|
It's snerk time in Florida...again.
On Tue, 15 Mar 2011 16:10:35 -0400, wrote:
On Tue, 15 Mar 2011 12:39:48 -0700, wrote: On Tue, 15 Mar 2011 12:28:40 -0400, wrote: On Mon, 14 Mar 2011 21:40:38 -0700, wrote: On Mon, 14 Mar 2011 21:28:49 -0400, wrote: On Mon, 14 Mar 2011 18:01:08 -0700, wrote: Didn't realize bloomberg was off topic. "Republicans Voting Against Stimulus Then Asked Obama for Money" Sorry if you're having comprehension problems. This topic is about one train in Florida, you are the one who is trying to make it about something else you want to argue about. You are the one who apparently doesn't match the news. The Republicans have blocked just about every stim package they could find, then had their hands out for the money. Feel free to live in a reality-free zone. Having absolutely nothing to do with this conversation. We are talking about one particular boondoggle not some generalized hatred for the GOP that you harbor and want to argue about. Even if I did want to comment on your links I would point out this is not a case of a GOP legislator fighting "stim" legislation and then taking the money. Scott does not want the money so your links are off topic or you do not understand what you are posting. I have no hatred for the GOP, but you seem to have some for anything liberal. No I just don't like stupid ideas. Yet every and any liberal originated idea is terrible. If not, please point to a few that are ok with you. As I said, all (or nearly all) Republicans voted against the stim, and most of them then put their hand out to want some of it after it passed. Having absolutely nothing to do with this subject. Scott did not want nor did he take the money. Having absolutely everything to do with the subject, whether or not you like it. Scott is a, apparently, a criminal. Feel free to defend him. Only apparent if you do not believe in the criminal justice system. One of those sleazy lawyers got him off without having to admit any guilt. Again this has nothing to do with what we are talking about. They got OJ off too. He wasn't found innocent. He was found not guilty. That's a big difference. You seem to just want to pick a fight about something and if it is not on topic, you change the subject. Nonsense. BTW I did not vote for Scott but I do agree with ditching this stupid train. It is an 18th century solution to a 21st century problem. Don't know or care about Fl politics, except when it comes to national elections. |
It's snerk time in Florida...again.
On Tue, 15 Mar 2011 21:00:26 -0400, wrote:
On Tue, 15 Mar 2011 14:46:10 -0700, wrote: No I just don't like stupid ideas. Yet every and any liberal originated idea is terrible. If not, please point to a few that are ok with you. Water quality, habitat preservation, decriminalizing "sin" to name a few Nixon got the EPA going, T. Roosevelt founded the national park system, you're claiming that Democrats didn't promote the war on drugs? As I said, all (or nearly all) Republicans voted against the stim, and most of them then put their hand out to want some of it after it passed. Having absolutely nothing to do with this subject. Scott did not want nor did he take the money. Having absolutely everything to do with the subject, whether or not you like it. How is that. If all of your articles were about taking stim money after you voted against it how is refusing stim money the same. ? The Republicans voted against it, then they had their hands out for it. Don't know or care about Fl politics, except when it comes to national elections. Then why are you blathering on in this topic? Despite your insistence that this "topic" is about Florida, it isn't. |
It's snerk time in Florida...again.
In article ,
says... On Tue, 15 Mar 2011 21:00:26 -0400, wrote: On Tue, 15 Mar 2011 14:46:10 -0700, wrote: No I just don't like stupid ideas. Yet every and any liberal originated idea is terrible. If not, please point to a few that are ok with you. Water quality, habitat preservation, decriminalizing "sin" to name a few Nixon got the EPA going, T. Roosevelt founded the national park system, you're claiming that Democrats didn't promote the war on drugs? As I said, all (or nearly all) Republicans voted against the stim, and most of them then put their hand out to want some of it after it passed. Having absolutely nothing to do with this subject. Scott did not want nor did he take the money. Having absolutely everything to do with the subject, whether or not you like it. How is that. If all of your articles were about taking stim money after you voted against it how is refusing stim money the same. ? The Republicans voted against it, then they had their hands out for it. Don't know or care about Fl politics, except when it comes to national elections. Then why are you blathering on in this topic? Despite your insistence that this "topic" is about Florida, it isn't. So, what you are saying is that every Democrat who voted to raise a tax that didn't get raised, should write an extra check for that extra amount every year anyway? Because that would be the same as a Senator voting against a stim package but taking the money the law said he must take after the bill was passed. Your insinuation is disingenuous... Like just about every other post here from you... |
It's snerk time in Florida...again.
On Mar 16, 12:45*am, wrote:
On Tue, 15 Mar 2011 21:09:57 -0700, wrote: On Tue, 15 Mar 2011 21:00:26 -0400, wrote: On Tue, 15 Mar 2011 14:46:10 -0700, wrote: No I just don't like stupid ideas. Yet every and any liberal originated idea is terrible. If not, please point to a few that are ok with you. Water quality, habitat preservation, decriminalizing "sin" to name a few Nixon got the EPA going, T. Roosevelt founded the national park system, you're claiming that Democrats didn't promote the war on drugs? Clinton's dea put more pot "criminals" *in jail than Nixon and Reagan put together ... if that is what you are saying. As I said, all (or nearly all) Republicans voted against the stim, and most of them then put their hand out to want some of it after it passed. Having absolutely nothing to do with this subject. Scott did not want nor did he take the money. Having absolutely everything to do with the subject, whether or not you like it. How is that. If all of your articles were about taking stim money after you voted against it how is refusing stim money the same. ? The Republicans voted against it, then they had their hands out for it. Yet this has nothing to do with the train we are talking about. They turned down the money. Don't know or care about Fl politics, except when it comes to national elections. Then why are you blathering on in this topic? Despite your insistence that this "topic" is about Florida, it isn't. Can you read? The word Florida is in the topic title. You are the one who started talking about a dozen other states. Reading isn't her issue. Comprehension is. |
It's snerk time in Florida...again.
On Wed, 16 Mar 2011 01:45:29 -0400, wrote:
On Tue, 15 Mar 2011 21:09:57 -0700, wrote: On Tue, 15 Mar 2011 21:00:26 -0400, wrote: On Tue, 15 Mar 2011 14:46:10 -0700, wrote: No I just don't like stupid ideas. Yet every and any liberal originated idea is terrible. If not, please point to a few that are ok with you. Water quality, habitat preservation, decriminalizing "sin" to name a few Nixon got the EPA going, T. Roosevelt founded the national park system, you're claiming that Democrats didn't promote the war on drugs? Clinton's dea put more pot "criminals" in jail than Nixon and Reagan put together ... if that is what you are saying. You claimed it was a liberal agenda to decriminalize "sin." I pointed out and you confirmed that's not the case, particularly. FYI, I happen to agree that things like the EPA, habitat preserv., and decriminalizing sin are the right things to do. They're not, however, the exclusive agenda of the right or the left. As I said, all (or nearly all) Republicans voted against the stim, and most of them then put their hand out to want some of it after it passed. Having absolutely nothing to do with this subject. Scott did not want nor did he take the money. Having absolutely everything to do with the subject, whether or not you like it. How is that. If all of your articles were about taking stim money after you voted against it how is refusing stim money the same. ? The Republicans voted against it, then they had their hands out for it. Yet this has nothing to do with the train we are talking about. They turned down the money. What about all the other cases where they voted against the stim and then put their hands out _for_ the money? Don't know or care about Fl politics, except when it comes to national elections. Then why are you blathering on in this topic? Despite your insistence that this "topic" is about Florida, it isn't. Can you read? The word Florida is in the topic title. You are the one who started talking about a dozen other states. Life and reality are bigger than Florida. Please show me a topic that stayed put. |
It's snerk time in Florida...again.
