lindainks55 said:
Good morning. Great idea. I'll try my hardest and best not to be part of any problem.
rm6046 said:
Agreed completely. It is unfortunate that a single remark, however inane or under what circumstances, could accelerate into that much anger should surprise me. Sadly, in today's world, it doesn't. My attempts to "pour some oil on the waters" turned out to be more like "pissing in the ocean" trying to raise the water level.
It was like "road rage" in the ethernet, that we can all live without. Sorry, guys, I gave it my best shot (no pun intended).
It was like "road rage" in the ethernet, that we can all live without. Sorry, guys, I gave it my best shot (no pun intended).
Julie said:
I posted the following on the meet up forum but will post again here.
Since I am the one organizing our band of bloggers with differing opinions. I do hereby declare this to be a Gun Free Meet Up. If you have a CC permit and wish to have protection via a weapon with you please leave that weapon in your locked vehicle.
I make this declaration because many of our loyal bloggers do not wish to be around guns and there will be children present.
The meet up will be held at OJ Watson Park in Shelter #1 which is adjacent to a playground. We will be sharing the shelter with other parties (and I believe those may be children's birthday parties).
I wish all to attend and have a safe and fun meet up.
signed,
the organizer
Since I am the one organizing our band of bloggers with differing opinions. I do hereby declare this to be a Gun Free Meet Up. If you have a CC permit and wish to have protection via a weapon with you please leave that weapon in your locked vehicle.
I make this declaration because many of our loyal bloggers do not wish to be around guns and there will be children present.
The meet up will be held at OJ Watson Park in Shelter #1 which is adjacent to a playground. We will be sharing the shelter with other parties (and I believe those may be children's birthday parties).
I wish all to attend and have a safe and fun meet up.
signed,
the organizer
longhorn said:
Is it even legal to conceal carry in public parks like Watson? If I were a parent, I sure would be concerned about THAT!
Maybe the best advocate for gun control will actually be this concealed carry law and all its flaws.
Maybe the best advocate for gun control will actually be this concealed carry law and all its flaws.
Vaughn Tolle said:
lh, under the amendment to the concealed carry bill passed by the 2007 legislature and vetoed by the Gov, which may be overridden today (or may not, given subsequent events), he would be so entitled. Under the existing law (prior to amendment), the park could have been posted by the city as the property owner as a "no gun zone".
rm6046 said:
Vaughn: Haven't read the amendment, but wouldn't parks be automatically exempted from CC, with or without specific posting, as a public facility, like the courthouses, health departments, etc. ?? Your point is good. Mine is just an uninformed question.
Julie said:
I just called Watson Park (529-9940) and asked about CC in the park. I was informed that it is NOT allowed. They have the signs posted.
If you would like to call and verify please feel free.
If you would like to call and verify please feel free.
longhorn said:
That's what I thought Julie. So.. mr. gun law expert is ADVERTISING he is going to carry illegally? His expertise in all things gun related, and he didnt KNOW Watson was gun free?
Clark, I think the Sheriff just got more "ammunition".
Clark, I think the Sheriff just got more "ammunition".
rm6046 said:
Cool, Julie. Great to see somebody is actually doing the homework on this thing. And it definitely puts another "card in the deck", so to speak. Good work.
lindainks55 said:
Vaughn, I admit I am totally uninformed about the amendment you mention that may/may not be overridden today. Does it have to do with who may or may not decide what building/land can be a posted gun free zone? Would you be wiling to offer a brief overview? Thanks in advance.
Nathan said:
Longhorn,
I would not carry illegally. I said I would have a cc permit by then, not that I would intentionally break the law.
See how much you try to twist my words to make them the worst possible?
You people are so irrational in your hate.
You say you are not scared of guns, yet here you are not wanting concealed carry in a park. You say you just don't want me carrying concealed yet here you are questioning anyone carrying.
Your lies are catching up to you.
I would not carry illegally. I said I would have a cc permit by then, not that I would intentionally break the law.
See how much you try to twist my words to make them the worst possible?
You people are so irrational in your hate.
You say you are not scared of guns, yet here you are not wanting concealed carry in a park. You say you just don't want me carrying concealed yet here you are questioning anyone carrying.
Your lies are catching up to you.
longhorn said:
Nathan, PLEASE! Do you even read your own posts? you said:
"I never said I was going to carry concealed to the park. I said I would have my permit by then.
If you want to read into that comment that I would be carrying concealed at the park that is on you, not me."
Posted By Nathan | 4/25/07 11:26 AM
and THEN? You said:
The meet up will not be the only place I will legally be carrying concealed.
Posted By Nathan | 4/24/07 11:04 PM
So yeah buddy, you did say you were going to be carring concealed at the meet up. Too bad you are so ignorant of the CURRENT gun laws you didnt know carrying in Watson Park was illegal.
And we should TRUST you with gun? When you lie and dont know the gun laws?
Woof.
Too bad a little turd like nathan can cause so much trouble. It seems to be his only mission here.
Nathan, of course it is your "right" to read and post here. But for the life of me why would you want to? I mean, other than to irritate, agitate, and aggrevate?
You prove with every post that you just want to cause trouble. It isnt hard for us to believe that is your intention attending the meetup as well.
"I never said I was going to carry concealed to the park. I said I would have my permit by then.
If you want to read into that comment that I would be carrying concealed at the park that is on you, not me."
Posted By Nathan | 4/25/07 11:26 AM
and THEN? You said:
The meet up will not be the only place I will legally be carrying concealed.
Posted By Nathan | 4/24/07 11:04 PM
So yeah buddy, you did say you were going to be carring concealed at the meet up. Too bad you are so ignorant of the CURRENT gun laws you didnt know carrying in Watson Park was illegal.
And we should TRUST you with gun? When you lie and dont know the gun laws?
Woof.
Too bad a little turd like nathan can cause so much trouble. It seems to be his only mission here.
Nathan, of course it is your "right" to read and post here. But for the life of me why would you want to? I mean, other than to irritate, agitate, and aggrevate?
You prove with every post that you just want to cause trouble. It isnt hard for us to believe that is your intention attending the meetup as well.
longhorn said:
Twisting your word? heheheheh. No dear boy.
I think you are the one who let your alligator mouth overload your tadpole ass. And now you are desperately backpeddaling and trying to crawfish out of those comments.
Are you sure you arent from Louisiana a la David Duke?
I think you are the one who let your alligator mouth overload your tadpole ass. And now you are desperately backpeddaling and trying to crawfish out of those comments.
Are you sure you arent from Louisiana a la David Duke?
longhorn said:
Oh, and nathan? Dont ever say you didnt threaten Clark. At least legally.
You said:
WS Clark,
When you step out of the blog to the real world, then things like lawsuits happen.
You want to talk about threats, then listen to this one:
I will sue your sorry ass to the max if you start trying to defamate my character in the work place.
It will no longer be fun and games on the blog :)
Posted By Nathan | 4/24/07 11:24 PM
Even you said it was a threat. No more fun and games on the blog. I dont care how many smilies you put behind things, you have developed a real pattern of threats and harrassment here.
Pot, meet kettle.
You said:
WS Clark,
When you step out of the blog to the real world, then things like lawsuits happen.
You want to talk about threats, then listen to this one:
I will sue your sorry ass to the max if you start trying to defamate my character in the work place.
It will no longer be fun and games on the blog :)
Posted By Nathan | 4/24/07 11:24 PM
Even you said it was a threat. No more fun and games on the blog. I dont care how many smilies you put behind things, you have developed a real pattern of threats and harrassment here.
Pot, meet kettle.
Vaughn Tolle said:
Linda, as best as I can explain it without all those nasty citations and lawyer words:
The Kansas Concealed Carry Law as put into law in 2006 contains a listing of places where concealed carry permit holders may not carry a concealed weapon. Public parks are not among the places listed. However, the same law provides that property owners, both public and private, may post their property as being CCW free zones. The Kansas League of Municipalities seized upon that language, and advised their member cities that they were free to post their public property not otherwise covered in the Act to prohibit CCW thereon. Many cities, including Wichita, adopted ordinances to that effect.
The intent, clearly expressed by the legislature, was for the Kansas CCW law to preempt local attempts under a city's home rule power. Sponsors of the legislation felt that the Kansas League of Municipalities and the members of the League were doing an end-run around the clear language of the statute by relying upon the posting of public property exception.
There was legislation introduced this session which was passed by veto-proof majorities in both the House and Senate which amended the law by prohibiting cities, among others, from passing ordinances such as happened after the original law was enacted, declaring the same void from their inception. The governor vetoed this legislation. Today is the first day of the "veto session" of the Legislature; it appears from public comments that there is still enough votes in the House to override the veto; the Senate is much closer, and the outcome is unsure. I note that it takes 27 votes to override; the original bill had 29 votes in favor. At least one Senator who had voted in favor has indicated he is now unsure.
For those so inclined, the statutory cite for the CCW law is K.S.A. 75-7c1 et seq.; the list of prohibited places is at K.S.A. 75-7c10; the legislation referenced is HB 2528.
The Kansas Concealed Carry Law as put into law in 2006 contains a listing of places where concealed carry permit holders may not carry a concealed weapon. Public parks are not among the places listed. However, the same law provides that property owners, both public and private, may post their property as being CCW free zones. The Kansas League of Municipalities seized upon that language, and advised their member cities that they were free to post their public property not otherwise covered in the Act to prohibit CCW thereon. Many cities, including Wichita, adopted ordinances to that effect.
The intent, clearly expressed by the legislature, was for the Kansas CCW law to preempt local attempts under a city's home rule power. Sponsors of the legislation felt that the Kansas League of Municipalities and the members of the League were doing an end-run around the clear language of the statute by relying upon the posting of public property exception.
There was legislation introduced this session which was passed by veto-proof majorities in both the House and Senate which amended the law by prohibiting cities, among others, from passing ordinances such as happened after the original law was enacted, declaring the same void from their inception. The governor vetoed this legislation. Today is the first day of the "veto session" of the Legislature; it appears from public comments that there is still enough votes in the House to override the veto; the Senate is much closer, and the outcome is unsure. I note that it takes 27 votes to override; the original bill had 29 votes in favor. At least one Senator who had voted in favor has indicated he is now unsure.
For those so inclined, the statutory cite for the CCW law is K.S.A. 75-7c1 et seq.; the list of prohibited places is at K.S.A. 75-7c10; the legislation referenced is HB 2528.
WSClark said:
Well, well, well............ same stuff, yada, yada. As someone correctly said up thread, it's not the gun that provokes fear, it is the guy behind it. Let's put it this way, if Tracy or RM or GSter or Grrl had a permit and carried a gun, I would have no problem at all, but if someone needs to state their intention of carrying, I have to consider motive.
Anyway, today is a new day. To my friends, happy rainy Wednesday. To those that are not my friends, hey, it's raining. Get over it.
Let's all pray in our own way for Tracy, his father and his family - may God bless.
Anyway, today is a new day. To my friends, happy rainy Wednesday. To those that are not my friends, hey, it's raining. Get over it.
Let's all pray in our own way for Tracy, his father and his family - may God bless.
Nathan said:
I threatend that if WS Clark started trying to contact my work place I would sue him.
