Presidents and Re-Election

[Chisoxfn]

Unfortunately based in part on how we fund education in this country the poor do not arrive at college's doors with the same set of tools as others. Funding schools through property taxes has been a great way to continue the class system in this country.

 

Middle class and rich schools can pay for better qualified, more experienced teachers, up do date text books, computers, decent classroom conditions, etc. Highland Park Texas, Kap's neck of the woods, requires a PhD to teach science in their high school. Los Fresnos High School in south Texas finally was able to hire a science teacher under a federal program that will forgive part of a teacher's student loans if they teach in disadvantaged schools.

 

Which student is more likely to be successful in a college Bio-tech program?

 

It isn't always about desire, or hard work. Racism is still alive and well in this country. Companies still discriminate. Small business is the fastest growing segment of the population and largly uneffected by anti-discrimination laws.

 

Is anyone aguing that being born middle class, straight, thin, and white is a disadvantage in this country? The only question is how big of an advantage is it?

 

Anyone have an alternate theory why more minorities die fighting wars in the this country then they are represented in the general population?

Here's another question, where do you think that teacher with the masters is going to want to teach?

 

Are they going to want to teach in a school that is in a crime invested area, where you have to deal with at least a higher percentage of the student base that are involved in crimes and gangs and what not?

 

The answer is obviously no. To me it has nothing to do with racism, but common sense. I know I'd sure as hell rather teach in that suburbia high school where you feel a lot safer (of course there has been columbine and what not) and in general their is a much larger support group from the parents and what not.

 

The government pours a mega percentage of its education into the poorer areas but so far money isn't the answer. Hell, I think the school system could even be over-funded in some areas. Sometimes money isn't the answer, but a change of styles or attitudes. I'd like to see how a truly well disciplined school would do in a bad area. I'm sure their would be a ton of conflicts, but to me, it has to be a point where you just go head to head with them and find the people that want to learn and give them there education.

 

People have been trying to figure out this answer for a long ass time and thus far I don't think anyone has came up with the right answer.

[LowerCaseRepublican]

Attack the technique, not the thought. A draft would make the military too white and that does scare the lilly white Republicans who cannot imagine their kids in the Army. And now they cannot hide their kids in the National Guard.

 

Unlike the scare tactics used to get us in Iraq. Or the scare tactics that the right uses to increase the military budget, or the scare tactic the right uses to force through tax cuts, or the scare tactics Cheney used two weeks ago about a terrorist attack if Kerry was elected, or the scare tactics Bush uses about gay marriage, or the . . .

Yeah and insinuating that a vote for Kerry is a vote for bin Laden isn't a scare tactic (Rep. Congressman from Nebraska, I believe it was, did that one) Or Cheney saying in so many words that if Kerry gets elected, we'll get slammed with another terrorist attack. Or that we needed the PATRIOT Act passed without letting Congress read it?

 

It's funnier cuz AQ even gave a public statement saying they want Bush to win the election saying that they could "not find a bigger idiot" than Bush because his idiocy is helping them recruit so many more members and prosper.

 

Whichever one of the neo-con goons gets into office (Kerry or Bush), if you read the PNAC founding documents in 1997, they call for the invasion/destruction of over 60 countries.

 

And just recently a group of US soldiers whose term of service is ending in months said that higher ups in their base told them that if they did not re-sign again that in the last few months of their term, they would sent to units being deployed to Iraq. Now if that isn't a threat...Thousands of troops have been put on a stop loss order, others have had their tours of service extended 3-9 months unvoluntarily by the DoD.

 

It's obvious that you said that we need more troops in Iraq to stabilize the situation there, Nuke. Hell, even the US War College agrees with that. Granted, the current restructuring of the military will make more soldiers available for combat duty and move most of the non-combat jobs to contractors etc., they may find some of the people they need to fill their manpower needs there.