On Wed, 16 Mar 2011 16:01:10 -0400, wrote:
On Wed, 16 Mar 2011 11:10:29 -0700, wrote: On Wed, 16 Mar 2011 01:45:29 -0400, wrote: On Tue, 15 Mar 2011 21:09:57 -0700, wrote: On Tue, 15 Mar 2011 21:00:26 -0400, wrote: On Tue, 15 Mar 2011 14:46:10 -0700, wrote: No I just don't like stupid ideas. Yet every and any liberal originated idea is terrible. If not, please point to a few that are ok with you. Water quality, habitat preservation, decriminalizing "sin" to name a few Nixon got the EPA going, T. Roosevelt founded the national park system, you're claiming that Democrats didn't promote the war on drugs? Clinton's dea put more pot "criminals" in jail than Nixon and Reagan put together ... if that is what you are saying. You claimed it was a liberal agenda to decriminalize "sin." I pointed out and you confirmed that's not the case, particularly. FYI, I happen to agree that things like the EPA, habitat preserv., and decriminalizing sin are the right things to do. They're not, however, the exclusive agenda of the right or the left. I do not consider Clinton that "liberal". He was the 4th Bush brother and he admits it. I expect to see the Bushes, Clintons and Obamas all out in Kennebunkport on Fidelity, laughing their ass off some day. Now that's funny! I'm betting that your right-wing buddies would probably disagree with the Clinton isn't a liberal comment. Ummm... the Obamas are from Chicago. Have they even been to Kennebunkport? As I said, all (or nearly all) Republicans voted against the stim, and most of them then put their hand out to want some of it after it passed. Having absolutely nothing to do with this subject. Scott did not want nor did he take the money. Having absolutely everything to do with the subject, whether or not you like it. How is that. If all of your articles were about taking stim money after you voted against it how is refusing stim money the same. ? The Republicans voted against it, then they had their hands out for it. Yet this has nothing to do with the train we are talking about. They turned down the money. What about all the other cases where they voted against the stim and then put their hands out _for_ the money? Off topic and not what we are talking about On topic and exactly what is being talked about... Don't know or care about Fl politics, except when it comes to national elections. Then why are you blathering on in this topic? Despite your insistence that this "topic" is about Florida, it isn't. Can you read? The word Florida is in the topic title. You are the one who started talking about a dozen other states. Life and reality are bigger than Florida. Please show me a topic that stayed put. Just because you wander off, we don't have to follow you. Yet, you're quite happy to participate. Don't want to talk about Republicans being hypocrites... then don't. |
It's snerk time in Florida...again.
On Wed, 16 Mar 2011 20:30:39 -0400, wrote:
On Wed, 16 Mar 2011 13:14:36 -0700, wrote: On Wed, 16 Mar 2011 16:01:10 -0400, wrote: On Wed, 16 Mar 2011 11:10:29 -0700, wrote: On Wed, 16 Mar 2011 01:45:29 -0400, wrote: On Tue, 15 Mar 2011 21:09:57 -0700, wrote: On Tue, 15 Mar 2011 21:00:26 -0400, wrote: On Tue, 15 Mar 2011 14:46:10 -0700, wrote: No I just don't like stupid ideas. Yet every and any liberal originated idea is terrible. If not, please point to a few that are ok with you. Water quality, habitat preservation, decriminalizing "sin" to name a few Nixon got the EPA going, T. Roosevelt founded the national park system, you're claiming that Democrats didn't promote the war on drugs? Clinton's dea put more pot "criminals" in jail than Nixon and Reagan put together ... if that is what you are saying. You claimed it was a liberal agenda to decriminalize "sin." I pointed out and you confirmed that's not the case, particularly. FYI, I happen to agree that things like the EPA, habitat preserv., and decriminalizing sin are the right things to do. They're not, however, the exclusive agenda of the right or the left. I do not consider Clinton that "liberal". He was the 4th Bush brother and he admits it. I expect to see the Bushes, Clintons and Obamas all out in Kennebunkport on Fidelity, laughing their ass off some day. Now that's funny! I'm betting that your right-wing buddies would probably disagree with the Clinton isn't a liberal comment. Ummm... the Obamas are from Chicago. Have they even been to Kennebunkport? Probably not, neither had the Clintons until 2009. Don't know or care about Fl politics, except when it comes to national elections. Then why are you blathering on in this topic? Despite your insistence that this "topic" is about Florida, it isn't. Can you read? The word Florida is in the topic title. You are the one who started talking about a dozen other states. Life and reality are bigger than Florida. Please show me a topic that stayed put. Just because you wander off, we don't have to follow you. Yet, you're quite happy to participate. Don't want to talk about Republicans being hypocrites... then don't. In this case Scott is not hypocritical. He ran on not wanting the money and when they tried to cram it down his throat he refused it and went to court to get the feds to get off his back. Ok. I can settle for him just having a criminal background. :) |
It's snerk time in Florida...again.
wrote:
On Wed, 16 Mar 2011 13:14:36 -0700, wrote: On Wed, 16 Mar 2011 16:01:10 -0400, wrote: On Wed, 16 Mar 2011 11:10:29 -0700, wrote: On Wed, 16 Mar 2011 01:45:29 -0400, wrote: On Tue, 15 Mar 2011 21:09:57 -0700, wrote: On Tue, 15 Mar 2011 21:00:26 -0400, wrote: On Tue, 15 Mar 2011 14:46:10 -0700, wrote: No I just don't like stupid ideas. Yet every and any liberal originated idea is terrible. If not, please point to a few that are ok with you. Water quality, habitat preservation, decriminalizing "sin" to name a few Nixon got the EPA going, T. Roosevelt founded the national park system, you're claiming that Democrats didn't promote the war on drugs? Clinton's dea put more pot "criminals" in jail than Nixon and Reagan put together ... if that is what you are saying. You claimed it was a liberal agenda to decriminalize "sin." I pointed out and you confirmed that's not the case, particularly. FYI, I happen to agree that things like the EPA, habitat preserv., and decriminalizing sin are the right things to do. They're not, however, the exclusive agenda of the right or the left. I do not consider Clinton that "liberal". He was the 4th Bush brother and he admits it. I expect to see the Bushes, Clintons and Obamas all out in Kennebunkport on Fidelity, laughing their ass off some day. Now that's funny! I'm betting that your right-wing buddies would probably disagree with the Clinton isn't a liberal comment. Ummm... the Obamas are from Chicago. Have they even been to Kennebunkport? Probably not, neither had the Clintons until 2009. Don't know or care about Fl politics, except when it comes to national elections. Then why are you blathering on in this topic? Despite your insistence that this "topic" is about Florida, it isn't. Can you read? The word Florida is in the topic title. You are the one who started talking about a dozen other states. Life and reality are bigger than Florida. Please show me a topic that stayed put. Just because you wander off, we don't have to follow you. Yet, you're quite happy to participate. Don't want to talk about Republicans being hypocrites... then don't. In this case Scott is not hypocritical. He ran on not wanting the money and when they tried to cram it down his throat he refused it and went to court to get the feds to get off his back. Scott is a criminal. He and his company were let off the hook during the first couple of years of the Bush Admin. He should have been prosecuted. His election is all the proof needed of the utter stupidity of florida voters. |
It's snerk time in Florida...again.