Yep, I am such an awful person because I don't want some psycho on the blog calling and harrassing me at the work place.
Yep, I am such an awful person because I don't want some psycho on the blog calling and harrassing me at the work place.
Vaughn Tolle said:
Forgot to finish final sentence: "which in essence amends K.S.A. 75-7c11, the property posting part of the law applicable to public owners".
Vaughn Tolle said:
To tiresomely continuing to add to prior posts:
If the veto is overridden by both the House and the Senate, the posting at Watson Park will need be removed, absent some sort of legal challenge to the amendment and a stay of effective date issued by a court while the challenge is moving forward through the judicial system. I am unable to fathom the grounds for any such challenge at this point.
If the veto is overridden by both the House and the Senate, the posting at Watson Park will need be removed, absent some sort of legal challenge to the amendment and a stay of effective date issued by a court while the challenge is moving forward through the judicial system. I am unable to fathom the grounds for any such challenge at this point.
longhorn said:
Sorry to repost from blog x here, but I'm too lazy to write it twice. I'm not being a smart ass here about this subject. I see the kansas legislature grabbing power from the locals just like the repukes in congress have pushed to do with state government.
Anyway, here it is for those of you not reading blogx:
Ya know, I think I see a pattern developing in the republican controlled kansas legislature. While they love to beat their chests about state's rights and how the feds should butt out of their business...
...they sure dont take that attitude about local governments in Kansas.
They want the state laws on guns to override the ability of local communities to say "not in these places".
Lance Kinzer just about wet himself in his hurry to get the STATE to tell LOCAL leaders they could not have domestic partnership registries if they chose them.
See anything in common there? And governor leadership, the best republican governor we've had :) had NO problem giving tax cuts on business inventories when THAT revenue when to the local governments.
She also had no problem taking away significant returns of sales tax money to clean up the budget crisis early in her term.
Who said shit rolls downhill? In Kansas, that sure seems to be true. The legislature AND the governor have no problem stepping on local government decisions.
Anyway, here it is for those of you not reading blogx:
Ya know, I think I see a pattern developing in the republican controlled kansas legislature. While they love to beat their chests about state's rights and how the feds should butt out of their business...
...they sure dont take that attitude about local governments in Kansas.
They want the state laws on guns to override the ability of local communities to say "not in these places".
Lance Kinzer just about wet himself in his hurry to get the STATE to tell LOCAL leaders they could not have domestic partnership registries if they chose them.
See anything in common there? And governor leadership, the best republican governor we've had :) had NO problem giving tax cuts on business inventories when THAT revenue when to the local governments.
She also had no problem taking away significant returns of sales tax money to clean up the budget crisis early in her term.
Who said shit rolls downhill? In Kansas, that sure seems to be true. The legislature AND the governor have no problem stepping on local government decisions.
WSClark said:
"I threatend that if WS Clark started trying to contact my work place I would sue him."
Just one last comment - Nathan I have absolutely no desire to speak with you ever in this lifetime. I have no desire to see you, to be anywhere near you or to have any contact whatsoever.
I do have an obligation as a citizen, however, that because of your thinly veiled threats, to contact those that are responsible for issuing CC permits and to let them know. This I have already done and I will follow up on it.
If you want to sue me because of that, have at it, but you won't get far. It is my right and duty as a citizen to inform the authorities.
And that is the last on have to say publicly on this topic.
End of debate.
Just one last comment - Nathan I have absolutely no desire to speak with you ever in this lifetime. I have no desire to see you, to be anywhere near you or to have any contact whatsoever.
I do have an obligation as a citizen, however, that because of your thinly veiled threats, to contact those that are responsible for issuing CC permits and to let them know. This I have already done and I will follow up on it.
If you want to sue me because of that, have at it, but you won't get far. It is my right and duty as a citizen to inform the authorities.
And that is the last on have to say publicly on this topic.
End of debate.
Nathan said:
WS Clark,
If you actually think anything is going to happen, you are even more dense than I thought.
But hey, if you want to piss in the wind, that is your perogative.
If you actually think anything is going to happen, you are even more dense than I thought.
But hey, if you want to piss in the wind, that is your perogative.
WSClark said:
Speaking of lunatics, did y'all see McCain on Stewart last night? Jon handed John is ass, big time. If you missed it, here are the links.....
http://www.comedycentral.com/motherload/player.jht...
http://www.comedycentral.com/motherload/player.jht...
http://www.comedycentral.com/motherload/player.jht...
http://www.comedycentral.com/motherload/player.jht...
longhorn said:
...and in the same vein....
If you havent read the Rude Pundit lately, he is his usual roll on the floor laughing self. Of course, his rude language tickles me, but if you dont like bad words, dont click.
It's worth a scroll to read what he says about babies out of limbo and the wingnut win on abortion with the supremes.
http://www.rudepundit.blogspot.com/
If you havent read the Rude Pundit lately, he is his usual roll on the floor laughing self. Of course, his rude language tickles me, but if you dont like bad words, dont click.
It's worth a scroll to read what he says about babies out of limbo and the wingnut win on abortion with the supremes.
http://www.rudepundit.blogspot.com/
lindainks55 said:
Thanks Vaughn! You are bilingual (speak lawyerly and old dumb woman at least!) ;-)
Gster said:
RE : "Thanks Vaughn! You are bilingual (speak lawyerly and old dumb woman at least!) ;-) ''
Wait a minute!! I understood Vaughn and I don't speak lawyerly!!
Gulp!!
Does that mean I'm going to start leaving the seat down??
Boy, things are starting to look Dire! Dire, I say!!
Wait a minute!! I understood Vaughn and I don't speak lawyerly!!
Gulp!!
Does that mean I'm going to start leaving the seat down??
Boy, things are starting to look Dire! Dire, I say!!
Wendy said:
I for one am thankful that the bad weather didn't pan out at least in the Wichita area... I have to tell you, if another bad hailstorm hit on 4/24 like last year, i think I would have to move (I handle damage claims and well it would have been a traumatizing experience to say the least, as I am STILL handling claims from last years storm... )
lindainks55 said:
Gary, I do love your mind and your sense of humor!
When you get to where comfortable shoes are desirable over shapely calves I have some I could loan you.
When you get to where comfortable shoes are desirable over shapely calves I have some I could loan you.
WSClark said:
Are you sure it wasn't the the old dumb woman language that you were understanding?
(Sorry G!!!! It was there - I took it!!!!)
(Sorry G!!!! It was there - I took it!!!!)
Vaughn Tolle said:
Linda, seeing as how you understood it, and that I don't "speak old, dumb woman", clearly this disqualifies you as such a person. :-)
lindainks55 said:
Wendy,
Monday, April 23rd (TWO days ago!), the roof was installed on my home from the hail storm loss of April 24, 2006. I had called for a 90-day extension since our insurance company put a one-year time limit on the claim. We still don't have the gutters replaced or the screens on two sides... But, I've made progress!
I do feel for you working those claims! I think everyone in my neighborhood got a new roof. We don't need more bad weather! But today's rain seems like the beneficial kind. All my newly-planted pretty flowers are smiling and I heard one go "sluuurp."
Monday, April 23rd (TWO days ago!), the roof was installed on my home from the hail storm loss of April 24, 2006. I had called for a 90-day extension since our insurance company put a one-year time limit on the claim. We still don't have the gutters replaced or the screens on two sides... But, I've made progress!
I do feel for you working those claims! I think everyone in my neighborhood got a new roof. We don't need more bad weather! But today's rain seems like the beneficial kind. All my newly-planted pretty flowers are smiling and I heard one go "sluuurp."
G said:
Boy, I hope I don't get an apron fetish out of this!!
What a revoltin' development that would be!
What a revoltin' development that would be!
Predestined said:
Did anybody catch Scarborough stating his opinion on Iraq last night?
"I want to make a point, friends. I supported this war from the very beginning. I tell you that all that the time. I continued supporting it up until the Golden Mosque was blown up in Samarra, and suddenly, it did turn into a civil war. There is little left that we can do to win this war in Iraq, unless you and I as taxpayers tell people in Washington, D.C., we want to raise enough money to send 300,000 to 400,00 troops over there to subdue Iraq for the next 10 years. If we decide we want to do that, we can win this war. If we don‘t do that—and there‘s no way we‘re going to do that—we can‘t win the war. And you‘re hearing that from a guy who‘s been a hawk from his earliest days. But I‘m also a realist. You know, it‘s like Gladstone said. When the facts change, so does my mind. You know, what do you do? Well, bottom line is, if you keep your feet in cement and you don‘t change with the realities on the ground, then you‘re responsible for the killing of a lot more U.S. troops."
Interesting comment from Joe.
"I want to make a point, friends. I supported this war from the very beginning. I tell you that all that the time. I continued supporting it up until the Golden Mosque was blown up in Samarra, and suddenly, it did turn into a civil war. There is little left that we can do to win this war in Iraq, unless you and I as taxpayers tell people in Washington, D.C., we want to raise enough money to send 300,000 to 400,00 troops over there to subdue Iraq for the next 10 years. If we decide we want to do that, we can win this war. If we don‘t do that—and there‘s no way we‘re going to do that—we can‘t win the war. And you‘re hearing that from a guy who‘s been a hawk from his earliest days. But I‘m also a realist. You know, it‘s like Gladstone said. When the facts change, so does my mind. You know, what do you do? Well, bottom line is, if you keep your feet in cement and you don‘t change with the realities on the ground, then you‘re responsible for the killing of a lot more U.S. troops."
Interesting comment from Joe.
Wendy said:
Linda, my handling of claims puts me in a position similar to that of a homeowner. I actually try to collect payment for damages. People don't like to pay me if they can't get their insurance company to do it, and honestly, the insurance companies get so bogged down, they don't get it done. And I don't know that there is a real solution.
From a homeowners stand point - I am getting ready to put my house on the market. The current siding and roof are decent, if a little on the older side. I KNOW I could get a lot more money out of the house if I replaced either or both, but the only way I am going to be able to afford to do that is if some really bad hail comes through and damages it enough that the insurance company will cover. How's that for irony?
From a homeowners stand point - I am getting ready to put my house on the market. The current siding and roof are decent, if a little on the older side. I KNOW I could get a lot more money out of the house if I replaced either or both, but the only way I am going to be able to afford to do that is if some really bad hail comes through and damages it enough that the insurance company will cover. How's that for irony?
rm6046 said:
Wendy: The silver lining behind every cloud ... if there was ever a position with better job security than in storm damage claims in KANSAS, I sure don't know what in the world it would be! Katrina's come every 100 years. Kansas' damaging storms seem to come every week! :D
Nathan said:
Good post Vaughn. In my late defense, that is why my father and I both thought carrying in parks was ok.
I have not been here for over 9 months and I am still getting caught up on things. Like how the city is circumventing the original intent of the CCW bill.
I had read the original.
I have not been here for over 9 months and I am still getting caught up on things. Like how the city is circumventing the original intent of the CCW bill.
I had read the original.
.morg said:
inspired moment:
Wichita Voice logo:
solid graphic of USA star in the center
Top: Wichita Voice
Bottom: Stuck in the middle with you!