 

H.R. 163 and S. 89 were both introduced by Democrats Charles Rangel (NY) and Ernest Hollings (SC) respectively. The bills were introduced in January 2003 and would require both men and women to either perform mandatory military or civilian service. Both of these pieces of legislation are currently stalled and there's no indication that they are going anywhere anytime soon. But, just when you thought the draft debate ended here comes Republican Senator Chuck Hagel (NE). It's a bi-partisan effort which may not pass but a draft is always a reality if they need people.

 

As for the volunteers and recruiters, this ex-recruiter and former Marine pretty much exposes a lot of the crap spewed in order to get as many people as possible involved in the military: http://www.objector.org/insider.html

[Texsox]

Here's another question, where do you think that teacher with the masters is going to want to teach? 

 

Are they going to want to teach in a school that is in a crime invested area, where you have to deal with at least a higher percentage of the student base that are involved in crimes and gangs and what not? 

 

The answer is obviously no.  To me it has nothing to do with racism, but common sense.  I know I'd sure as hell rather teach in that suburbia high school where you feel a lot safer (of course there has been columbine and what not) and in general their is a much larger support group from the parents and what not.

 

The government pours a mega percentage of its education into the poorer areas but so far money isn't the answer.  Hell, I think the school system could even be over-funded in some areas.  Sometimes money isn't the answer, but a change of styles or attitudes.  I'd like to see how a truly well disciplined school would do in a bad area.  I'm sure their would be a ton of conflicts, but to me, it has to be a point where you just go head to head with them and find the people that want to learn and give them there education. 

 

People have been trying to figure out this answer for a long ass time and thus far I don't think anyone has came up with the right answer.

Thank you,

 

In many poorer schools a greater percentage of their operating budget goes into security instead of teachers, resulting in larger class sizes.

 

Instead of racism how about preserving the class system of the have and have nots? All the more reasons why our military is darker than our general population.

[LowerCaseRepublican]

Depends on which Kerry...is it the Kerry that called Saddam a terrorist or the one that now is backtracking on the whole thing.

 

Or perhaps it is the John Kerry that is now attacking Bush for not giving enough support to the troops to win the war.  The same John Kerry that voted against all the bullet proof vesting and what not to PROTECT the troops.

 

I know politics is an issue, but its ludicrous to see him go out on the warpath right now and make all these claims when he's pretty much been the exact opposite on them.

 

Disagree with Bush all you want, but I'm a hell of a lot more confident to get a straight forward answer from him then I am from Kerry and thats something I definately respect.

Jas, straightforward answers my ass.

 

9-11 Air Quality

Saying post 9/11 that the air in NYC near Ground Zero is fine to breathe. Months later, they find a report saying that the EPA told Bush and Co. that the air was still dangerously toxic, yet Bush told NY inhabitants to go about their daily lives breathing in dangerously tainted air.

 

 

Social Security

Or straightforward in this statement: "We're going to keep the promise of Social Security and keep the government from raiding the Social Security surplus." from March 3, 2001. Unfortunately, "the president's new budget uses Social Security surpluses to pay for other programs every year through 2013, ultimately diverting more than $1.4 trillion in Social Security funds to other purposes."

 

"Despite his campaign rhetoric in favor of a patients' bill of rights, Bush fought such a bill tooth and nail as Texas governor, vetoing a bill coauthored by Republican state Rep. John Smithee in 1995. He... constantly opposed a patient's right to sue an HMO over coverage denied that resulted in adverse health effects." [salon, 2/7/01]

 

 

HMOs and Patients' Right to Sue

"We're one of the first states that said you can sue an HMO for denying you proper coverage... It's time for our nation to come together and do what's right for the people. And I think this is right for the people. You know, I support a national patients' bill of rights, Mr. Vice President. And I want all people covered. I don't want the law to supersede good law like we've got in Texas." [Governor Bush, 10/17/00]

 