wrote:
On Wed, 16 Mar 2011 21:15:12 -0400, wrote: wrote: On Wed, 16 Mar 2011 13:14:36 -0700, wrote: On Wed, 16 Mar 2011 16:01:10 -0400, wrote: On Wed, 16 Mar 2011 11:10:29 -0700, wrote: On Wed, 16 Mar 2011 01:45:29 -0400, wrote: On Tue, 15 Mar 2011 21:09:57 -0700, wrote: On Tue, 15 Mar 2011 21:00:26 -0400, wrote: On Tue, 15 Mar 2011 14:46:10 -0700, wrote: No I just don't like stupid ideas. Yet every and any liberal originated idea is terrible. If not, please point to a few that are ok with you. Water quality, habitat preservation, decriminalizing "sin" to name a few Nixon got the EPA going, T. Roosevelt founded the national park system, you're claiming that Democrats didn't promote the war on drugs? Clinton's dea put more pot "criminals" in jail than Nixon and Reagan put together ... if that is what you are saying. You claimed it was a liberal agenda to decriminalize "sin." I pointed out and you confirmed that's not the case, particularly. FYI, I happen to agree that things like the EPA, habitat preserv., and decriminalizing sin are the right things to do. They're not, however, the exclusive agenda of the right or the left. I do not consider Clinton that "liberal". He was the 4th Bush brother and he admits it. I expect to see the Bushes, Clintons and Obamas all out in Kennebunkport on Fidelity, laughing their ass off some day. Now that's funny! I'm betting that your right-wing buddies would probably disagree with the Clinton isn't a liberal comment. Ummm... the Obamas are from Chicago. Have they even been to Kennebunkport? Probably not, neither had the Clintons until 2009. Don't know or care about Fl politics, except when it comes to national elections. Then why are you blathering on in this topic? Despite your insistence that this "topic" is about Florida, it isn't. Can you read? The word Florida is in the topic title. You are the one who started talking about a dozen other states. Life and reality are bigger than Florida. Please show me a topic that stayed put. Just because you wander off, we don't have to follow you. Yet, you're quite happy to participate. Don't want to talk about Republicans being hypocrites... then don't. In this case Scott is not hypocritical. He ran on not wanting the money and when they tried to cram it down his throat he refused it and went to court to get the feds to get off his back. Scott is a criminal. He and his company were let off the hook during the first couple of years of the Bush Admin. He should have been prosecuted. His election is all the proof needed of the utter stupidity of florida voters. I am sure you voted for LBJ and Scott is a piker compared to that crook. Unfortunately when Jeb left, nobody who was really qualified was willing to step up here. Sink was a bank lobbyist and I am not sure that was the right choice either. You're sure I voted for LBJ, eh? In 1964, when Johnson ran for his own term, I was too young to vote in the U.S. presidential election. Had I been able to vote, I would have voted for Johnson. His opponent then was Barry Goldwater. Back then, I would have considered Goldwater too extreme to be president. I got to know Goldwater pretty well in the late 1970's and 1960's when I was a consultant to several of the national postal employee unions and prepared testimony for presentation before a Senate committee on which he served. He truly was a great man. Nowadays, of course, he wouldn't have anything to do with the race-hating, gay-bashing, white separatists who run the GOP. |
It's snerk time in Florida...again.
Harryk wrote:
wrote: On Wed, 16 Mar 2011 21:15:12 -0400, wrote: wrote: On Wed, 16 Mar 2011 13:14:36 -0700, wrote: On Wed, 16 Mar 2011 16:01:10 -0400, wrote: On Wed, 16 Mar 2011 11:10:29 -0700, wrote: On Wed, 16 Mar 2011 01:45:29 -0400, wrote: On Tue, 15 Mar 2011 21:09:57 -0700, wrote: On Tue, 15 Mar 2011 21:00:26 -0400, wrote: On Tue, 15 Mar 2011 14:46:10 -0700, wrote: No I just don't like stupid ideas. Yet every and any liberal originated idea is terrible. If not, please point to a few that are ok with you. Water quality, habitat preservation, decriminalizing "sin" to name a few Nixon got the EPA going, T. Roosevelt founded the national park system, you're claiming that Democrats didn't promote the war on drugs? Clinton's dea put more pot "criminals" in jail than Nixon and Reagan put together ... if that is what you are saying. You claimed it was a liberal agenda to decriminalize "sin." I pointed out and you confirmed that's not the case, particularly. FYI, I happen to agree that things like the EPA, habitat preserv., and decriminalizing sin are the right things to do. They're not, however, the exclusive agenda of the right or the left. I do not consider Clinton that "liberal". He was the 4th Bush brother and he admits it. I expect to see the Bushes, Clintons and Obamas all out in Kennebunkport on Fidelity, laughing their ass off some day. Now that's funny! I'm betting that your right-wing buddies would probably disagree with the Clinton isn't a liberal comment. Ummm... the Obamas are from Chicago. Have they even been to Kennebunkport? Probably not, neither had the Clintons until 2009. Don't know or care about Fl politics, except when it comes to national elections. Then why are you blathering on in this topic? Despite your insistence that this "topic" is about Florida, it isn't. Can you read? The word Florida is in the topic title. You are the one who started talking about a dozen other states. Life and reality are bigger than Florida. Please show me a topic that stayed put. Just because you wander off, we don't have to follow you. Yet, you're quite happy to participate. Don't want to talk about Republicans being hypocrites... then don't. In this case Scott is not hypocritical. He ran on not wanting the money and when they tried to cram it down his throat he refused it and went to court to get the feds to get off his back. Scott is a criminal. He and his company were let off the hook during the first couple of years of the Bush Admin. He should have been prosecuted. His election is all the proof needed of the utter stupidity of florida voters. I am sure you voted for LBJ and Scott is a piker compared to that crook. Unfortunately when Jeb left, nobody who was really qualified was willing to step up here. Sink was a bank lobbyist and I am not sure that was the right choice either. You're sure I voted for LBJ, eh? In 1964, when Johnson ran for his own term, I was too young to vote in the U.S. presidential election. Had I been able to vote, I would have voted for Johnson. His opponent then was Barry Goldwater. Back then, I would have considered Goldwater too extreme to be president. I got to know Goldwater pretty well in the late 1970's and 1960's when I was a consultant to several of the national postal employee unions and prepared testimony for presentation before a Senate committee on which he served. He truly was a great man. Nowadays, of course, he wouldn't have anything to do with the race-hating, gay-bashing, white separatists who run the GOP. Make that 1970's and 1980's... |
It's snerk time in Florida...again.