Wichita Voice logo:
solid graphic of USA star in the center
Top: Wichita Voice
Bottom: Stuck in the middle with you!
WSClark said:
Weather! I quit smoking four months ago today. In a related development, my jeans immediately began shrinking at an alarming rate. To counter these events, I try to walk everyday for at least a few miles. Today, it looks like I will need water wings.
Dang.
You're right about the job security of storm damage claims positions, RM. Too true! The only job more secure is in the manufacturing sector - making orange barrels for the City of Wichita.
Dang.
You're right about the job security of storm damage claims positions, RM. Too true! The only job more secure is in the manufacturing sector - making orange barrels for the City of Wichita.
WSClark52 said:
Folks, you have to read this one - Gonzo and Rove Vote Fraud Hoax - makes Watergate look like a purse snatching on South Broadway.
http://www.gregpalast.com/dont-fire-gonzales/#more...
http://www.gregpalast.com/dont-fire-gonzales/#more...
WSClark said:
Here's another for your reading pleasure - copped from Bartcop.
"Bush is standing by Alberto Gonzales. Bush says Gonzales is an honorable man.
You know what that means? George is drinking again."
-- David Letterman
"Bush is standing by Alberto Gonzales. Bush says Gonzales is an honorable man.
You know what that means? George is drinking again."
-- David Letterman
rm6046 said:
Hahahahahaha! Seriously, as Vaughn said last week, I also think that Gonzo is an honorable gentleman, who is in waaaaaaaaaaay over his head. He's got to feel like that Linda Blair character in "The Exorcist" with her head spinning around and around and around. :)
Predestined said:
Good article, Will. I haven't read Palast for a couple of years. His take on the 2000 election in Florida was well worth paying attention to, as was his info on the history of the Bush family and the House of Saud.
I don't know if it's still on his website--I forgot to look--but he had a great video about GW's TXANG service and where those records ended up.
I don't know if it's still on his website--I forgot to look--but he had a great video about GW's TXANG service and where those records ended up.
WSClark said:
Speaking honestly now, without and partisan considerations, can you think of a president more incompetent than George W Bush? Seriously, I thought that LBJ was the worst for his unwarranted escalation or the War in Vietnam, with the possible exception of Nixon for his rabid paranoia and hateful aggression against his fellow citizens, but Bush II has to take the top spot.
How can anyone defend this man? Honestly.
I am very disturbed by the dismissal of Congress by Bush. He seems to have no concern for the American people and their thoughts on the war. He is not just like a bull in a china shop - he is like a totally uncoordinated, drunken bull having a seizure during a sneezing fit while trying to juggle bowling balls with his testicles during sex with a gymnast on speed.
How can anyone defend this man? Honestly.
I am very disturbed by the dismissal of Congress by Bush. He seems to have no concern for the American people and their thoughts on the war. He is not just like a bull in a china shop - he is like a totally uncoordinated, drunken bull having a seizure during a sneezing fit while trying to juggle bowling balls with his testicles during sex with a gymnast on speed.
darwinsdisciple said:
From my friend, Bill:
Terrorists want us out of Iraq.
Democrats want us out of Iraq.
Therefore, Democrats support terrorism.
I carefully explained to him that the ability to draw a specific point of commonality between two elements is not sufficient to draw a conclusion that those two elements have anything else whatsoever in common. I could say:
The pope opposes abortion.
George Bush opposes abortion.
Osama bin Laden opposes abortion.
Therefore, The Pope supports Bush and bin Laden, Bush supports the pope and bin Laden, and bin Laden supports the pope and Bush.
I tried to get him to understand that misusing a logical device in order to support a contention only serves to corrupt and mangle whatever dialogue is in progress, and that a person who does this sort of thing either does it unknowingly, in which case a re-examination of one's understanding of logical process is in order; or they do it intentionally, in which case not only is their intended point justifiably dismissable, but they reveal themselves to be the worst sort of charlatan. [Fleetwood, anybody?]
http://wtetw.com/journal.htm
Terrorists want us out of Iraq.
Democrats want us out of Iraq.
Therefore, Democrats support terrorism.
I carefully explained to him that the ability to draw a specific point of commonality between two elements is not sufficient to draw a conclusion that those two elements have anything else whatsoever in common. I could say:
The pope opposes abortion.
George Bush opposes abortion.
Osama bin Laden opposes abortion.
Therefore, The Pope supports Bush and bin Laden, Bush supports the pope and bin Laden, and bin Laden supports the pope and Bush.
I tried to get him to understand that misusing a logical device in order to support a contention only serves to corrupt and mangle whatever dialogue is in progress, and that a person who does this sort of thing either does it unknowingly, in which case a re-examination of one's understanding of logical process is in order; or they do it intentionally, in which case not only is their intended point justifiably dismissable, but they reveal themselves to be the worst sort of charlatan. [Fleetwood, anybody?]
http://wtetw.com/journal.htm
sunbefree said:
Why is WSClark taunting Nathan about harassing him about his work? I read the blog and WSClark needs to apologize for his threats.
sunbefree said:
darwinsdisciple,
Your logic comparisons are flawed.
In the first three you have the formula:
"A" wants out of "Z"
"B" wants out of "Z"
Therefore "A" and "B" want "Y"
In the second example you write:
"D" Opposes "X"
"E" Opposes "X"
"F" Opposes "X"
Therefore, "D" supports "E" and "F", "E" supports "D" and "F", and "F" supports "D" and "E."
You could have written "D","E" and "F" support each other which would still have been a fallacy but more correct.
Without the original text of the author, it is hard to analyze what the premise actually was. Critiquing a premise by logic requires the original to be examined-
-not a supposition where a conclusion is drawn without the establishment of a determinant.
Your logic comparisons are flawed.
In the first three you have the formula:
"A" wants out of "Z"
"B" wants out of "Z"
Therefore "A" and "B" want "Y"
In the second example you write:
"D" Opposes "X"
"E" Opposes "X"
"F" Opposes "X"
Therefore, "D" supports "E" and "F", "E" supports "D" and "F", and "F" supports "D" and "E."
You could have written "D","E" and "F" support each other which would still have been a fallacy but more correct.
Without the original text of the author, it is hard to analyze what the premise actually was. Critiquing a premise by logic requires the original to be examined-
-not a supposition where a conclusion is drawn without the establishment of a determinant.
Danny said:
Good morning. I'm happy to start the day anew.
WS(regarding where you had talked about quitting smoking),
In my 'mad' attempt to get into law enforcement, I've been doing the following:
Weight lifting(I have a chart) but:
Chest press max at 145,
Leg press max at 150,
Leg curl max at 130,
Leg extension max at 215,
Lateral pull down max at 110,
Tricep curl max at 80,
Bicep curl max at 80.
Two and a half months ago all of these were half that. So it is nice to see progress and still know I can't pass the damned PFT yet(which I do every other week).
Running wise I've been following this plan:
http://www.coolrunning.com/engine/2/2_3/181.shtml and am currently on week 7 of that. My running times for 300 meter sprint went from 1 min 32 seconds to 1 min 1 second(need to get that down another 10 seconds). My 1.5 mile run went from 24 minutes 51 seconds to 16 minutes even. Need to get that down another 6 minutes.
I went from doing 7 pushups to doing nearly 34 pushups(would like to get that to about 40 or 50 though), and 0 situps to 37 situps in a minute(would also like to get that to about 40 or 50).
So what is the PFT?
# of situps in one minutes time(goals for me 40 - 50)
5 minute break
300 meter sprint(40-50 seconds)
5 minute break
# of pushups(not timed)(40 - 50)
5 minute break
1.5 mile run(9 - 10 minutes)
WS(regarding where you had talked about quitting smoking),
In my 'mad' attempt to get into law enforcement, I've been doing the following:
Weight lifting(I have a chart) but:
Chest press max at 145,
Leg press max at 150,
Leg curl max at 130,
Leg extension max at 215,
Lateral pull down max at 110,
Tricep curl max at 80,
Bicep curl max at 80.
Two and a half months ago all of these were half that. So it is nice to see progress and still know I can't pass the damned PFT yet(which I do every other week).
Running wise I've been following this plan:
http://www.coolrunning.com/engine/2/2_3/181.shtml and am currently on week 7 of that. My running times for 300 meter sprint went from 1 min 32 seconds to 1 min 1 second(need to get that down another 10 seconds). My 1.5 mile run went from 24 minutes 51 seconds to 16 minutes even. Need to get that down another 6 minutes.
I went from doing 7 pushups to doing nearly 34 pushups(would like to get that to about 40 or 50 though), and 0 situps to 37 situps in a minute(would also like to get that to about 40 or 50).
So what is the PFT?
# of situps in one minutes time(goals for me 40 - 50)
5 minute break
300 meter sprint(40-50 seconds)
5 minute break
# of pushups(not timed)(40 - 50)
5 minute break
1.5 mile run(9 - 10 minutes)
Predestined said:
Congress was ramping up investigations of the White House on several fronts:
_The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee voted 21-10 to issue a subpoena to Rice to compel her testimony on the Bush administration's pre-war claims about Saddam Hussein seeking weapons of mass destruction.
_Next door, the House Judiciary Committee voted 32-6 to grant immunity from prosecution to Monica Goodling, Gonzales' White House liaison, for testimony on why the administration fired eight federal prosecutors. The panel also unanimously approved — but did not issue — a subpoena to compel her to testify. In addition, the committee scheduled a May 10 hearing for Gonzales.
_Across Capitol Hill, Leahy's panel approved — but did not issue — a subpoena in the firings matter for Sara Taylor, deputy to Bush political adviser Karl Rove.
_The House oversight committee also issued subpoenas for the Republican National Committee for testimony and documents about White House e-mails on RNC accounts that are said to be missing. The RNC released a letter to the panel listing 37 White House officials who have RNC e-mail accounts, including Rove.
------
_The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee voted 21-10 to issue a subpoena to Rice to compel her testimony on the Bush administration's pre-war claims about Saddam Hussein seeking weapons of mass destruction.
_Next door, the House Judiciary Committee voted 32-6 to grant immunity from prosecution to Monica Goodling, Gonzales' White House liaison, for testimony on why the administration fired eight federal prosecutors. The panel also unanimously approved — but did not issue — a subpoena to compel her to testify. In addition, the committee scheduled a May 10 hearing for Gonzales.
_Across Capitol Hill, Leahy's panel approved — but did not issue — a subpoena in the firings matter for Sara Taylor, deputy to Bush political adviser Karl Rove.
_The House oversight committee also issued subpoenas for the Republican National Committee for testimony and documents about White House e-mails on RNC accounts that are said to be missing. The RNC released a letter to the panel listing 37 White House officials who have RNC e-mail accounts, including Rove.
------
Nathan said:
What a joke.
I wonder how many of the democrats on that panel were around in 98 sying all the same things about Saddam they are now trying to get Condi for.
I wish Bush would grow some balls and go after these guys instead of sitting in the whitehouse like nothing is happening.
I wonder how many of the democrats on that panel were around in 98 sying all the same things about Saddam they are now trying to get Condi for.
I wish Bush would grow some balls and go after these guys instead of sitting in the whitehouse like nothing is happening.