"To let two Texas consumers, Juan Davila and Ruby R. Calad, sue their managed-care companies for wrongful denials of medical benefits ‘would be to completely undermine' federal law regulating employee benefits, Assistant Solicitor General James A. Feldman said at oral argument March 23. Moreover, the B ush administration's brief attacked the policy rationale for Texas's law, which is similar to statutes on the books in nine other states." [Washington Post, 4/5/04]

 

North Korea

"We developed a bold approach under which, if the North addressed our long-standing concerns, the United States was prepared to take important steps that would have significantly improved the lives of the North Korean people. Now that North Korea's covert nuclear weapons program has come to light, we are unable to pursue this approach." [GWB, Nov. 15, 2002]

 

Well, we will work to take steps to ease their political and economic isolation. So there would be -- what you would see would be some provisional or temporary proposals that would only lead to lasting benefit after North Korea dismantles its nuclear programs. So there would be some provisional or temporary efforts of that nature." [White House Press Sec. Scott McClellan June 23, 2004]

 

 

http://www.americanprogressaction.org/site...WJcP7H&b=118263 has a s***load more.

 

We all know Kerry has different positions quite often and he gets slimed for it. I wonder why the liberal media doesn't do the same to Bush.

 

They are both total and complete idiots -- I just ask, what the f*** did this country do that we deserve to have an election with these two assclowns be our main choices for who is gonna drive us back into the Stone Age for the next 4 years?

[LowerCaseRepublican]

Here's another question, where do you think that teacher with the masters is going to want to teach? 

 

Are they going to want to teach in a school that is in a crime invested area, where you have to deal with at least a higher percentage of the student base that are involved in crimes and gangs and what not? 

 

The answer is obviously no.  To me it has nothing to do with racism, but common sense.  I know I'd sure as hell rather teach in that suburbia high school where you feel a lot safer (of course there has been columbine and what not) and in general their is a much larger support group from the parents and what not.

 

The government pours a mega percentage of its education into the poorer areas but so far money isn't the answer.  Hell, I think the school system could even be over-funded in some areas.  Sometimes money isn't the answer, but a change of styles or attitudes.  I'd like to see how a truly well disciplined school would do in a bad area.  I'm sure their would be a ton of conflicts, but to me, it has to be a point where you just go head to head with them and find the people that want to learn and give them there education. 

 

People have been trying to figure out this answer for a long ass time and thus far I don't think anyone has came up with the right answer.

I'm actually in an ed minor program to teach secondary education (History major).

 

It's quite interesting to see funding desparities in schools. While true that NCLB did increase funds for schools, it underfunded the amount of money needed to fulfill the bill's demands.

 

Class size has a lot to do with education. In most "bad" schools, class sizes are up into the mid-30s. And with the new federal mandates for education (aka passing examinations), most classes in "bad" schools no longer have time for individual attention and must divert efforts to teaching for the test.

 

By funding schools with property taxes, it drastically implements what sort of education is going to be available for a child. The disparity in per pupil expenditures is enormous in some parts of the state of Illinois and I think, IMO, that this is a reason that some kids don't "want to learn".

 

If they are in a science lab that does not have enough money for beakers, bunsen burners, or even to provide books to the entire class (which has actually happened a lot in IL schools...see Kozol's "Savage Inequalities"), then it's easy to see the reasoning that "getting an education is pointless" and where they are coming from dropping out.

 

It's not that the kids don't want to learn, it's that they've been getting the screw job from the education system. Most politicians come out and score points saying that education is inefficient and it should be run like a business and that they should be giving quality educations and if not, then they need to be shut down. It's stacking the deck against people when you realize that businesses get to be picky and choose what resources they are going to make their "quality products" out of. Public schools have to take all people of all ability levels so there may be some who come in not having the same skill level at the outset.