On Thu, 17 Mar 2011 13:43:57 -0400, wrote:
On Wed, 16 Mar 2011 17:49:55 -0700, wrote: Despite your insistence that this "topic" is about Florida, it isn't. Can you read? The word Florida is in the topic title. You are the one who started talking about a dozen other states. Life and reality are bigger than Florida. Please show me a topic that stayed put. Just because you wander off, we don't have to follow you. Yet, you're quite happy to participate. Don't want to talk about Republicans being hypocrites... then don't. In this case Scott is not hypocritical. He ran on not wanting the money and when they tried to cram it down his throat he refused it and went to court to get the feds to get off his back. Ok. I can settle for him just having a criminal background. :) OK so you agree the train thing does not have anything to do with your hypocrisy rant and you want to change the subject I agree that Scott is more of a criminal in this specific instance than a hypocrite. :) OK. I agree Scott is a crook That is why I didn't vote for him Happy now. Of course! I still think he made the right choice on the train So, the broken clock is accurate twice a day? |
It's snerk time in Florida...again.
On Thu, 17 Mar 2011 13:46:32 -0400, wrote:
On Wed, 16 Mar 2011 21:15:12 -0400, Harryk wrote: wrote: On Wed, 16 Mar 2011 13:14:36 -0700, wrote: On Wed, 16 Mar 2011 16:01:10 -0400, wrote: On Wed, 16 Mar 2011 11:10:29 -0700, wrote: On Wed, 16 Mar 2011 01:45:29 -0400, wrote: On Tue, 15 Mar 2011 21:09:57 -0700, wrote: On Tue, 15 Mar 2011 21:00:26 -0400, wrote: On Tue, 15 Mar 2011 14:46:10 -0700, wrote: No I just don't like stupid ideas. Yet every and any liberal originated idea is terrible. If not, please point to a few that are ok with you. Water quality, habitat preservation, decriminalizing "sin" to name a few Nixon got the EPA going, T. Roosevelt founded the national park system, you're claiming that Democrats didn't promote the war on drugs? Clinton's dea put more pot "criminals" in jail than Nixon and Reagan put together ... if that is what you are saying. You claimed it was a liberal agenda to decriminalize "sin." I pointed out and you confirmed that's not the case, particularly. FYI, I happen to agree that things like the EPA, habitat preserv., and decriminalizing sin are the right things to do. They're not, however, the exclusive agenda of the right or the left. I do not consider Clinton that "liberal". He was the 4th Bush brother and he admits it. I expect to see the Bushes, Clintons and Obamas all out in Kennebunkport on Fidelity, laughing their ass off some day. Now that's funny! I'm betting that your right-wing buddies would probably disagree with the Clinton isn't a liberal comment. Ummm... the Obamas are from Chicago. Have they even been to Kennebunkport? Probably not, neither had the Clintons until 2009. Don't know or care about Fl politics, except when it comes to national elections. Then why are you blathering on in this topic? Despite your insistence that this "topic" is about Florida, it isn't. Can you read? The word Florida is in the topic title. You are the one who started talking about a dozen other states. Life and reality are bigger than Florida. Please show me a topic that stayed put. Just because you wander off, we don't have to follow you. Yet, you're quite happy to participate. Don't want to talk about Republicans being hypocrites... then don't. In this case Scott is not hypocritical. He ran on not wanting the money and when they tried to cram it down his throat he refused it and went to court to get the feds to get off his back. Scott is a criminal. He and his company were let off the hook during the first couple of years of the Bush Admin. He should have been prosecuted. His election is all the proof needed of the utter stupidity of florida voters. I am sure you voted for LBJ and Scott is a piker compared to that crook. Unfortunately when Jeb left, nobody who was really qualified was willing to step up here. Sink was a bank lobbyist and I am not sure that was the right choice either. Charlie Crist was pretty popular wasn't he? He seemed reasonable to me, but I don't know much about him except that he agreed with Obama from time to time, and that was his undoing to right-wing nut Rubio. |
It's snerk time in Florida...again.
On Thu, 17 Mar 2011 17:15:55 -0400, wrote:
On Thu, 17 Mar 2011 13:03:02 -0700, wrote: On Thu, 17 Mar 2011 13:43:57 -0400, wrote: On Wed, 16 Mar 2011 17:49:55 -0700, wrote: Despite your insistence that this "topic" is about Florida, it isn't. Can you read? The word Florida is in the topic title. You are the one who started talking about a dozen other states. Life and reality are bigger than Florida. Please show me a topic that stayed put. Just because you wander off, we don't have to follow you. Yet, you're quite happy to participate. Don't want to talk about Republicans being hypocrites... then don't. In this case Scott is not hypocritical. He ran on not wanting the money and when they tried to cram it down his throat he refused it and went to court to get the feds to get off his back. Ok. I can settle for him just having a criminal background. :) OK so you agree the train thing does not have anything to do with your hypocrisy rant and you want to change the subject I agree that Scott is more of a criminal in this specific instance than a hypocrite. :) OK. I agree Scott is a crook That is why I didn't vote for him Happy now. Of course! I still think he made the right choice on the train So, the broken clock is accurate twice a day? ... and if the topic was what time is it, at those two times it would be relevant. We were talking about the train and Scott made the right decision. So, you're saying that Scott, a probable criminal and right wing loony, was right about one thing? Ok. |
It's snerk time in Florida...again.
On Thu, 17 Mar 2011 17:18:41 -0400, wrote:
On Thu, 17 Mar 2011 13:05:23 -0700, wrote: On Thu, 17 Mar 2011 13:46:32 -0400, wrote: On Wed, 16 Mar 2011 21:15:12 -0400, Harryk wrote: wrote: On Wed, 16 Mar 2011 13:14:36 -0700, wrote: On Wed, 16 Mar 2011 16:01:10 -0400, wrote: On Wed, 16 Mar 2011 11:10:29 -0700, wrote: On Wed, 16 Mar 2011 01:45:29 -0400, wrote: On Tue, 15 Mar 2011 21:09:57 -0700, wrote: On Tue, 15 Mar 2011 21:00:26 -0400, wrote: On Tue, 15 Mar 2011 14:46:10 -0700, wrote: No I just don't like stupid ideas. Yet every and any liberal originated idea is terrible. If not, please point to a few that are ok with you. Water quality, habitat preservation, decriminalizing "sin" to name a few Nixon got the EPA going, T. Roosevelt founded the national park system, you're claiming that Democrats didn't promote the war on drugs? Clinton's dea put more pot "criminals" in jail than Nixon and Reagan put together ... if that is what you are saying. You claimed it was a liberal agenda to decriminalize "sin." I pointed out and you confirmed that's not the case, particularly. FYI, I happen to agree that things like the EPA, habitat preserv., and decriminalizing sin are the right things to do. They're not, however, the exclusive agenda of the right or the left. I do not consider Clinton that "liberal". He was the 4th Bush brother and he admits it. I expect to see the Bushes, Clintons and Obamas all out in Kennebunkport on Fidelity, laughing their ass off some day. Now that's funny! I'm betting that your right-wing buddies would probably disagree with the Clinton isn't a liberal comment. Ummm... the Obamas are from Chicago. Have they even been to Kennebunkport? Probably not, neither had the Clintons until 2009. Don't know or care about Fl politics, except when it comes to national elections. Then why are you blathering on in this topic? Despite your insistence that this "topic" is about Florida, it isn't. Can you read? The word Florida is in the topic title. You are the one who started talking about a dozen other states. Life and reality are bigger than Florida. Please show me a topic that stayed put. Just because you wander off, we don't have to follow you. Yet, you're quite happy to participate. Don't want to talk about Republicans being hypocrites... then don't. In this case Scott is not hypocritical. He ran on not wanting the money and when they tried to cram it down his throat he refused it and went to court to get the feds to get off his back. Scott is a criminal. He and his company were let off the hook during the first couple of years of the Bush Admin. He should have been prosecuted. His election is all the proof needed of the utter stupidity of florida voters. I am sure you voted for LBJ and Scott is a piker compared to that crook. Unfortunately when Jeb left, nobody who was really qualified was willing to step up here. Sink was a bank lobbyist and I am not sure that was the right choice either. Charlie Crist was pretty popular wasn't he? He seemed reasonable to me, but I don't know much about him except that he agreed with Obama from time to time, and that was his undoing to right-wing nut Rubio. Crist was not really much of a leader. He was just a go along to get along guy, basically like your Gray Davis but our economy was strong enough to keep him out of trouble. Davis got a bum rap in my opinion. He was certainly no worse than the guy who replaced him. |
It's snerk time in Florida...again.