Wendy said:
Sun,
You have it wrong. DD's supposition is this (based on his friends statement)
"a" wants out of "z"
"b" wants out of "z"
THEREFORE "b" supports "a" (READ HIS POST FIRST)
then your definition of
"d" wants to stop "x"
"e" wants to stop "x"
"f" wants to stop "x"
therefore "d" supports "e" and "f", "e" supports "d" and "f" and "f" supports "d" and "e"
simply proves DD's point.
You have it wrong. DD's supposition is this (based on his friends statement)
"a" wants out of "z"
"b" wants out of "z"
THEREFORE "b" supports "a" (READ HIS POST FIRST)
then your definition of
"d" wants to stop "x"
"e" wants to stop "x"
"f" wants to stop "x"
therefore "d" supports "e" and "f", "e" supports "d" and "f" and "f" supports "d" and "e"
simply proves DD's point.
Danny said:
Sun and Wendy,
Do we really want to bring back nightmares of Philosophy logic and programming logic?!?! Please don't! I hated those classes and don't want to have to be able thing through all the fun rules like....
For all A...
There exists an A...
Bottom(which means can conclude whatever)...
Do we really want to bring back nightmares of Philosophy logic and programming logic?!?! Please don't! I hated those classes and don't want to have to be able thing through all the fun rules like....
For all A...
There exists an A...
Bottom(which means can conclude whatever)...
lindainks55 said:
Will, That Palast link was a good one. Thanks.
It's about time Congress paid attention to Americans. So much to do, so little time. This administration deserves more than they will ever be held accountable for, but time marches on and we're closer daily to when adults can take over. It will take some time to undo the harm bushco has done, but it will happen.
It's about time Congress paid attention to Americans. So much to do, so little time. This administration deserves more than they will ever be held accountable for, but time marches on and we're closer daily to when adults can take over. It will take some time to undo the harm bushco has done, but it will happen.
Julie said:
Very true VT. And you don't have a middle schooler in the home to proof read papers. When I can decipher his handwriting (good thing he wants to be a Vet because he totally has the doctor handwriting) getting past the IM language is well, we'll just go for interesting.
:^)
:^)
Vaughn Tolle said:
Julie, having seen some examples of high school drafts, interesting is a most polite way to put it.
Linda, if so, I'll be in the "creationist" camp.
Linda, if so, I'll be in the "creationist" camp.
Vaughn Tolle said:
Julie, your comment brought back memories of the time we had middle schoolers in the house. They resisted my attempts to proofread their papers mightily; in fact, I was told to "go away" upon more than one occasion by both. (So was their mother, BTW).
Finally, I prevailed upon one of them (the younger, as I recall) to let me proof a paper; after reading it, I handed it back, w/o comment, as it was written much better than I would have been able to do it. A humbling experience, but gratifying to know the English teachers had been truthful at the conferences over the years; both our girls had the knack, ability, and had paid attention to grammar rules in class to be better writers than their dad.
A story to bore you; one of the few teachers left at NEMHS who actually taught the elder's favorite memory of her involves the Sophomore Project paper she wrote. First drafts were handed in on the appointed date; hers was returned with no "red ink", suggestions, deletions, etc., just a comment to put it into the final form and hand it in.
Finally, I prevailed upon one of them (the younger, as I recall) to let me proof a paper; after reading it, I handed it back, w/o comment, as it was written much better than I would have been able to do it. A humbling experience, but gratifying to know the English teachers had been truthful at the conferences over the years; both our girls had the knack, ability, and had paid attention to grammar rules in class to be better writers than their dad.
A story to bore you; one of the few teachers left at NEMHS who actually taught the elder's favorite memory of her involves the Sophomore Project paper she wrote. First drafts were handed in on the appointed date; hers was returned with no "red ink", suggestions, deletions, etc., just a comment to put it into the final form and hand it in.
Gster said:
Does anyone else share my distaste of the "Adverb Generation", and their constant , continual over use of the work "like"? I'm like, it's like, every damn thing the pronounce is "like" something!
It's worse than the swearing I do, really, it like is!
Phew, I needed that.
It's worse than the swearing I do, really, it like is!
Phew, I needed that.
Julie said:
Congrats to you VT (and VT's wife) on raising well edumacated, well writing adults!
i gt 2 mch stuf tht i mzndrstd n cnt mk sns f.
(I get too much stuff that I misunderstand and can't make sense of.)
i gt 2 mch stuf tht i mzndrstd n cnt mk sns f.
(I get too much stuff that I misunderstand and can't make sense of.)
Vaughn Tolle said:
Gster, like I like do like understand also, dude; like it's really like awesome how like the use of like really like pos the like olders.
Vaughn Tolle said:
Julie, I just wish the translation you provided with your 12:26 post had been needed by me. :-(
Gster said:
RE: " gt 2 mch stuf tht i mzndrstd n cnt mk sns f."
If this trend keeps up, what are we going to do with all the leftover unused vowels?
Maybe we'll end up building storage sites like we do for nuclear waste??
Export 'em?
PS It sure raises hell with the spell checker!!
If this trend keeps up, what are we going to do with all the leftover unused vowels?
Maybe we'll end up building storage sites like we do for nuclear waste??
Export 'em?
PS It sure raises hell with the spell checker!!
lindainks55 said:
David Warlick, an educator / speaker / consultant / writer, says today's younger generation who text are actually a higher level of society who have created a new language with which they communicate. This makes them bilingual. He sees the opposite of a problem. And if they communicate in English when that is the appropriate way of communicating -- a paper for a class -- we should be celebrating their achievements of being able to write and express themselves in more than one language.
Like totally do you understand what I mean, like it's like a good thing?
Like totally do you understand what I mean, like it's like a good thing?
Gster said:
Linda- In the grand scheme of things, I'm more for underliking rather than overliking!
Maybe even disliking? As in dis.
Maybe even disliking? As in dis.
lindainks55 said:
My biggest pet peeve with the spoken language is the misuse of verb tense. Do they teach how to conjugate verbs today? I saw, I have seen...
Vaughn Tolle said:
Linda, while that would be a good thing if indeed the said younger generation would be bilingual in such a way, what I find from discussions, examples, etc., is that the "texting" language finds its way into the "proper English" arena too frequently. Thus, it would appear that true "bilingualism" is not occurring. Punctuation faults abound; phonetic spellings abound; texting abbreviations occur in place of the actual words, even if the words so abbreviated are appropriate (often, the same are not); sentence fragments; subject/verb disagreements as to singular/plural; there are so many violations of "the rules" I could weep, were I not tempted to puke.
Gster said:
And lets not forget our friends: the double negative, and "you know... you know"...etc. ad infinitum.
I agree with the comment about verb tense misuse.
I agree with the comment about verb tense misuse.
Vaughn Tolle said:
Linda, concerning your question on conjugation, it is my understanding that since conjugation of verbs is a part of that nasty stuff called "grammar", and as it is my further understanding that grammar is no longer taught, by and large, in the elementary and middle schools, the answer is no.
Another story to bore: when the elder was taking French at WSU while still at NEMHS, there was a discussion of the conjugation of verbs which the majority of the class did not comprehend. Thus, the French professor took the rest of the hour to impart basic rules of English grammar as to verb conjugation upon the class in order for them to understand the conjugation of a certain irregular French verb that was being taught.
Yet another story to bore: as I have posted, my wife is the Administrative Assistant at the Middle School of the Independent School here in Wichita. The Independent School does teach grammar; the problem which has arisen is that there are no grammar texts to purchase, so that the texts currently in use which, due to years of use are physically falling apart.
Another story to bore: when the elder was taking French at WSU while still at NEMHS, there was a discussion of the conjugation of verbs which the majority of the class did not comprehend. Thus, the French professor took the rest of the hour to impart basic rules of English grammar as to verb conjugation upon the class in order for them to understand the conjugation of a certain irregular French verb that was being taught.
Yet another story to bore: as I have posted, my wife is the Administrative Assistant at the Middle School of the Independent School here in Wichita. The Independent School does teach grammar; the problem which has arisen is that there are no grammar texts to purchase, so that the texts currently in use which, due to years of use are physically falling apart.
Vaughn Tolle said:
(Hate it when I do that); "apart may be replaced by either new (to the school) copies of the same texts or newer texts or something, so the current texts may be retired from service".
WSClark said:
Whack - The way kids talk today is whack. You know? Totally whack.
Translation: Whack is the newest slag meaning messed up, wrong, bizarre.
There is actually a dictionary for list stuff.
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=wha...
Be forewarned if you visit this site, some of the stuff is pretty shocking.
Translation: Whack is the newest slag meaning messed up, wrong, bizarre.
There is actually a dictionary for list stuff.
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=wha...
Be forewarned if you visit this site, some of the stuff is pretty shocking.
WSClark said:
Slang/slag? What's the diff?
List/this? Huh?
You know, my kid watches TV, eats dinner, plays a video game online while carrying on a conversation over the Internet.
I can't watch a rerun of L & O and type a three line post on a blog.
How whack is that?
List/this? Huh?
You know, my kid watches TV, eats dinner, plays a video game online while carrying on a conversation over the Internet.
I can't watch a rerun of L & O and type a three line post on a blog.
How whack is that?
Danny said:
My largest pet peeve with language is the fact I use a computer and do programming daily, as such I start finding myself thinking things through logical steps that have to occur in order to accomplish a task. As a result this includes my typing out fun responses such as this one.
In regards to the word like. I was eating lunch last week and this group of girls averaged saying the word like in their conversation 30 or 35 times a minute(maybe even more). All I thought, after listening to it(unfortunately), how did they get anything at all from their conversation? I've come to the conclusion then that voice inflection and tonal range must be the method of communication. Therefore being a guy I will now switch back to using the word "ugh." Hehe.
In regards to the word like. I was eating lunch last week and this group of girls averaged saying the word like in their conversation 30 or 35 times a minute(maybe even more). All I thought, after listening to it(unfortunately), how did they get anything at all from their conversation? I've come to the conclusion then that voice inflection and tonal range must be the method of communication. Therefore being a guy I will now switch back to using the word "ugh." Hehe.
WSClark said:
Well, the Appropriations Bill with the Iraq withdrawal deadline is on its way to George W Bush's desk. It passed the Senate 51-46 mostly along party lines.
Now things are going to get interesting. Who's going to blink, Bush or Congress? Bush is certain to veto the bill within a day, so the party will begin as soon as he puts pen to paper. Well, crayon to paper in George's case.
In my view, Congressional Democrats should stand firm. They do not have the votes to override the veto, but the Republicans do not have the votes to pass a bill on their own.
I do not think that we can let Bush have his way and give him the funding without strings attached. This administration has been wrong on every point regarding the war, from day one. Absolutely nothing they have claimed or predicted has been accurate. The American people want us out of Iraq. The Iraqi people want us out of Iraq. The world community wants us out of Iraq, so why are we still there.
The Democrats should ignore Bush's request for funding until he agrees to a withdrawal schedule.
If he doesn't agree with that, no funding, bring the troops home.
End of debate.
