Frankensteins monster vs Someone who is not very clever

Originally posted by ggwâ?¢:
Agreed. I'm not telling anyone that Dr. Bush has the prescription, but at least he's willing to touch the "third rail of American politics" rather than continuing to dig the hole deeper by throwing more money at this broken system, as all his predecessors have done, and as his current opponent pledges to do if elected.

I COULD NOT AGREE WITH YOU MORE!

Originally posted by ggw™:

First, Clinton had a massive peace dividend to expend.

Sorry for my English, but do you mean that Clinton was president during a peace time? If that's what you meant, then we should take into account that the war in Irak was a result of the lies created by the Bush administration. That war could have been prevented. If there is someone to blame for this, that's the Bush administration, I think it's a big mistake to say that Bush was president in a difficult time (I mean the portion of this difficult time due to the war in Irak, not the 9/11 attacks or the Agfhanistan war) because he just made the whole thing up.

What I mean is that Clinton came into office right after the Cold War had ended and he had a budgetary windfall because a great deal of money that was previously spent on vast and hugely expensive defense programs such as ICBMs and tactical nuclear subs was no longer needed for staying ahead of the Soviets. So he had a big chunk of change he could spend on new programs without running into deficits. This was a one time event not an ongoing savings in military spending.

Originally posted by Barcelona:
Sorry for my English, but do you mean that Clinton was president during a peace time? If that's what you meant, then we should take into account that the war in Irak was a result of the lies created by the Bush administration. That war could have been prevented. If there is someone to blame for this, that's the Bush administration, I think it's a big mistake to say that Bush was president in a difficult time (I mean the portion of this difficult time due to the war in Irak, not the 9/11 attacks or the Agfhanistan war) because he just made the whole thing up.

anyone who wants Bush to be re-elected is guilty of extreme illogic or ill-informedness. Take for example, the traditional Republican small government argument. OK, it makes some sense, except Bush isn't cutting government – government has expanded massively under his regime even as taxes have been cut, leading to the largest deficits in the history of the world. Bush and the neo-cons are so radically removed from either conservative or liberal approaches that whether you're a liberal or a conservative, there really is no choice but to defeat him.

Originally posted by cubby bear:

Originally posted by hitman:
As I am teacher, this funding has had to increase because of the all of the new standards that need to be met.

Do you not agree with the standards then? Should we not expect a child in the 5th grade to be taught to read and be able to read at a 5th grade level? And the same for every grade before and after that? [/QB]

That isn't the point of the legislation. The legislation doesn't even agree with common nature.

Not all kids in 5th grade are going to be able to read at a 5th grade level. It is very simple, it will never happen. When you consider the number of Sp.Ed. students and those students coming from poor homes (I mean in the sense of upbringing, not just socioeconomically) it will never happen, not even in fucking utopia. There are kids that are below average, average, above average, and even higher and lower than that. However, we are supposed to be some kind of miracle workers and make lemons into lemonade and get all kids on the same level. As much as that would be nice, the reality is it rarely happens.

So much of education is out of the teachers' hands. Education must start at home first, then at school. It needs to be taught that education is important and necessary. A school just isn't a place to drop your kid off and get govt. provided daycare.

Originally posted by ggwâ?¢:
What I mean is that Clinton came into office right after the Cold War had ended and he had a budgetary windfall because a great deal of money that was previously spent on vast and hugely expensive defense programs such as ICBMs and tactical nuclear subs was no longer needed for staying ahead of the Soviets. So he had a big chunk of change he could spend on new programs without running into deficits. This was a one time event not an ongoing savings in military spending.

Originally posted by Barcelona:
Sorry for my English, but do you mean that Clinton was president during a peace time? If that's what you meant, then we should take into account that the war in Irak was a result of the lies created by the Bush administration. That war could have been prevented. If there is someone to blame for this, that's the Bush administration, I think it's a big mistake to say that Bush was president in a difficult time (I mean the portion of this difficult time due to the war in Irak, not the 9/11 attacks or the Agfhanistan war) because he just made the whole thing up.

Well then how do you explain the real defense cuts getting started near the end of Reagan's presidency? That was during the Cold War.

Originally posted by Rhett Miller:
To pay the minority kids to stay home the day they give the standardized tests? ;)

Originally posted by hitman:

As I am teacher, this funding has had to increase because of the all of the new standards that need to be met.