On 3/17/2011 6:22 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 17 Mar 2011 17:15:55 -0400, wrote: On Thu, 17 Mar 2011 13:03:02 -0700, wrote: On Thu, 17 Mar 2011 13:43:57 -0400, wrote: On Wed, 16 Mar 2011 17:49:55 -0700, wrote: Despite your insistence that this "topic" is about Florida, it isn't. Can you read? The word Florida is in the topic title. You are the one who started talking about a dozen other states. Life and reality are bigger than Florida. Please show me a topic that stayed put. Just because you wander off, we don't have to follow you. Yet, you're quite happy to participate. Don't want to talk about Republicans being hypocrites... then don't. In this case Scott is not hypocritical. He ran on not wanting the money and when they tried to cram it down his throat he refused it and went to court to get the feds to get off his back. Ok. I can settle for him just having a criminal background. :) OK so you agree the train thing does not have anything to do with your hypocrisy rant and you want to change the subject I agree that Scott is more of a criminal in this specific instance than a hypocrite. :) OK. I agree Scott is a crook That is why I didn't vote for him Happy now. Of course! I still think he made the right choice on the train So, the broken clock is accurate twice a day? ... and if the topic was what time is it, at those two times it would be relevant. We were talking about the train and Scott made the right decision. So, you're saying that Scott, a probable criminal and right wing loony, was right about one thing? Ok. GIVE US A BREAK. GO AWAY BTW, OBAMA SAYS YOU DON'T NEED TO WORRY ABOUT THE RADIATION FALLOUT. DO YOU BELIEVE HIM? |
It's snerk time in Florida...again.
Harryk wrote:
wrote: On Wed, 16 Mar 2011 21:15:12 -0400, wrote: wrote: On Wed, 16 Mar 2011 13:14:36 -0700, wrote: On Wed, 16 Mar 2011 16:01:10 -0400, wrote: On Wed, 16 Mar 2011 11:10:29 -0700, wrote: On Wed, 16 Mar 2011 01:45:29 -0400, wrote: On Tue, 15 Mar 2011 21:09:57 -0700, wrote: On Tue, 15 Mar 2011 21:00:26 -0400, wrote: On Tue, 15 Mar 2011 14:46:10 -0700, wrote: No I just don't like stupid ideas. Yet every and any liberal originated idea is terrible. If not, please point to a few that are ok with you. Water quality, habitat preservation, decriminalizing "sin" to name a few Nixon got the EPA going, T. Roosevelt founded the national park system, you're claiming that Democrats didn't promote the war on drugs? Clinton's dea put more pot "criminals" in jail than Nixon and Reagan put together ... if that is what you are saying. You claimed it was a liberal agenda to decriminalize "sin." I pointed out and you confirmed that's not the case, particularly. FYI, I happen to agree that things like the EPA, habitat preserv., and decriminalizing sin are the right things to do. They're not, however, the exclusive agenda of the right or the left. I do not consider Clinton that "liberal". He was the 4th Bush brother and he admits it. I expect to see the Bushes, Clintons and Obamas all out in Kennebunkport on Fidelity, laughing their ass off some day. Now that's funny! I'm betting that your right-wing buddies would probably disagree with the Clinton isn't a liberal comment. Ummm... the Obamas are from Chicago. Have they even been to Kennebunkport? Probably not, neither had the Clintons until 2009. Don't know or care about Fl politics, except when it comes to national elections. Then why are you blathering on in this topic? Despite your insistence that this "topic" is about Florida, it isn't. Can you read? The word Florida is in the topic title. You are the one who started talking about a dozen other states. Life and reality are bigger than Florida. Please show me a topic that stayed put. Just because you wander off, we don't have to follow you. Yet, you're quite happy to participate. Don't want to talk about Republicans being hypocrites... then don't. In this case Scott is not hypocritical. He ran on not wanting the money and when they tried to cram it down his throat he refused it and went to court to get the feds to get off his back. Scott is a criminal. He and his company were let off the hook during the first couple of years of the Bush Admin. He should have been prosecuted. His election is all the proof needed of the utter stupidity of florida voters. I am sure you voted for LBJ and Scott is a piker compared to that crook. Unfortunately when Jeb left, nobody who was really qualified was willing to step up here. Sink was a bank lobbyist and I am not sure that was the right choice either. You're sure I voted for LBJ, eh? In 1964, when Johnson ran for his own term, I was too young to vote in the U.S. presidential election. Had I been able to vote, I would have voted for Johnson. His opponent then was Barry Goldwater. Back then, I would have considered Goldwater too extreme to be president. I got to know Goldwater pretty well in the late 1970's and 1960's when I was a consultant to several of the national postal employee unions and prepared testimony for presentation before a Senate committee on which he served. He truly was a great man. Nowadays, of course, he wouldn't have anything to do with the race-hating, gay-bashing, white separatists who run the GOP. Bull****. |
It's snerk time in Florida...again.
On Thu, 17 Mar 2011 18:42:37 -0400, Ernie wrote:
On 3/17/2011 6:22 PM, wrote: On Thu, 17 Mar 2011 17:15:55 -0400, wrote: On Thu, 17 Mar 2011 13:03:02 -0700, wrote: On Thu, 17 Mar 2011 13:43:57 -0400, wrote: On Wed, 16 Mar 2011 17:49:55 -0700, wrote: Despite your insistence that this "topic" is about Florida, it isn't. Can you read? The word Florida is in the topic title. You are the one who started talking about a dozen other states. Life and reality are bigger than Florida. Please show me a topic that stayed put. Just because you wander off, we don't have to follow you. Yet, you're quite happy to participate. Don't want to talk about Republicans being hypocrites... then don't. In this case Scott is not hypocritical. He ran on not wanting the money and when they tried to cram it down his throat he refused it and went to court to get the feds to get off his back. Ok. I can settle for him just having a criminal background. :) OK so you agree the train thing does not have anything to do with your hypocrisy rant and you want to change the subject I agree that Scott is more of a criminal in this specific instance than a hypocrite. :) OK. I agree Scott is a crook That is why I didn't vote for him Happy now. Of course! I still think he made the right choice on the train So, the broken clock is accurate twice a day? ... and if the topic was what time is it, at those two times it would be relevant. We were talking about the train and Scott made the right decision. So, you're saying that Scott, a probable criminal and right wing loony, was right about one thing? Ok. GIVE US A BREAK. GO AWAY BTW, OBAMA SAYS YOU DON'T NEED TO WORRY ABOUT THE RADIATION FALLOUT. DO YOU BELIEVE HIM? Give yourself a break. I'm not going anywhere. You're here with me. I'm not here with you. BTW, you're a moron/stalker. Bye bye... |
It's snerk time in Florida...again.