Now things are going to get interesting. Who's going to blink, Bush or Congress? Bush is certain to veto the bill within a day, so the party will begin as soon as he puts pen to paper. Well, crayon to paper in George's case.
In my view, Congressional Democrats should stand firm. They do not have the votes to override the veto, but the Republicans do not have the votes to pass a bill on their own.
I do not think that we can let Bush have his way and give him the funding without strings attached. This administration has been wrong on every point regarding the war, from day one. Absolutely nothing they have claimed or predicted has been accurate. The American people want us out of Iraq. The Iraqi people want us out of Iraq. The world community wants us out of Iraq, so why are we still there.
The Democrats should ignore Bush's request for funding until he agrees to a withdrawal schedule.
If he doesn't agree with that, no funding, bring the troops home.
End of debate.
Dubya said:
"Like" is one of the most annoying words in the English language. In Germany they say "oder" which literally means "or" at the end of many of their sentences. So it would be something like "The other day I was at the mall, or...." or perhaps "Did you get your homework done, or..."
Mildly annoying when you're not a native speaker, but it is NO WHERE near as annoying as "like":
"The other day I was like at the mall and like this dude like totally cut me off in the parking lot...I was like, DUDE, like whatever!"
It wasn't LIKE that at all, it either WAS or WAS NOT that way!! /strangle
~Dubya
Mildly annoying when you're not a native speaker, but it is NO WHERE near as annoying as "like":
"The other day I was like at the mall and like this dude like totally cut me off in the parking lot...I was like, DUDE, like whatever!"
It wasn't LIKE that at all, it either WAS or WAS NOT that way!! /strangle
~Dubya
Danny said:
WS,
It will be interesting to keep up on this. Myself, I'm not for a "this is the absolute day" for withdraw. However, I am quite for identifying the things needing our assistance still, placing deadlines on those things for when they will be finished, which in turn leads to a semi-predictable deadline for getting us out of Iraq.
However, the "government" in Iraq needs to start taking over complete responsibility there. I think part of ensuring that they do is making them understand we aren't going to be in Iraq forever.
It will be interesting to keep up on this. Myself, I'm not for a "this is the absolute day" for withdraw. However, I am quite for identifying the things needing our assistance still, placing deadlines on those things for when they will be finished, which in turn leads to a semi-predictable deadline for getting us out of Iraq.
However, the "government" in Iraq needs to start taking over complete responsibility there. I think part of ensuring that they do is making them understand we aren't going to be in Iraq forever.
WSClark said:
The Maliki government seems to have little interest in developing a functioning government. It sad to say that they have to office inside the Green Zone in order to have any semblance of order. In fact, any operation not inside the Green Zone is in danger. Of course, last week a suicide bomber breached the Zone security and killed himself and eight (?) others.
As little regard I have for Bush, I have even less for Maliki. The only thing you can say for him is that he is a fairly good Muppet.
It is sad to think that the Bush Administration is banking on this guy. We are no closer to "victory" in Iraq today than we were four years ago.
The reason that I am for an immediate pull out is that I see the result being the same whether we pull out today or five years from now. The same civil war will break into full bloom and the same regional powers will fight a proxy war over the Iraqi turf.
The only difference between leaving now or five years from now is the number of American lives lost and dollars spent.
As little regard I have for Bush, I have even less for Maliki. The only thing you can say for him is that he is a fairly good Muppet.
It is sad to think that the Bush Administration is banking on this guy. We are no closer to "victory" in Iraq today than we were four years ago.
The reason that I am for an immediate pull out is that I see the result being the same whether we pull out today or five years from now. The same civil war will break into full bloom and the same regional powers will fight a proxy war over the Iraqi turf.
The only difference between leaving now or five years from now is the number of American lives lost and dollars spent.
Danny said:
WS,
That could well be true. Part of me questions whether the "government" of Iraq(Maliki, and others) really want Iraq to be stable or really give a damn about their country.
For all I know what I said above, which is what I think I'd do if in charge, could blow up just as badly. I think it would give at least a picture of setting goals, meeting goals, and leaving versus the real or perceived reality of nothing getting done in Iraq with no chance of leaving.
That could well be true. Part of me questions whether the "government" of Iraq(Maliki, and others) really want Iraq to be stable or really give a damn about their country.
For all I know what I said above, which is what I think I'd do if in charge, could blow up just as badly. I think it would give at least a picture of setting goals, meeting goals, and leaving versus the real or perceived reality of nothing getting done in Iraq with no chance of leaving.
WSClark said:
You may be right, Danny, but you would think that, by NOW, Maliki would have done SOMETHING. Thus far, zero, zip, nada, zilch. His army and police are more likely to going on their own killing sprees as they are to protect anyone.
You noticed that when McCain, Lindsey and Company took their stroll through the Baghdad market, they were protected by American forces. 100 troops, three Blackhawks and armed Humvees, and that was after the market had been cleared and sealed off.
Now if McCain really had a set, he would have taken that little walk under the protection of Iraqi forces. If he had done that, I might be more inclined to believe the "surge is working" talk out of the Bushes.
You noticed that when McCain, Lindsey and Company took their stroll through the Baghdad market, they were protected by American forces. 100 troops, three Blackhawks and armed Humvees, and that was after the market had been cleared and sealed off.
Now if McCain really had a set, he would have taken that little walk under the protection of Iraqi forces. If he had done that, I might be more inclined to believe the "surge is working" talk out of the Bushes.
Predestined said:
I was napping, so I missed the great convo (oops! conversation) on grammar. Don't worry, I paid the price. Both granddaughters painted my desk with fingernail polish. I'm only happy they were intelligent enough not to get any on my new monitor.
My pet peeve? "Where (are) you at?" Said with or without the 'are', but always said with the 'at'. Not only do I hear it from at least two in my own family, but I've heard it on TV, too.
I know I've shared these two stories on the other blog before, but there may be a couple who missed them, and I don't want to deprive them of the pleasure. (That's a joke, guys.)
Ten or more years ago, when KAKE started hosting and televising the Literacy Telethon, a group of people, who were the heads of the HR departments at the larger companies in Wichita, were discussing the literacy of the young people applying for jobs. Their biggest complaint was that the majority of those applicants could not write a coherent sentence, whether because of grammar, spelling, or punctuation. Among the applicants were many college graduates. Why were these people who did the hiring for Boeing, Cessna, Lear, Raytheon/Beech, and Coleman concerned with this? Because these young people were very intelligent and had many new and good ideas, but they would never be able to share those ideas or have them applied in the workforce. They couldn't communicate well enough to get those ideas across to others. I remember then thinking that it was a sad comment on our education system. But instead of improving, it has only gotten worse.
Story 2. While standing in line at a parent/teacher conference, of which I ALWAYS attended for each child, I heard one of the student's fathers say that his kid didn't need to learn how to spell. His son had spell check on his computer. And he was serious! This man considered himself to be one of the leaders of the community. I can't say his grammar was all that great, either. It was tough to hold my tongue, but I did. I really didn't think the man was educatable anymore anyway.
And a 3rd story, just because. My best friend for almost 44 years has a son who's the same age as my second oldest daughter. When my friend went to p/t conferences, she talked to the 7th grade English teacher and complained that, when she had read the papers her son had written, she had noticed that his spelling, grammar, and punctuation were terrible. She wanted to know why she rarely saw him graded for these errors. No red marks on his papers. Nothing. The teacher's reply was that she didn't grade on these things. She believed that red marks for grammar and such would harm the students' creativity. My friend was not happy, and neither was I when she told me about it. The problem I see in this is that if the student can't write well enough for someone to comprehend what's been written, creativity isn't going to matter.
VT, I always proofread my girls' papers. They nearly always asked me to. I couldn't quote you all the rules of grammar, and my punctuation has gotten sloppy. I quite often head to the dictionary when I don't know how to spell something. I was never an English teacher, but language and the use of it have always been important to me.
I still correct my daughters when they use poor grammar. My oldest corrects her hubby, whose grammar is attrocious. We're doing what we can. If we could only teach the oldest grandchild that she should say, "Nana, her was playing with the fingernail polish, not me."
/rant
My pet peeve? "Where (are) you at?" Said with or without the 'are', but always said with the 'at'. Not only do I hear it from at least two in my own family, but I've heard it on TV, too.
I know I've shared these two stories on the other blog before, but there may be a couple who missed them, and I don't want to deprive them of the pleasure. (That's a joke, guys.)
Ten or more years ago, when KAKE started hosting and televising the Literacy Telethon, a group of people, who were the heads of the HR departments at the larger companies in Wichita, were discussing the literacy of the young people applying for jobs. Their biggest complaint was that the majority of those applicants could not write a coherent sentence, whether because of grammar, spelling, or punctuation. Among the applicants were many college graduates. Why were these people who did the hiring for Boeing, Cessna, Lear, Raytheon/Beech, and Coleman concerned with this? Because these young people were very intelligent and had many new and good ideas, but they would never be able to share those ideas or have them applied in the workforce. They couldn't communicate well enough to get those ideas across to others. I remember then thinking that it was a sad comment on our education system. But instead of improving, it has only gotten worse.
Story 2. While standing in line at a parent/teacher conference, of which I ALWAYS attended for each child, I heard one of the student's fathers say that his kid didn't need to learn how to spell. His son had spell check on his computer. And he was serious! This man considered himself to be one of the leaders of the community. I can't say his grammar was all that great, either. It was tough to hold my tongue, but I did. I really didn't think the man was educatable anymore anyway.
And a 3rd story, just because. My best friend for almost 44 years has a son who's the same age as my second oldest daughter. When my friend went to p/t conferences, she talked to the 7th grade English teacher and complained that, when she had read the papers her son had written, she had noticed that his spelling, grammar, and punctuation were terrible. She wanted to know why she rarely saw him graded for these errors. No red marks on his papers. Nothing. The teacher's reply was that she didn't grade on these things. She believed that red marks for grammar and such would harm the students' creativity. My friend was not happy, and neither was I when she told me about it. The problem I see in this is that if the student can't write well enough for someone to comprehend what's been written, creativity isn't going to matter.
VT, I always proofread my girls' papers. They nearly always asked me to. I couldn't quote you all the rules of grammar, and my punctuation has gotten sloppy. I quite often head to the dictionary when I don't know how to spell something. I was never an English teacher, but language and the use of it have always been important to me.
I still correct my daughters when they use poor grammar. My oldest corrects her hubby, whose grammar is attrocious. We're doing what we can. If we could only teach the oldest grandchild that she should say, "Nana, her was playing with the fingernail polish, not me."
/rant
Danny said:
WS,
I agree, Maliki isn't doing what he should be. As you, others, and somewhat myself, have said, he isn't going to do anything so long as there reason to believe we aren't leaving anytime at all.
I don't think I even need to say leaving soon in the situation. As it stands, or appears to stand, why does he have to do anything if it appears we are going to be there indefinitely? Which is why I think we need to identify those things that require us to be there, figure out how we can solve those things, and place deadlines on those things. These things should be tangible, and I think what would happen and "semi-deadline" for withdraw would appear. And that could be used to say, look this is around when we should be able to withdraw. To the Iraqi government it should be worded such, "look we are going to be leaving, start figuring out how you are going to work together and you better do it fast."