[/QB]

It's more like the short-bus riders…

Originally posted by ggwâ?¢:
So you only pay cash for everything and you don't have (or plan on getting) a mortgage or a car loan?

Originally posted by hitman:
Deficits matter all of the time. You shouldn't be able to keep spending when in debt.

When you have a mortgage or a car loan, you're paying on it, and have to pay every month, or run the risk of repossession and the like. You're not doubling, tripling that debt every year.

The deficit is just a tad different than a mortgage. Talk about comparing ant hills to mountains.

my two bits (adjusting for inflation), both candidates:

1) will not consider ending the drug war;
2) will not consider the ramifications of the prison-industrial complex;
3) will not repeal or modify either the PATRIOT or INDUCE Acts;
4) will not offer meaningful reform of social security;
5) will not offer anything meaningful in terms of national healthcare;
6) will not check the FCC on media monopolization;
7) will not check the FDA on blatantly catering to the highest bidder, aka covering up juvenile suicide rates regarding experimental antidepressants, or allowing reimportation of designer medications;
8) will revoke free trade if enough "swing votes" are at stake;
9) will support israel, without question, despite the moral and diplomatic liability of allying with an apartheid state;

these are the issues important to me. if you want your vote to count for something other than the status quo, consider the libertarian, green, or reform parties. why put it to waste on either side of the same coin?

I'm voting for the same guy I always do:

The lesser of two beagles.

Originally posted by Ikarus:
my two bits (adjusting for inflation), both candidates:

1) will not consider ending the drug war;
2) will not consider the ramifications of the prison-industrial complex;
3) will not repeal or modify either the PATRIOT or INDUCE Acts;
4) will not offer meaningful reform of social security;
5) will not offer anything meaningful in terms of national healthcare;
6) will not check the FCC on media monopolization;
7) will not check the FDA on blatantly catering to the highest bidder, aka covering up juvenile suicide rates regarding experimental antidepressants, or allowing reimportation of designer medications;
8) will revoke free trade if enough "swing votes" are at stake;
9) will support israel, without question, despite the moral and diplomatic liability of allying with an apartheid state;

these are the issues important to me. if you want your vote to count for something other than the status quo, consider the libertarian, green, or reform parties. why put it to waste on either side of the same coin?

How can a vote from these parties always count for something? Half of the time, candidates from these parties can't even make it on a ballot. But then again, I know that is all part of a governmental control conspiracy.

Originally posted by hitman:
That isn't the point of the legislation. The legislation doesn't even agree with common nature.

Not all kids in 5th grade are going to be able to read at a 5th grade level. It is very simple, it will never happen. When you consider the number of Sp.Ed. students and those students coming from poor homes (I mean in the sense of upbringing, not just socioeconomically) it will never happen, not even in fucking utopia. There are kids that are below average, average, above average, and even higher and lower than that. However, we are supposed to be some kind of miracle workers and make lemons into lemonade and get all kids on the same level. As much as that would be nice, the reality is it rarely happens.

So much of education is out of the teachers' hands. Education must start at home first, then at school. It needs to be taught that education is important and necessary. A school just isn't a place to drop your kid off and get govt. provided daycare.

Wow, I hope you never teach my children- you're giving up on them before they even enter the school building! You have basically confirmed that you can have absolutely no effect on a disadvantaged child's life because they are screwed from the get go?

First of all, the goal of the law is to increase the number of students that are performing at grade level in math and reading and soon science. Would you actually like to tell one of the parents of your disadvantaged students- or your ELL students- or your special ed students that you won't challenge their children to achieve that goal because they just aren't able to learn? You're not even willing to try?

Everyone in the education community realizes that not every child is going to learn at the same rate or be able to achieve such goals, however, finally addressing accountability in education is a noble goal! For the last 45 years no one, not a single educator, policy maker or parent has actually known what kind of return they were getting on their educational investment and finally we are getting some idea of what that is!

I for one am now certain that accountability is the right way to go- if I were a parent of one of your students I would certainly want to know that you don't feel you should be held at all accountable for their son or daughters education!