On Thu, 17 Mar 2011 22:23:32 -0400, wrote:
On Thu, 17 Mar 2011 15:22:01 -0700, wrote: On Thu, 17 Mar 2011 17:15:55 -0400, wrote: On Thu, 17 Mar 2011 13:03:02 -0700, wrote: On Thu, 17 Mar 2011 13:43:57 -0400, wrote: On Wed, 16 Mar 2011 17:49:55 -0700, wrote: Despite your insistence that this "topic" is about Florida, it isn't. Can you read? The word Florida is in the topic title. You are the one who started talking about a dozen other states. Life and reality are bigger than Florida. Please show me a topic that stayed put. Just because you wander off, we don't have to follow you. Yet, you're quite happy to participate. Don't want to talk about Republicans being hypocrites... then don't. In this case Scott is not hypocritical. He ran on not wanting the money and when they tried to cram it down his throat he refused it and went to court to get the feds to get off his back. Ok. I can settle for him just having a criminal background. :) OK so you agree the train thing does not have anything to do with your hypocrisy rant and you want to change the subject I agree that Scott is more of a criminal in this specific instance than a hypocrite. :) OK. I agree Scott is a crook That is why I didn't vote for him Happy now. Of course! I still think he made the right choice on the train So, the broken clock is accurate twice a day? ... and if the topic was what time is it, at those two times it would be relevant. We were talking about the train and Scott made the right decision. So, you're saying that Scott, a probable criminal and right wing loony, was right about one thing? Ok. He is right about merit pay for teachers too so that is 2 things in a couple months. If a politician gets one big thing right a month I will be happy with them. What does he say about merit pay? Seems like a good idea to me. I just saw a tivo of 60 minutes...$125K for charter school teachers. Apparently, it hasn't made a difference in kids' performance, at least not so far. |
It's snerk time in Florida...again.
In article ,
says... On Thu, 17 Mar 2011 22:23:32 -0400, wrote: He is right about merit pay for teachers too so that is 2 things in a couple months. If a politician gets one big thing right a month I will be happy with them. What does he say about merit pay? Seems like a good idea to me. http://www2.jcfloridan.com/news/2011...ion-merit-pay- bill-mixed-ar-1594330/ "Fifty percent of a teacher's evaluation will depend on how much progress their students have made on the Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test or other exams over a three-year period." What this means is good teachers at low-income student schools will get screwed on pay. So the low-income student schools will end up with the poorest teachers. Real smart. I just saw a tivo of 60 minutes...$125K for charter school teachers. Apparently, it hasn't made a difference in kids' performance, at least not so far. Success of students to achieve their potential depends mostly on their parents. Initially charter schools get good performance because guess what? Involved parents are required to get kids in charter schools. Most have a waiting list for admission. Who is most responsible for getting the kids on the list? Involved parents. That's what gets successful education for kids. This whole deal about charter schools is pretty much misguided except it can allow some kids to get into a better environment for learning. That's good. Doesn't help those whose parents don't get them into a charter school. And way too many won't make that effort. It mostly comes down to parents, not teachers or schools. |
It's snerk time in Florida...again.
In article ,
says... On Thu, 17 Mar 2011 17:15:55 -0400, wrote: On Thu, 17 Mar 2011 13:03:02 -0700, wrote: On Thu, 17 Mar 2011 13:43:57 -0400, wrote: On Wed, 16 Mar 2011 17:49:55 -0700, wrote: Despite your insistence that this "topic" is about Florida, it isn't. Can you read? The word Florida is in the topic title. You are the one who started talking about a dozen other states. Life and reality are bigger than Florida. Please show me a topic that stayed put. Just because you wander off, we don't have to follow you. Yet, you're quite happy to participate. Don't want to talk about Republicans being hypocrites... then don't. In this case Scott is not hypocritical. He ran on not wanting the money and when they tried to cram it down his throat he refused it and went to court to get the feds to get off his back. Ok. I can settle for him just having a criminal background. :) OK so you agree the train thing does not have anything to do with your hypocrisy rant and you want to change the subject I agree that Scott is more of a criminal in this specific instance than a hypocrite. :) OK. I agree Scott is a crook That is why I didn't vote for him Happy now. Of course! I still think he made the right choice on the train So, the broken clock is accurate twice a day? ... and if the topic was what time is it, at those two times it would be relevant. We were talking about the train and Scott made the right decision. So, you're saying that Scott, a probable criminal and right wing loony, was right about one thing? Ok. He naver said anything about probable criminal, he never said anything about looney... Do you ever post honestly or is each and every post destined to have lies and insults in it? |
It's snerk time in Florida...again.
In article ,
says... In article , says... On Thu, 17 Mar 2011 22:23:32 -0400, wrote: He is right about merit pay for teachers too so that is 2 things in a couple months. If a politician gets one big thing right a month I will be happy with them. What does he say about merit pay? Seems like a good idea to me. http://www2.jcfloridan.com/news/2011...ion-merit-pay- bill-mixed-ar-1594330/ "Fifty percent of a teacher's evaluation will depend on how much progress their students have made on the Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test or other exams over a three-year period." What this means is good teachers at low-income student schools will get screwed on pay. So the low-income student schools will end up with the poorest teachers. Real smart. I just saw a tivo of 60 minutes...$125K for charter school teachers. Apparently, it hasn't made a difference in kids' performance, at least not so far. Success of students to achieve their potential depends mostly on their parents. Initially charter schools get good performance because guess what? Involved parents are required to get kids in charter schools. Most have a waiting list for admission. Who is most responsible for getting the kids on the list? Involved parents. That's what gets successful education for kids. This whole deal about charter schools is pretty much misguided except it can allow some kids to get into a better environment for learning. That's good. Doesn't help those whose parents don't get them into a charter school. And way too many won't make that effort. It mostly comes down to parents, not teachers or schools. So much bull****... A good teacher can teach your kids in that 6 hours a day, not count on the parents to do the work for the other 18... I am sick and tired of folks trying to blame the Parents while they are at work all day and the teachers have the kids right there a captive audience. |
It's snerk time in Florida...again.