Either way, I think you could be right, they may still end up in a civil war regardless. But I think I'd like to say we fixed the things we broke, we tried, and then we left.
I agree, Maliki isn't doing what he should be. As you, others, and somewhat myself, have said, he isn't going to do anything so long as there reason to believe we aren't leaving anytime at all.
I don't think I even need to say leaving soon in the situation. As it stands, or appears to stand, why does he have to do anything if it appears we are going to be there indefinitely? Which is why I think we need to identify those things that require us to be there, figure out how we can solve those things, and place deadlines on those things. These things should be tangible, and I think what would happen and "semi-deadline" for withdraw would appear. And that could be used to say, look this is around when we should be able to withdraw. To the Iraqi government it should be worded such, "look we are going to be leaving, start figuring out how you are going to work together and you better do it fast."
Either way, I think you could be right, they may still end up in a civil war regardless. But I think I'd like to say we fixed the things we broke, we tried, and then we left.
tracyaphillips said:
Possibly the best Charlie Daniels lyics:
Damn Good Cowboy
He's the loosest dude I've ever been exposed to
He loves the bottle and a dirty joke
He likes to hang out on the street
And he'd rather fight than eat
And his nose and the women keep him broke
He's been in every jail from here to Juarez
And every funky old backstreeet saloon
He's a victim of his fate
Born a hundred years too late
And sometimes I think
A hundred years too soon
(chorus)
He's a outlaw, He's a bum
He's a rounder and then some
He's as ornery as a redneck fool can be
He ain't ever gonna be no different
He's a damn good cowboy
And I hope to hell he stays in Tennessee
He didn't finish school or go to college
When he turned 16 he just had to go
And while everyone who did
Was building homes and having kids
He was out West ridin' in some rodeo
He got busted up in Cheyenne last September
And he had to get his hat and pack his trunk
And he came on back to town,
He just kinda hangs around
He's the local hero and the local drunk
He's a outlaw, He's a bum
He's a rounder and then some
He's as ornery as a redneck fool can be
He ain't ever gonna be no different
He's a damn good cowboy
And I hope to hell he stays in Tennessee
You may think he's a little crazy
And you may think that where he's at's nowhere
And in your righteous sight,
You just might be right
But he damn sure did have fun gettin there
He's a outlaw, He's a bum
He's a rounder and then some
He's as ornery as a redneck fool can be
And if you don't like him you won't like me either
He's a damn good cowboy
And I hope to hell he stays in Tennessee
see you tomorrow, Trace
Damn Good Cowboy
He's the loosest dude I've ever been exposed to
He loves the bottle and a dirty joke
He likes to hang out on the street
And he'd rather fight than eat
And his nose and the women keep him broke
He's been in every jail from here to Juarez
And every funky old backstreeet saloon
He's a victim of his fate
Born a hundred years too late
And sometimes I think
A hundred years too soon
(chorus)
He's a outlaw, He's a bum
He's a rounder and then some
He's as ornery as a redneck fool can be
He ain't ever gonna be no different
He's a damn good cowboy
And I hope to hell he stays in Tennessee
He didn't finish school or go to college
When he turned 16 he just had to go
And while everyone who did
Was building homes and having kids
He was out West ridin' in some rodeo
He got busted up in Cheyenne last September
And he had to get his hat and pack his trunk
And he came on back to town,
He just kinda hangs around
He's the local hero and the local drunk
He's a outlaw, He's a bum
He's a rounder and then some
He's as ornery as a redneck fool can be
He ain't ever gonna be no different
He's a damn good cowboy
And I hope to hell he stays in Tennessee
You may think he's a little crazy
And you may think that where he's at's nowhere
And in your righteous sight,
You just might be right
But he damn sure did have fun gettin there
He's a outlaw, He's a bum
He's a rounder and then some
He's as ornery as a redneck fool can be
And if you don't like him you won't like me either
He's a damn good cowboy
And I hope to hell he stays in Tennessee
see you tomorrow, Trace
WSClark said:
Ah, my friends, one year ago today, right about this time, I took my sweet beautiful Golden Retriever to the vet for his final visit. He fought a valiant battle against cancer, living three times as long as the should have, but the end came quickly. He was only eight years old.
He was the most beautiful dog. Neighborhood kids would come to the door and ask if Rocky could come out and play. Everybody loved him. He would let my granddaughter sit on him while she colored or ate her lunch. He would steal a slice of pizza from you and then look so innocent that you couldn't get mad. He loved to play catch, but would tease you when you tried to get the ball from you.
Most importantly, Rocky loved me. No matter how much of a jerk I was, no matter my mood, no matter what, he loved me and stood beside me.
For that, I will always love him.
And I will always miss him.
He was the most beautiful dog. Neighborhood kids would come to the door and ask if Rocky could come out and play. Everybody loved him. He would let my granddaughter sit on him while she colored or ate her lunch. He would steal a slice of pizza from you and then look so innocent that you couldn't get mad. He loved to play catch, but would tease you when you tried to get the ball from you.
Most importantly, Rocky loved me. No matter how much of a jerk I was, no matter my mood, no matter what, he loved me and stood beside me.
For that, I will always love him.
And I will always miss him.
Vaughn Tolle said:
Pre, story #3 in your 4:25 pm post hit a nerve. This did not happen with either of our daughters, but I heard something similar when at a p/t conference (just hanging out, waiting our turn) from a mother upset about the grade her student was receiving in freshman English. She had just vented to the English teacher, and was still steamed, and told me her story (very similar to your #3) and how unfair it was for the current English teacher to expect her student to write properly when he hadn't been made to before. I remarked her anger was misdirected, as it should have been directed at the middle school teacher(s); she then went off in a huff.
lindainks55 said:
The days of that one party holding all three branches and continuing to abuse power, neglect duties of oversight and investigation and continue to be more and more corrupt are over. The voters spoke loudly last fall. This bunch took political lows to new depths and our country is in grave danger, not nearly as much from terrorists as from bushco. The people spoke and the new majority better stand firm. We can UNelect them next time too!
lindainks55 said:
I have a story about one of my grandsons. Doesn't reflect on him as positively as Vaughn's stories do on his daughters, but its fun and shows a hole in his education.
He is a junior in East's IB program -- a smart young man with a bright future. East's prom was last weekend and in advance he and his girlfriend along with some of their friends decided not to attend the prom (not dancers, I guess) but to dress up and go to dinner at a fancy smancy place. So his mother asked him if he had ordered a corsage. He hadn't so she explained it had to be done in advance, they weren't available unless you had ordered them... A few days went by and she asked him again. Still hadn't. She reiterated and even went further in trying to explain. He got a bit teenager to mom snippy about get outta my face. She persevered and asked yet again in a couple of days. This time he finally lost all patience with mom who wouldn't get off his back and told her if they didn't have a corsage he would eat chocolate cake or cheese cake.
He knew corsage fit someplace in fancy smancy and had decided it was maybe a French pastry or very special dessert only served at the most expensive of restaurants. Mom did save the day and order the flower and now he knows what a corsage is. How many other holes are there he will need to fill in?
He is a junior in East's IB program -- a smart young man with a bright future. East's prom was last weekend and in advance he and his girlfriend along with some of their friends decided not to attend the prom (not dancers, I guess) but to dress up and go to dinner at a fancy smancy place. So his mother asked him if he had ordered a corsage. He hadn't so she explained it had to be done in advance, they weren't available unless you had ordered them... A few days went by and she asked him again. Still hadn't. She reiterated and even went further in trying to explain. He got a bit teenager to mom snippy about get outta my face. She persevered and asked yet again in a couple of days. This time he finally lost all patience with mom who wouldn't get off his back and told her if they didn't have a corsage he would eat chocolate cake or cheese cake.
He knew corsage fit someplace in fancy smancy and had decided it was maybe a French pastry or very special dessert only served at the most expensive of restaurants. Mom did save the day and order the flower and now he knows what a corsage is. How many other holes are there he will need to fill in?
WSClark said:
If you are not watching the debate tonight (or at least taping) you are in big trouble (with me.)
Rather mild up to the point that Gravel chewed everyone out in no uncertain terms.......
Barack is awesome!!!!
Rather mild up to the point that Gravel chewed everyone out in no uncertain terms.......
Barack is awesome!!!!
Danny said:
Linda,
I'm very similar in nature like that. It isn't that I am not smart(my GPA is "proof" of that), and it isn't that I don't care(again point to GPA).
However, of the many classes that I've had, the ones that seemed to keep me from getting that 4.0 were English and very closely related subjects. Creatively speaking, all of my teachers said I was just fine. It was just my grasp of the punctuation and the occasional slip up of English usage(regarding how to use: nouns, verbs, etc).
For me, I type as I think. So while I'm sitting down typing this response you are getting my unedited thoughts for instance. My apathy, in a way, is that I don't go back and proof read everything I type all the time. I know that I should, but for whatever I don't do it.
I'm very similar in nature like that. It isn't that I am not smart(my GPA is "proof" of that), and it isn't that I don't care(again point to GPA).
However, of the many classes that I've had, the ones that seemed to keep me from getting that 4.0 were English and very closely related subjects. Creatively speaking, all of my teachers said I was just fine. It was just my grasp of the punctuation and the occasional slip up of English usage(regarding how to use: nouns, verbs, etc).
For me, I type as I think. So while I'm sitting down typing this response you are getting my unedited thoughts for instance. My apathy, in a way, is that I don't go back and proof read everything I type all the time. I know that I should, but for whatever I don't do it.
gster said:
"It's very 'portant that chilins learn to speak prosper Inglish. I wouldn't have gotten so far if I wasn't so comprehinsile in its use, totemly! Ya'll stay in school and absurd everything you can, 'cause it'll shuesomely changer your life, just like minein!!"
The Prez
The Prez
Predestined said:
Aw, Danny, don't be too hard on yourself about English. When I was in grade school, I loved Math and Science, along with everything else. I can't remember NOT liking any subject. When I was 9 & 20, I wanted to be a research scientist. I have the really nice microscope my parents got me for Christmas to prove it. I enjoyed doing long division and working with fractions as much as I did diagramming sentences, although I HATED word problems in Math. Then in 6th grade I had a teacher who--well, he was only there that one year, if that explains it. He taught Math and Science and absolutely spoiled both for me. 7th grade brought "Modern Math", and I never did catch the hang of it. My Math grades dropped, and Science wasn't far behind. I'd put up some kind of wall to learning either. I made it through Algebra & Biology in HS by the skin of my teeth. Thank heaven only 1 credit of both was needed to graduate!
It's true that males are better at the concrete subjects such as Math. Science is so closely related that it's true there, too. OTOH, women seem to excel more in abstract, such as languages. It's a brain thing, I think, but I also notice that it's far from 100%. Look at all of the writers who are men and all the women who excel in math and science.
You gotta go with what you do best. I believe every person has been given a gift, whether it's those mentioned above, working on cars, building things, raising children, playing a musical instrument, acting, singing... The list goes on. It's a matter of finding what your gift is and putting it to use. I think you've done a good job of that. :)
It's true that males are better at the concrete subjects such as Math. Science is so closely related that it's true there, too. OTOH, women seem to excel more in abstract, such as languages. It's a brain thing, I think, but I also notice that it's far from 100%. Look at all of the writers who are men and all the women who excel in math and science.