Call me a joker, call me a fool
Right at this moment I'm totally cool
Clear as a crystal, sharp as a knife
I feel like I'm in the prime of my life
Sometimes it feels like I'm going too fast
I don't know how long this feeling will last
Maybe it's only tonight

Darling I don't know why I go to extremes
Too high or too low there ain't no in-betweens
And if I stand or I fall
It's all or nothing at all
Darling I don't know why I go to extremes

Sometimes I'm tired, sometimes I'm shot
Sometimes I don't know how much more I've got
Maybe I'm headed over the hill
Maybe I've set myself up for the kill
Tell me how much do you think you can take
Until the heart in you is starting to break?
Sometimes it feels like it will

Darling I don't know why I go to extremes
Too high or too low there ain't no in-betweens
You can be sure when I'm gone
I won't be out there too long
Darling I don't know why I go to extremes

Out of the darkness, into the light
Leaving the scene of the crime
Either I'm wrong or I'm perfectly right every time
Sometimes I lie awake, night after night
Coming apart at the seams
Eager to please, ready to fight
Why do I go to extremes?

And if I stand or I fall
It's all or nothing at all
Darling I don't know why I go to extremes

No I don't know why I go to extremes
Too high or too low
There ain't no in-betweens
You can be sure when I'm gone
I won't be out there too long
Darling I don't know why I go to extremes

I don't know why…I don't know why…
I don't know why…I don't know why…
Out in the dark…into the light…

So what is Pollard's point?

If a bug eyed short bus riding alcoholic turd like Billy Joel can make it in life and marry a beautiful woman his daughter's age, anybody can make it in life. We just need to give them a chance.

Originally posted by Rhett Miller:
So what is Pollard's point?

If a bug eyed short bus riding alcoholic turd like Billy Joel can make it in life and marry a beautiful woman his daughter's age, anybody can make it in life. We just need to give them a chance.

it just kept popping in to my head while reading responses like cubby bear's, certainly not the only one who does it

but I am not sure where hitman said teachers should not be held at all responsible

taking everything "to it's extreme" possible meaning does little for a discussion

Well, yeah, that too.

I agree with Hitman and Cubby Bear both, in general.

Originally posted by pollard:

Originally posted by Rhett Miller:
So what is Pollard's point?

If a bug eyed short bus riding alcoholic turd like Billy Joel can make it in life and marry a beautiful woman his daughter's age, anybody can make it in life. We just need to give them a chance.

it just kept popping in to my head while reading responses like cubby bear's, certainly not the only one who does it

but I am not sure where hitman said teachers should not be held at all responsible

taking everything "to it's extreme" possible meaning does little for a discussion

I never said that teachers should never be held responsible at all. They should be. However, there are things that are out of a teacher's control, which NCLB does not address. So automatically if a child isn't performing up to ability, it is automatically the teacher's fault, which just plain isn't fair. That would be like if a car breaks down, automatically blaming the driver, when it could be faulty manufacturing of the car.

I give all of my students a chance, no matter what, and prefer to teach the disadvantaged kids more, because they appreciate what I do, rather than the rich-ass spoiled kids. And unless you've been in the trenches like myself, reserve your judgements on my abilities as an educator.

Case in point. I have a student who had a hemispherectomy (sp?) at age 3 or 4. Number one, this kid is lucky as hell to be alive. However, now he is in the 5th grade, although he has the functioning level of a 4 year old (after all he is missing half of his brain). But his parents will not accept his limitations and have him on a diploma track which means he is supposed to graduate from high school and meet all requirements. And because of wonderful legislation like NCLB and the IDEA Act of the 80's, we are held responsible for this kid's progress or lack thereof. There is only so much you can do, especially when the parents are fuck-ups who just want to blame others for their own shortcomings as parents when they don't change the kids diapers or help with his studies at home, at the same time ignoring his brother (who is "normal") and flushing his upbringing.

And this is only one of the problems my wife and I deal with on an everday basis, that takes away from getting all of the other kids performing where they need to be. So in reality, the NCLB is more about shutting out reason, than holding accountability.

Can anyone now see why a teacher would feel like this? Especially when all I hear from others outside of the profession is that teaching is so great because of having the summers off. When in reality we have classes that we have to take to constantly keep up our certification, and don't get paid enough that my wife and I can't even afford to buy a house under the current wonderful economy in the district where we teach.

Now I just feel like taking a bullet.

Hitman, as a former teacher, you have all my sympathies. You are right, people don't have a clue about the life of a teacher.

Originally posted by Rhett Miller:
Hitman, as a former teacher, you have all my sympathies. You are right, people don't have a clue about the life of a teacher.

Rhett, this may be the only time that you hear this on the boards…THANK YOU!