On 3/18/2011 10:14 AM, Boating All Out wrote:
In , Doesn't help those whose parents don't get them into a charter school. And way too many won't make that effort. It mostly comes down to parents, not teachers or schools. Not all parents want their children to become characters, Tom. Merit should be part of the equation in salary review. Why should the slackers get paid the same as dedicated achievers. The Florida governor is on the right track. |
It's snerk time in Florida...again.
wrote:
On Thu, 17 Mar 2011 23:16:00 -0700, wrote: On Thu, 17 Mar 2011 22:23:32 -0400, wrote: On Thu, 17 Mar 2011 15:22:01 -0700, wrote: He is right about merit pay for teachers too so that is 2 things in a couple months. If a politician gets one big thing right a month I will be happy with them. What does he say about merit pay? Seems like a good idea to me. I just saw a tivo of 60 minutes...$125K for charter school teachers. Apparently, it hasn't made a difference in kids' performance, at least not so far. I saw that show and it is significant that these were "at risk" kids. I believe it will take time to turn them around. I do believe that teachers should be paid by their performance and not just time in grade, particularly since you can't really get rid of a bad teacher. One problem is that "performance" is too closely linked to the results of "standardized testing," and all those tests really test is whether the kids memorized those parts of their lessons that appear on the tests. The test results do not tell you if the kids are learning anything significant or, just as important, how to think. Then there are all the other pressures we've placed on teachers in the last 50 years. These days, teachers are expected to socialize kids, teach them manners, not hurt their feelings, wipe their noses, and deal with substance abuse and a plethora of other issues that should be the responsibility of the parents of the kids. My father had two rules in the household that had to be obeyed: respect your mother at all times and don't ever talk back to your teachers or misbehave in school. I wonder how many kids have those rules impressed upon them these days. We weren't angels in school, but the sort of mischief we got into was pretty innocent compared to what I see these days. Our sole security officer at the high school wasn't worried about kids with guns or knives or kids on serious drugs. His biggest issue was the kids who left the campus and school property at lunchtime to run down to the nearby Italian deli and get a lunch more to their liking than what was being served in the cafeteria. It didn't help his cause when he chased us back to school and then lingered to order and pickup a cold cut sub at the deli. I recall one time some kid brought a knife to school. He was permanently expelled. |
It's snerk time in Florida...again.
In article ,
says... On Fri, 18 Mar 2011 10:27:15 -0400, I_am_Tosk wrote: In article , says... In article , says... On Thu, 17 Mar 2011 22:23:32 -0400, wrote: He is right about merit pay for teachers too so that is 2 things in a couple months. If a politician gets one big thing right a month I will be happy with them. What does he say about merit pay? Seems like a good idea to me. http://www2.jcfloridan.com/news/2011...ion-merit-pay- bill-mixed-ar-1594330/ "Fifty percent of a teacher's evaluation will depend on how much progress their students have made on the Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test or other exams over a three-year period." What this means is good teachers at low-income student schools will get screwed on pay. So the low-income student schools will end up with the poorest teachers. Real smart. I just saw a tivo of 60 minutes...$125K for charter school teachers. Apparently, it hasn't made a difference in kids' performance, at least not so far. Success of students to achieve their potential depends mostly on their parents. Initially charter schools get good performance because guess what? Involved parents are required to get kids in charter schools. Most have a waiting list for admission. Who is most responsible for getting the kids on the list? Involved parents. That's what gets successful education for kids. This whole deal about charter schools is pretty much misguided except it can allow some kids to get into a better environment for learning. That's good. Doesn't help those whose parents don't get them into a charter school. And way too many won't make that effort. It mostly comes down to parents, not teachers or schools. So much bull****... A good teacher can teach your kids in that 6 hours a day, not count on the parents to do the work for the other 18... I am sick and tired of folks trying to blame the Parents while they are at work all day and the teachers have the kids right there a captive audience. That is not really true. Good parents will help kids with homework and create a better learning experience at home. If a kid lives in a crack house with a bunch of drop outs and criminals, he is far more likely to be a crackhead, criminal, drop out. More likely I give you that, but a good teacher could reach out and let that kid get the most out of that 6 hours a day they have him or her... I just don't think this should be on the parents. If the schools spent more time teaching the basics instead of some of the crap they do, the kids could come out and learn. Make the kids write, with pencil and paper, make them read, right there in class, out loud, like we did when we were kids, we learned. Or at least a lot of us did...;) I saw a news story on the text of one chapter taught in the NYC school system. It was a whole chapter on police brutality and corruption. Yeah, have a lesson on it, but a whole chapter, a whole month of the short school year? That is a waste and does nothing but create a divide between these kids and law and order. It certainly doesn't do anything to prepare them to come out to "normal" society outside of the ghetto or in collage that's for sure... Teach the kids, don't indoctrinate them and we will be just fine... |
It's snerk time in Florida...again.
On Fri, 18 Mar 2011 09:14:17 -0500, Boating All Out wrote:
In article , says... On Thu, 17 Mar 2011 22:23:32 -0400, wrote: He is right about merit pay for teachers too so that is 2 things in a couple months. If a politician gets one big thing right a month I will be happy with them. What does he say about merit pay? Seems like a good idea to me. http://www2.jcfloridan.com/news/2011...ion-merit-pay- bill-mixed-ar-1594330/ "Fifty percent of a teacher's evaluation will depend on how much progress their students have made on the Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test or other exams over a three-year period." What this means is good teachers at low-income student schools will get screwed on pay. So the low-income student schools will end up with the poorest teachers. Real smart. Amen. I just saw a tivo of 60 minutes...$125K for charter school teachers. Apparently, it hasn't made a difference in kids' performance, at least not so far. Success of students to achieve their potential depends mostly on their parents. Initially charter schools get good performance because guess what? Involved parents are required to get kids in charter schools. Most have a waiting list for admission. Who is most responsible for getting the kids on the list? Involved parents. That's what gets successful education for kids. This whole deal about charter schools is pretty much misguided except it can allow some kids to get into a better environment for learning. That's good. Doesn't help those whose parents don't get them into a charter school. And way too many won't make that effort. It mostly comes down to parents, not teachers or schools. Amen. |
It's snerk time in Florida...again.
On Fri, 18 Mar 2011 10:27:15 -0400, I_am_Tosk
wrote: In article , says... In article , says... On Thu, 17 Mar 2011 22:23:32 -0400, wrote: He is right about merit pay for teachers too so that is 2 things in a couple months. If a politician gets one big thing right a month I will be happy with them. What does he say about merit pay? Seems like a good idea to me. http://www2.jcfloridan.com/news/2011...ion-merit-pay- bill-mixed-ar-1594330/ "Fifty percent of a teacher's evaluation will depend on how much progress their students have made on the Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test or other exams over a three-year period." What this means is good teachers at low-income student schools will get screwed on pay. So the low-income student schools will end up with the poorest teachers. Real smart. I just saw a tivo of 60 minutes...$125K for charter school teachers. Apparently, it hasn't made a difference in kids' performance, at least not so far. Success of students to achieve their potential depends mostly on their parents. Initially charter schools get good performance because guess what? Involved parents are required to get kids in charter schools. Most have a waiting list for admission. Who is most responsible for getting the kids on the list? Involved parents. That's what gets successful education for kids. This whole deal about charter schools is pretty much misguided except it can allow some kids to get into a better environment for learning. That's good. Doesn't help those whose parents don't get them into a charter school. And way too many won't make that effort. It mostly comes down to parents, not teachers or schools. So much bull****... A good teacher can teach your kids in that 6 hours a day, not count on the parents to do the work for the other 18... I am sick and tired of folks trying to blame the Parents while they are at work all day and the teachers have the kids right there a captive audience. And you've just shown how much you know about the classroom. Socrates, who was considered a decent teacher, would have a hard time teaching a turnip. |
It's snerk time in Florida...again.