You gotta go with what you do best. I believe every person has been given a gift, whether it's those mentioned above, working on cars, building things, raising children, playing a musical instrument, acting, singing... The list goes on. It's a matter of finding what your gift is and putting it to use. I think you've done a good job of that. :)
WSClark said:
Poor Kucinich - some good ideas - but he's a 98 pound weakling in an NFL lockerroom. And Gravel, he's like your old Uncle that has too much to drink at the Family Picnic.
So far, Obama (okay I am biased) has done quite well, Edwards, Biden (?) and Clinton are doing okay. I like Richardson but (sorry) he just looks too much like Fred Flintstone. Clinton hasn't done anything to set herself apart from the rest. Dodd is just vanilla ice cream, good guy, but he can't win.
What do you think?
So far, Obama (okay I am biased) has done quite well, Edwards, Biden (?) and Clinton are doing okay. I like Richardson but (sorry) he just looks too much like Fred Flintstone. Clinton hasn't done anything to set herself apart from the rest. Dodd is just vanilla ice cream, good guy, but he can't win.
What do you think?
lindainks55 said:
I'm afraid to admit it because I really, really don't want to be in big trouble with you, but I don't have anything more than a couple fo fuzzy local channels (10 and 4) until tomorrow morning when Dish Network has an appointment to be here. So, I am interested in your opinion and your telling of what was asked and hwo they answered and. HELP, I'm digging it deeper, arent' I?
lindainks55 said:
Whilst usins are talkin bout spelling and talking good and ritin good I want y'all to NO I'm a gonna SET myself right down here and SIT my drink beside me and then I ain't gonna do NO MORE of that callin out other folks fer screwin up when I can't type three sentences that aren't full of them thar words spelled wrong and then that your where it shoulda been you're...
Hank Price said:
I think that the democrats are in a lot of trouble. The nomination is basically between Obama and Mrs Bill Clinton. Or putting it another way, it's between the far left and the extreme kooky left.
If either one gets the nomination, and one of them will, there are at least half a dozen republicans that can beat them. It won't be because of their gender or race, it will be because one doesn't have any experience or known ability to lead and the other one can't run on any of her experiences.
Sorry, but you did ask me what I thought.
Hank
If either one gets the nomination, and one of them will, there are at least half a dozen republicans that can beat them. It won't be because of their gender or race, it will be because one doesn't have any experience or known ability to lead and the other one can't run on any of her experiences.
Sorry, but you did ask me what I thought.
Hank
WSClark said:
In my view, Obama kicked it tonight, Hillary did well as did Edwards. I am extremely biased, since I am a huge fan of Barack. I do not dislike Clinton, but I just do not think she can win, not because she is a woman, but because so many people see her as an evil. I don't agree, of course, but we have to pick a winner this time.
Kucinich is actually pretty good, but there is just no way in Hell that he could win. America will never elect a wimpy looking guy like him. Not to mention he looks a little like Hitler. Sorry, but personal appearance does affect elections.
I liked Biden, but no cigar for him. He got off the best line of the night - when asked if he could be trusted to not make verbal gaffs in the future, his reply was "YES!" That's it, just one word.
Dodd and Gravel just did not make an impression.
I really like Richardson, good guy, bunches of experience, but another guy that cannot win the presidency. I am starting to think that I would like him as a running mate for Obama.
Edwards did well also. He looks and sounds presidential, he knows his stuff and seems very sincere. I like him, but I prefer Barack.
We have a great group of Dems running - but there is a big shadow looming over all of them - Gore is reportedly looking into another run.
Ah....................
Kucinich is actually pretty good, but there is just no way in Hell that he could win. America will never elect a wimpy looking guy like him. Not to mention he looks a little like Hitler. Sorry, but personal appearance does affect elections.
I liked Biden, but no cigar for him. He got off the best line of the night - when asked if he could be trusted to not make verbal gaffs in the future, his reply was "YES!" That's it, just one word.
Dodd and Gravel just did not make an impression.
I really like Richardson, good guy, bunches of experience, but another guy that cannot win the presidency. I am starting to think that I would like him as a running mate for Obama.
Edwards did well also. He looks and sounds presidential, he knows his stuff and seems very sincere. I like him, but I prefer Barack.
We have a great group of Dems running - but there is a big shadow looming over all of them - Gore is reportedly looking into another run.
Ah....................
gster said:
Hank- I don't have a preference, and you are certainly entitled to your opinion, but your prediction prowess wasn't exactly stellar the last election.
And, it's really far too soon to get excited about any one particular candidate, IMHO.
Gary
And, it's really far too soon to get excited about any one particular candidate, IMHO.
Gary
WSClark said:
I just love it when Republicans try to help us with our nominee for president. In the spirit of fair play, let me offer my suggestions for the Party of Death.
First choice - Dick Cheney - he would be a great candidate to run, after all, he supports gay rights.
Second choice - James Inhofe - Doofus from Oklahoma - enough said.
Third choice - Jeb Bush - the country overwhelmingly wants four more years of Bush.
The CONS don't need to thank me for my assistance.
First choice - Dick Cheney - he would be a great candidate to run, after all, he supports gay rights.
Second choice - James Inhofe - Doofus from Oklahoma - enough said.
Third choice - Jeb Bush - the country overwhelmingly wants four more years of Bush.
The CONS don't need to thank me for my assistance.
lindainks55 said:
I'm glad Obama did well. I think he will make an excellent president. Right now things are looking very good for the Democratic Party. bushco as our best ambassador and they are doing a stellar job of ensuring the next president is a Democrat. Things are looking up for America!
hank said:
Hey Gary,
Yea, I'm afraid the last election was a little worse than I expected. I did redeem myself on a few of my bets. . .Lieberman did beat the great liberal anti war hope in Connecticut. And, all-in-all we didn't take too bad a whoopin for an off year election.
Most of the races where the democrats were honest in their campaigns they lost.
Hank
Yea, I'm afraid the last election was a little worse than I expected. I did redeem myself on a few of my bets. . .Lieberman did beat the great liberal anti war hope in Connecticut. And, all-in-all we didn't take too bad a whoopin for an off year election.
Most of the races where the democrats were honest in their campaigns they lost.
Hank
lindainks55 said:
I received a three page letter from the Obama For America campaign this week. It is very interesting and well worth reading. I'll share some of it when I have more time. He is so well spoken which is very refreshing, and has great ideas.
I hear from my grandson who is a college student that many of his age are very excited about Obama. And they are planning to do their part to take back America. The current president has screwed things up pretty badly for them and it has definitely gotten their attention.
I hear from my grandson who is a college student that many of his age are very excited about Obama. And they are planning to do their part to take back America. The current president has screwed things up pretty badly for them and it has definitely gotten their attention.
lindainks55 said:
Democratic Sweep In 2006 Midterm Elections
The final result was a thirty-seat pickup for the Democrats, including the pickup of the Vermont At-Large seat, previously held by Independent Bernie Sanders who caucused with the Democrats. Democrats defeated twenty-two Republican incumbents and won nine open Republican-held seats. The election has since earned the nick name The Blue Wave.
Republicans won no seats previously held by Democrats in either the House or the Senate, and it was the largest seat gain for the Democrats since the 1982 elections.
It was the first time since the 1948 elections that no Republicans won any Democratic seats.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_House_e...,_2006
Seems not to have mattered what was said or not said, they won anyway. It will take more than one election cycle, but the Democratic Party got a great start and will only build on those victories! Hoooray!
The final result was a thirty-seat pickup for the Democrats, including the pickup of the Vermont At-Large seat, previously held by Independent Bernie Sanders who caucused with the Democrats. Democrats defeated twenty-two Republican incumbents and won nine open Republican-held seats. The election has since earned the nick name The Blue Wave.
Republicans won no seats previously held by Democrats in either the House or the Senate, and it was the largest seat gain for the Democrats since the 1982 elections.
It was the first time since the 1948 elections that no Republicans won any Democratic seats.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_House_e...,_2006
Seems not to have mattered what was said or not said, they won anyway. It will take more than one election cycle, but the Democratic Party got a great start and will only build on those victories! Hoooray!
WSClark said:
I love it when the THIRTY PERCENTERS crawl out from under their rocks and tell the left how wonderful everything is going for the Republicans. It is like watching Paris Hilton claim that she is a good girl that has only had two sexual partners.
Yeah, right.
The National Debt is going to be at least $11 trillion before we can even come close to a balanced budget again, the SS lockbox is completely unfunded, the environment has taken a dive in the last six years, the world hates us, we are stuck in an unwinnable war, terrorism is worse, not better, we have done nothing to address the health care issues in this country, the elderly have been sold out to the pharmaceutical companies, women's rights have been undermined, the country's infrastructure is crumbling, the National Guard throughout the country has been devastated and a major American city is a shell of what it once was.
And the Republicans still pat themselves on the back and tell us that they have been good girls.
Yeah, right.
Yeah, right.
The National Debt is going to be at least $11 trillion before we can even come close to a balanced budget again, the SS lockbox is completely unfunded, the environment has taken a dive in the last six years, the world hates us, we are stuck in an unwinnable war, terrorism is worse, not better, we have done nothing to address the health care issues in this country, the elderly have been sold out to the pharmaceutical companies, women's rights have been undermined, the country's infrastructure is crumbling, the National Guard throughout the country has been devastated and a major American city is a shell of what it once was.
And the Republicans still pat themselves on the back and tell us that they have been good girls.
Yeah, right.
WSClark said:
Oh, yeah, and the current Republican president's approval ratings are about the same as the last president that had to resign from office.
Yeah, the Republicans impeached a president with an approval rating of 67%, while they applaud the actions of a president with an approval rating of 30%.
So much for being responsive to the people of America.
I bet the Republicans think that Paris Hilton was a virgin when she made that video.
Yeah, right.
Yeah, the Republicans impeached a president with an approval rating of 67%, while they applaud the actions of a president with an approval rating of 30%.
So much for being responsive to the people of America.
I bet the Republicans think that Paris Hilton was a virgin when she made that video.
Yeah, right.
Wendy said:
Hey, for anyone that didn't know:
The annual "Take Back the Night" March is tonight. Starts at 6 PM ourside the Oldtown Warren. It's a very important march - to fight against sexual violence in our community...
(Featured speakers Paul Morrison, Sabrina Peres-Glatt, and Dr. Ron Matson)
The annual "Take Back the Night" March is tonight. Starts at 6 PM ourside the Oldtown Warren. It's a very important march - to fight against sexual violence in our community...
(Featured speakers Paul Morrison, Sabrina Peres-Glatt, and Dr. Ron Matson)
tracyaphillips said:
No doubt protestors will show up to try to convince everyone that Morrison is a 'baby killer'.
Predestined said:
Tracy, some people need to get a life of their own before worrying about the life of anything else.
lindainks55 said:
At a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing on Jan. 11, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice predicted significant progress within two or three months. Here is and exchange with Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) and Secretary Rice:
Obama: "Are you telling me that if in six months or whatever time frame you are suggesting that in fact the Maliki government has not performed these benchmarks -- which, by the way, remain not sufficiently explicit, I think, for a lot of us to make decisions on, but let's assume that that surfaces over the next several weeks that this is being debated -- that at that point, you are going to suggest to the Maliki government that we are going to start phasing down our troop levels in Iraq?"