 

With a propensity of poor parents living in a condensed area (as what happens with the "white flight" concept of movement), property taxes are no longer able to sustain a quality school. Their jobs aren't going to be that good so their houses aren't going to be that good and therefore the school system isn't going to exactly be the caliber of New Trier HS because they don't have as much money to pour into education. The real kick in the ass is that all the administrators at the state and federal level making decisions on education have absolutely no background in educational theory or any background in classroom experience as a teacher/administrator. So where do these people get off saying what will work in a classroom?

[Heads22]

Don't go into it with me.  I allow others to have their opinion.  But don't call me ignorant.

Someone woke up wrong today. Just giving you s***, which really s hould be the first thing you should expect from me.....

[Texsox]

another kid without choices picks the military

 

Click to enlarge photo

LONDON (Reuters) - Britain's Prince Harry will join an officer training course next year after passing the army's entrance tests, his father's office said on Friday.

 

The 20-year-old prince, third in line to the throne, will be trained as an officer cadet at the prestigious Sandhurst military academy after successfully passing a four-day Regular Commissions Board (RCB) assessment.

 

"I am delighted that I have passed my RCB and that I can now go to Sandhurst," he said in a statement released by Clarence House, his father Prince Charles's office.

 

More at link.

[KipWellsFan]

Depends on which Kerry...is it the Kerry that called Saddam a terrorist or the one that now is backtracking on the whole thing.

 

Or perhaps it is the John Kerry that is now attacking Bush for not giving enough support to the troops to win the war.  The same John Kerry that voted against all the bullet proof vesting and what not to PROTECT the troops.

 

I know politics is an issue, but its ludicrous to see him go out on the warpath right now and make all these claims when he's pretty much been the exact opposite on them.

 

Disagree with Bush all you want, but I'm a hell of a lot more confident to get a straight forward answer from him then I am from Kerry and thats something I definately respect.

It simply can't be so simple that John Kerry voted against bullet proof vesting for troops. He's not an idiot, there's obviously a lot more to this.

[Texsox]

It simply can't be so simple that John Kerry voted against bullet proof vesting for troops.  He's not an idiot, there's obviously a lot more to this.

Kip, it's easier to just repeat something rush said than find out the truth.

[KipWellsFan]

Kip, it's easier to just repeat something rush said than find out the truth.

I guess so lol

[NUKE_CLEVELAND]

Bush with 55% of the votes.

 

look for it.

 

Kerry

the latest electoral-vote.com tracker has Bush with over 300 electoral votes now and projects he'll win 330+ when its all said and done.

 

Barring any major negative news, terrorist attack, major economic slump or revelations that Bush kills babies in his spare time I think Bush coasts to victory in Nov.

[Texsox]

the latest electoral-vote.com tracker has Bush with over 300 electoral votes now and projects he'll win 330+ when its all said and done. 

 

Barring any major negative news,  terrorist attack, major economic slump or revelations that Bush kills babies in his spare time I think Bush coasts to victory in Nov.

I agree 100%, no need for us Bush backers to even head to the polls, this one is in the bag.

[southsider2k5]

the latest electoral-vote.com tracker has Bush with over 300 electoral votes now and projects he'll win 330+ when its all said and done. 

 

Barring any major negative news,  terrorist attack, major economic slump or revelations that Bush kills babies in his spare time I think Bush coasts to victory in Nov.

Not a chance. This is going to be ultra-close again, mark my words.

[kapkomet]

Caught some thing on the radio with Dick Morris. He expects Bush to throttle Kerry in the debates, then Kerry to figure out that he has been a dumbass, find a real message for the last three weeks of the campaign, and come storming back to make it a close election .... ....

 

I basically expect the same thing.

[Texsox]

Caught some thing on the radio with Dick Morris.  He expects Bush to throttle Kerry in the debates, then Kerry to figure out that he has been a dumbass, find a real message for the last three weeks of the campaign, and come storming back to make it a close election .... ....

 

I basically expect the same thing.

Listening to Sean

 

Dick might be a flip flopper, but he's our flip flopper.

