatment (special or otherwise) is going to affect every other kid in the classroom -- there is a real difference between the narrow perspective of being Johnny's parent, and the broader perspective of being Johnny's (and everyone else's) teacher.
That said, this should not negate the opinion and the input of parents. They are, after all, Johnny's parents, and know an awful lot about him that probably is good to know if you are trying to teach him.
I think the most difficult thing, as a teacher, is to try to deal with people who have firm convictions based upon partial understandings, misunderstandings, or total lack of understanding.
Finally, and this is a little known secret that I think all teachers share. If they don't, they are either extremely talented or lopsidedly blind. It is this ... most teachers are working with someone else's child, and can never absolutely know if every word out of their mouth (since so many words come out, and they are going in so many different directions at once ... for so many different purposes and reasons) was the best thing they could have said at that particular moment. The teaching profession is resting upon a very palpable sense of uncertainty. It is this uncertainty that causes some to become defensive. It is this uncertainty that causes some to quit. But it is also this uncertainty that causes a lot to try much harder, to become much better, and to take themselves beyond what they thought they could accomplish.
I am not sharing a secret to be used against teachers. I share it because it make them more human.
|
|
|
Post by Scott Hays on Nov 2, 2005 13:09:17 GMT -5
I have four things on my mind this morning ... one is a little dated, but made relevant because of a horribly slanted "Face to Face" feature presented on CNBC this morning. The other three are fairly topical. I want to divide them into two separate posts, though. This one, called "Calvin and Hobbes", relates directly to the preceding conversation about schools and schooling. The other three, called "ongoing c*#p", appear under a separate subject heading.
Calvin and Hobbes I know that C&H is passe and dead (though a new, definitive, three-volume coffee-table "history" is now in the bookstores), but the cute little sucker speaks reams about the things we adults ... concerned, as we are, with matters of consequence ... have forgotten about our childhoods. All episodes of C&H are about "learning", many make implicit comments about school and schooling, and a few make direct comments. My newspaper finally retired recycled Peanuts cartoons from its comics' pages, but started C&H from the beginning. If I remember correctly, we are now on about the third or fourth "story". The last two were directly about school, and you may remember them both:
1. Calvin is assigned a science report and he chooses to report on "Bats". He and Hobbes sit down together, and Hobbes suggests that Calvin begin by listing everything he knows about bats. Calvin doesn't know much, except that they have fangs, fly, and must be insects. Hobbes writes dutifully writes this down, and asks for the next thing, but C knows nothing more. But, he says, this is enough ... by the time he adds an introduction, conclusion and illustrations, it will be as long as a mini-thesis. Besides, he has a clear plastic cover! At school, despite warnings from Hobbes and friends, he volunteers to give his report first! The class responds, "BATS AREN'T INSECTS", and he gets in big trouble at school. To avoid trouble at home, he tells Hobbes to help him burn the note from his teacher!
2. Calvin is taking a quiz. The question asks how far apart two cars were that were driving toward one-another, one at 60 miles per hour and the other at 30 miles per hour, and pass each other in 10 minutes. He reverts into his alter ego ... Tracer Bullet, Private-Eye ... in order to get to the bottom of this case. He's now a hard-boiled PI, who travels with his two pals (one rides in a holster, the other in a hip flask), trying to find just the facts given to him by a ditzy broad. The "ditzy broad" appears alongside him in one caption -- it is his teacher, and she is telling him to "get to work". He tells her he is working on it. He then returns to his alter-ego, and claims that the case is easy, except he also points out that the real questions haven't even been asked -- who are these two guys, why is one of them in such a hurry, and who really cares where they came from?
Obviously, Calvin is about to crash once again, foiled in his adventures by the real world. But hey ... this is what I have been trying to tell you about the challenge of teaching. Everyone is a Calvin. Maybe they don't go off to the extent that Calvin does, but they all go off. They may not all go off at the same time over the same question, either. But they all look like they are working ... or learn real quick to look like they are working (in fact, those that tend to get in the most "trouble" are those who are least skilled in this very important skill that everyone learns). Now ... how in the world do you communicate this to a parent who is concerned about their child's "learning"? It's not "bad" (unless constant). It's not unnatural or uncommon. You can't "cure" it by saying "pay attention". And it underlies the most important thing that no one ever recognizes ... the learner is in charge of what they learn, when they learn it, and how thoroughly they learn it!
|
|