Rice: "Senator, I want to be not explicit about what we might do because I don't want to speculate. But I will tell you this, the benchmark that I'm looking at -- the oil law is important, the political process is extraordinary important -- that the most important thing that the Iraqi government has to do right now is to reestablish the confidence of its population that it's going to be even-handed in defending it. That's what we need to see over the next two or three months, and I think that over the next several months they're going to have to show that."
Obama: "Or else what? . . . "
Rice: "Or this plan -- or this plan is not -- this plan is not going to work."
---------------------------------
It's almost FOUR full months later. How do you define two or three or even several months?
I say the "benchmarks" haven't been met -- NONE of them!
Obama: "Are you telling me that if in six months or whatever time frame you are suggesting that in fact the Maliki government has not performed these benchmarks -- which, by the way, remain not sufficiently explicit, I think, for a lot of us to make decisions on, but let's assume that that surfaces over the next several weeks that this is being debated -- that at that point, you are going to suggest to the Maliki government that we are going to start phasing down our troop levels in Iraq?"
Rice: "Senator, I want to be not explicit about what we might do because I don't want to speculate. But I will tell you this, the benchmark that I'm looking at -- the oil law is important, the political process is extraordinary important -- that the most important thing that the Iraqi government has to do right now is to reestablish the confidence of its population that it's going to be even-handed in defending it. That's what we need to see over the next two or three months, and I think that over the next several months they're going to have to show that."
Obama: "Or else what? . . . "
Rice: "Or this plan -- or this plan is not -- this plan is not going to work."
---------------------------------
It's almost FOUR full months later. How do you define two or three or even several months?
I say the "benchmarks" haven't been met -- NONE of them!
Danny said:
I watched the debates last night. I don't really know who is going to win or lose. Further, I don't know who I am going to vote for yet. I watch these to attempt to get an idea of what the different candidates stand for on each "side" of the bi-party system.
I suppose we'll see who ends up being the better candidate come closer to election time though.
I suppose we'll see who ends up being the better candidate come closer to election time though.
lindainks55 said:
Dale McFeatters writes in an opinion piece for Scripps News: "Late in the day, the Bush administration is getting some of the same scrutiny the GOP-run Congress gave the Clinton administration. Turnabout is fair play and it could also mean better government."
http://www.scrippsnews.com/node/21873
"Dana Milbank writes in The Washington Post about the return of the legislative subpoena: "Republicans dubbed it 'Subpoenafest,' but it was nothing compared with the raise-the-roof subpoena bashes the Republicans threw during the Clinton administration. Waxman pointed out that the oversight committee issued 1,052 subpoenas to Democratic targets between 1997 and 2002, all without a debate or vote. During a 100-day period in 1997, Waxman said, then-Chairman Dan Burton (R-Ind.) issued subpoenas at the clip of two per day.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/artic...
A congress who remembers their duties of oversight and investigative! Finally. So much to do, so little time.
http://www.scrippsnews.com/node/21873
"Dana Milbank writes in The Washington Post about the return of the legislative subpoena: "Republicans dubbed it 'Subpoenafest,' but it was nothing compared with the raise-the-roof subpoena bashes the Republicans threw during the Clinton administration. Waxman pointed out that the oversight committee issued 1,052 subpoenas to Democratic targets between 1997 and 2002, all without a debate or vote. During a 100-day period in 1997, Waxman said, then-Chairman Dan Burton (R-Ind.) issued subpoenas at the clip of two per day.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/artic...
A congress who remembers their duties of oversight and investigative! Finally. So much to do, so little time.
lindainks55 said:
I agree Danny. It's too early to think about. The process of selecting our candidates needs improvements. By the time we voters should be paying attention to people running for office many potential candidates have been eliminated. Seems how much money someone raised plays too big a part in being able to survive. And are the states with the primaries and the caucuses truly representative of America? They choose whose name actually goes on the ballot. I bring it up as a question. Shouldn't there be better ways to allow everyone a chance to get their message to the American people. If we aren't paying enough attention yet (and we agree we shouldn't need to at this point), when we get there we may have lost the opportunity to evaluate several of the people. Aren't we supposed to be that country where anyone can be anything with enough effort?
Predestined said:
Turnabout's fair play works for me. :) Now the GOP understands what it feels like to be put under a microscope and dug at with an ice pick.
Yes, Linda, it's good to see that someone is finally asking questions to be answered...under oath!
Can anyone tell me why Clinton couldn't or wouldn't invoke Execute...uh, whatever it is? (Sorry, 2-day headache is doing a number on me.)
Yes, Linda, it's good to see that someone is finally asking questions to be answered...under oath!
Can anyone tell me why Clinton couldn't or wouldn't invoke Execute...uh, whatever it is? (Sorry, 2-day headache is doing a number on me.)
Predestined said:
For all you movie lovers out there---
(And don't miss mention of our former DEM U.S. Rep and Sec. of Agriculture.)
Film Industry Champion Valenti Dies
http://www.eonline.com/news/article/index.jsp?uuid...
(And don't miss mention of our former DEM U.S. Rep and Sec. of Agriculture.)
Film Industry Champion Valenti Dies
http://www.eonline.com/news/article/index.jsp?uuid...
Danny said:
Linda,
Well I thought that we did get to vote in primaries, now perhaps I'm not informed correctly, isn't that were each party decides who they choose as their candidate in the general election?
Perhaps I'm mis-equating primaries as caucuses. Either, it does seem that at least initially not every state is involved in this process, or at least if they are it isn't as prominent. Either way, one would expect that each party would nominate who they think is best, and then we'd choose between those candidates the one we think would be represent the country.
Pre,
Being the "technology" geek I am. Valenti pissed me off. Ok, as does the RIAA and MPAA in general. This will get me going on a DRM or DRM-free world. This may need to be an article, more than a reply. So, I'm going to leave it at this for the moment. I'll briefly explain what DRM is though.
DRM: Digital Rights Management. It has the goal of stopping piracy. However, it is generally easily defeated, and in reality is stop "casual" piracy vs. "professional" piracy. Further, it serves the purpose of limiting what hardware you can listen to music on or watch movies on. Example: buy a song from iTunes, you can listen to it on your computer or an iPod. No other MP3 player will work.
/rant mode off.
I think I have my next article of discussion to submit.
Well I thought that we did get to vote in primaries, now perhaps I'm not informed correctly, isn't that were each party decides who they choose as their candidate in the general election?
Perhaps I'm mis-equating primaries as caucuses. Either, it does seem that at least initially not every state is involved in this process, or at least if they are it isn't as prominent. Either way, one would expect that each party would nominate who they think is best, and then we'd choose between those candidates the one we think would be represent the country.
Pre,
Being the "technology" geek I am. Valenti pissed me off. Ok, as does the RIAA and MPAA in general. This will get me going on a DRM or DRM-free world. This may need to be an article, more than a reply. So, I'm going to leave it at this for the moment. I'll briefly explain what DRM is though.
DRM: Digital Rights Management. It has the goal of stopping piracy. However, it is generally easily defeated, and in reality is stop "casual" piracy vs. "professional" piracy. Further, it serves the purpose of limiting what hardware you can listen to music on or watch movies on. Example: buy a song from iTunes, you can listen to it on your computer or an iPod. No other MP3 player will work.
/rant mode off.
I think I have my next article of discussion to submit.
Vaughn Tolle said:
Danny, I look forward to your article. Be forewarned; I may well, where appropriate, raise issues of intellectual property in a "devil's advocate" way.
Danny said:
VT,
That would be good. Understand, I'm not for piracy, but I'm for open formats. I think one of the ending questions I'll have, if I buy something legally, should I not expect a fair use of being allowed to listen or view my purchase on any medium of my choice? DMCA currently prevents me from doing this because I'm not allowed to legally reverse engineer their encryption.
That would be good. Understand, I'm not for piracy, but I'm for open formats. I think one of the ending questions I'll have, if I buy something legally, should I not expect a fair use of being allowed to listen or view my purchase on any medium of my choice? DMCA currently prevents me from doing this because I'm not allowed to legally reverse engineer their encryption.
Vaughn Tolle said:
Danny, I understand your fair use argument with which, BTW, I agree. However, there is a conflict under current technology with making something purchased legally open for fair use by the purchaser on any medium of the purchaser's choice, but yet making the legally purchased item relatively impracticable to be copied in such a way that it may be thereafter distributed to others without recognition of the intellectual property rights of the creator via the payment of royalties.
lindainks55 said:
Whew, those two men do have some words, don't they!? If I read slowly do you think I might learn something? There's a chance.
I know this means nothing to anyone, but makes me happy -- I HAVE TELEVISION! The evenings when I really enjoy sitting down to watch will feel less at loose ends...
I know this means nothing to anyone, but makes me happy -- I HAVE TELEVISION! The evenings when I really enjoy sitting down to watch will feel less at loose ends...
lindainks55 said:
Danny and VT -- I was joking! Just because I don't understand doesn't mean I can't. I will try! I read your words and sometimes can even hook up a thought or two.
Predestined said:
Danny, like VT, I understand your arguments. One good reason I didn't buy an iPod. In fact, my MP3 player should arrive today. And...I PAY for my songs and don't mind doing it. I'd much rather pay .88 (limit 10 burns) for a song than to have to buy an entire CD for only one song.
I also understand royalties, because I get them twice a year. They aren't great. In fact, the percentage of cover price for my mass market fiction books is 6%. But even at that, when someone copies a book and posts it on the internet (and this is done A LOT), I'm cheated out of even that small amount.
I don't mind someone loaning by books to someone else to read. I've even bought used books. But free to read on the 'net? Huh uh. And that's why I pay for my music, even though my kids disagree with me strongly.
I also understand royalties, because I get them twice a year. They aren't great. In fact, the percentage of cover price for my mass market fiction books is 6%. But even at that, when someone copies a book and posts it on the internet (and this is done A LOT), I'm cheated out of even that small amount.
I don't mind someone loaning by books to someone else to read. I've even bought used books. But free to read on the 'net? Huh uh. And that's why I pay for my music, even though my kids disagree with me strongly.
Danny said:
Pre,
Exactly. I don't promote or even condone piracy or theft. However, I do promote and advocate fair use. Meaning if I buy a song on iTunes, I'd like to play it on my Sensa, or my PDA, or even a CD player(which I can do that) and not just my computer or an iPod which I won't buy.
Anyway, I did write up an article and submitted it today. So perhaps we'll see it later today or on Monday, depending on when Dubya wants to publish it.
Exactly. I don't promote or even condone piracy or theft. However, I do promote and advocate fair use. Meaning if I buy a song on iTunes, I'd like to play it on my Sensa, or my PDA, or even a CD player(which I can do that) and not just my computer or an iPod which I won't buy.
Anyway, I did write up an article and submitted it today. So perhaps we'll see it later today or on Monday, depending on when Dubya wants to publish it.
Loading....