[kapkomet]

that's right... that's what show it was. I was checking on traffic and caught that right at the tail end. That's about the only time I listen to Sean Hannity is to find out why I'm stuck in traffic somewhere in the metroplex.

[LowerCaseRepublican]

the latest electoral-vote.com tracker has Bush with over 300 electoral votes now and projects he'll win 330+ when its all said and done. 

 

Barring any major negative news,  terrorist attack, major economic slump or revelations that Bush kills babies in his spare time I think Bush coasts to victory in Nov.

 

Yeah, when the rigged e-voting machines made by Diebold who declared that they would deliver votes to Bush, you may be right. Remember what candidate from what party got the majority of the votes in 2000?

[Texsox]

that's right... that's what show it was.  I was checking on traffic and caught that right at the tail end.  That's about the only time I listen to Sean Hannity is to find out why I'm stuck in traffic somewhere in the metroplex.

It was an interesting interview. If you could cut out hannity's cheerleader comments.

 

What I thought was funny was his comment that when you change positions the only people who believe you are the people who use to agree with you. Then hannity went on to say how intelligent, astute, etc. Dick is. I was wondering if hannity always believed Dick or if Dick was wrong. Either way something was out of wack.

 

And we do love people from the other side coming over. Dick as a Dem, idiot Clinton flunky. Dick as a GOP, astute genious.

[Rex Kickass]

I have given up putting any serious stock in the polls, there are so damn many of them. I will say that I've read recently that Democrats have been more successful at registering new voters than Republican and that pollsters would miss most of this subset entirely. If the Dems are successful at bringing a higher percentage of them out to the polls, the election may very well go for Kerry. I've seen electoral polls that show Kerry with 270 and bush with 311. The way I see it, if Bush loses Ohio or Florida from his state count this time around, he'd need to hold New Hampshire, take Wisconsin, Iowa and Minnesota to keep the White House. If Kerry wins Ohio and Florida, it would be extremely difficult for Bush to win, period.

[mreye]

If 55% actually did vote for Bush which they won't, it would be so incredibly embarassing for your country.  But I know that the majority of the U.S.A. isn't that stupid.

:rolly

 

Thanks. I guess I'm stupid. Have we met?

[southsider2k5]

:rolly

 

Thanks. I guess I'm stupid. Have we met?

Too many times to count :headshake

[KipWellsFan]

:rolly

 

Thanks. I guess I'm stupid. Have we met?

Well maybe not stupid that's me being mad. But I think you are really missing the boat.

[mreye]

Kip, it's easier to just repeat something rush said than find out the truth.

You're so predictable, Tex.

[Texsox]

You're so predictable, Tex.

The GOP likes to fool people into believing that every appropriation bill just has one line item. In fact there are many line items and issues and both parties use this to get other stuff passed. Since appropraition bills must be passed without changes, there is no way to vote yes for bullet proof vests and no to the "riders".

 

It is an even bigger problem for the President. He does not have "line item veto" to pass the stuff he agrees with and stop the other stuff. Many state governors have this authority, and IMHO the President should also.

 

Currently if the majority party wants to fund something that is ideologically against the other party, say abortions for teenagers, all they have to do is wrap it in something necessary like bulletproof vests. It's a no win for the minority. They are either for something they do not want to be (abortion for example) or against something they are for (bullet proof vests).

 

Just claiming someone voted against this one thing or not is unfair to both parties. You must know everything that was on the bill.

 

It is also a nice technique for the majority party to float these bills, knowing in their current condition they will not be passed, then use it for campaign fodder during the next election cycle. Both sides do it and IMHO it is unfair and intelligent voters should not allow the Dems and Gopers to get away with it.

[mreye]

There is Badnarik (Libertarian), Cobb (Green), the Natural Law Party, the Constitution Party, the Socialist Equality Party and a few others that I can't remember off the top of my head.

http://www.thetimesonline.com/articles/200...f1c0000efe1.txt

 

Badnarik is from Indiana