On Fri, 18 Mar 2011 12:19:45 -0400, I_am_Tosk
wrote: In article , says... On Fri, 18 Mar 2011 10:27:15 -0400, I_am_Tosk wrote: In article , says... In article , says... On Thu, 17 Mar 2011 22:23:32 -0400, wrote: He is right about merit pay for teachers too so that is 2 things in a couple months. If a politician gets one big thing right a month I will be happy with them. What does he say about merit pay? Seems like a good idea to me. http://www2.jcfloridan.com/news/2011...ion-merit-pay- bill-mixed-ar-1594330/ "Fifty percent of a teacher's evaluation will depend on how much progress their students have made on the Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test or other exams over a three-year period." What this means is good teachers at low-income student schools will get screwed on pay. So the low-income student schools will end up with the poorest teachers. Real smart. I just saw a tivo of 60 minutes...$125K for charter school teachers. Apparently, it hasn't made a difference in kids' performance, at least not so far. Success of students to achieve their potential depends mostly on their parents. Initially charter schools get good performance because guess what? Involved parents are required to get kids in charter schools. Most have a waiting list for admission. Who is most responsible for getting the kids on the list? Involved parents. That's what gets successful education for kids. This whole deal about charter schools is pretty much misguided except it can allow some kids to get into a better environment for learning. That's good. Doesn't help those whose parents don't get them into a charter school. And way too many won't make that effort. It mostly comes down to parents, not teachers or schools. So much bull****... A good teacher can teach your kids in that 6 hours a day, not count on the parents to do the work for the other 18... I am sick and tired of folks trying to blame the Parents while they are at work all day and the teachers have the kids right there a captive audience. That is not really true. Good parents will help kids with homework and create a better learning experience at home. If a kid lives in a crack house with a bunch of drop outs and criminals, he is far more likely to be a crackhead, criminal, drop out. More likely I give you that, but a good teacher could reach out and let that kid get the most out of that 6 hours a day they have him or her... I just don't think this should be on the parents. If the schools spent more time teaching the basics instead of some of the crap they do, the kids could come out and learn. Now you're not talking 'teacher', you're talking 'school board' - the folks that develop the curriculum. Make the kids write, with pencil and paper, make them read, right there in class, out loud, like we did when we were kids, we learned. Or at least a lot of us did...;) I saw a news story on the text of one chapter taught in the NYC school system. It was a whole chapter on police brutality and corruption. Yeah, have a lesson on it, but a whole chapter, a whole month of the short school year? Again, you're talking curriculum, not what the teacher does. That is a waste and does nothing but create a divide between these kids and law and order. It certainly doesn't do anything to prepare them to come out to "normal" society outside of the ghetto or in collage that's for sure... Teach the kids, don't indoctrinate them and we will be just fine... You just need to figure out who you're putting down. Obviously, you should be writing to your local school board and attending some of their meetings. |
It's snerk time in Florida...again.
In article ,
says... On Fri, 18 Mar 2011 12:19:45 -0400, I_am_Tosk wrote: In article , says... On Fri, 18 Mar 2011 10:27:15 -0400, I_am_Tosk wrote: In article , says... In article , says... On Thu, 17 Mar 2011 22:23:32 -0400, wrote: He is right about merit pay for teachers too so that is 2 things in a couple months. If a politician gets one big thing right a month I will be happy with them. What does he say about merit pay? Seems like a good idea to me. http://www2.jcfloridan.com/news/2011...ion-merit-pay- bill-mixed-ar-1594330/ "Fifty percent of a teacher's evaluation will depend on how much progress their students have made on the Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test or other exams over a three-year period." What this means is good teachers at low-income student schools will get screwed on pay. So the low-income student schools will end up with the poorest teachers. Real smart. I just saw a tivo of 60 minutes...$125K for charter school teachers. Apparently, it hasn't made a difference in kids' performance, at least not so far. Success of students to achieve their potential depends mostly on their parents. Initially charter schools get good performance because guess what? Involved parents are required to get kids in charter schools. Most have a waiting list for admission. Who is most responsible for getting the kids on the list? Involved parents. That's what gets successful education for kids. This whole deal about charter schools is pretty much misguided except it can allow some kids to get into a better environment for learning. That's good. Doesn't help those whose parents don't get them into a charter school. And way too many won't make that effort. It mostly comes down to parents, not teachers or schools. So much bull****... A good teacher can teach your kids in that 6 hours a day, not count on the parents to do the work for the other 18... I am sick and tired of folks trying to blame the Parents while they are at work all day and the teachers have the kids right there a captive audience. That is not really true. Good parents will help kids with homework and create a better learning experience at home. If a kid lives in a crack house with a bunch of drop outs and criminals, he is far more likely to be a crackhead, criminal, drop out. More likely I give you that, but a good teacher could reach out and let that kid get the most out of that 6 hours a day they have him or her... I just don't think this should be on the parents. If the schools spent more time teaching the basics instead of some of the crap they do, the kids could come out and learn. Now you're not talking 'teacher', you're talking 'school board' - the folks that develop the curriculum. Make the kids write, with pencil and paper, make them read, right there in class, out loud, like we did when we were kids, we learned. Or at least a lot of us did...;) I saw a news story on the text of one chapter taught in the NYC school system. It was a whole chapter on police brutality and corruption. Yeah, have a lesson on it, but a whole chapter, a whole month of the short school year? Again, you're talking curriculum, not what the teacher does. That is a waste and does nothing but create a divide between these kids and law and order. It certainly doesn't do anything to prepare them to come out to "normal" society outside of the ghetto or in collage that's for sure... Teach the kids, don't indoctrinate them and we will be just fine... You just need to figure out who you're putting down. Obviously, you should be writing to your local school board and attending some of their meetings. Why, my school system isn't at risk.. The teachers here are happy and well paid, and they really do teach the kids. I am talking about the failing schools particularly in the inner cities.. |
It's snerk time in Florida...again.
|
It's snerk time in Florida...again.
On 3/18/2011 2:39 PM, Harryk wrote:
wrote: On Fri, 18 Mar 2011 12:06:53 -0400, wrote: I saw that show and it is significant that these were "at risk" kids. I believe it will take time to turn them around. I do believe that teachers should be paid by their performance and not just time in grade, particularly since you can't really get rid of a bad teacher. One problem is that "performance" is too closely linked to the results of "standardized testing," and all those tests really test is whether the kids memorized those parts of their lessons that appear on the tests. The test results do not tell you if the kids are learning anything significant or, just as important, how to think. You better get used to standardized tests. That is the way the world judges people. You can do much of anything these days without passing a test. If the test is well written, "memorizing the answer" is actually learning the material since no 2 kids will get exactly the same test. We are moving to computer generated testing where there is a huge pool of questions and they randomize the tests. The tests do nothing or little to show whether a kid can think. Regurgitating canned information is not thinking. What a small mind you have. Problems can be presented on tests that require thinking to arrive at a correct answer. |
It's snerk time in Florida...again.
On Fri, 18 Mar 2011 13:37:49 -0400, I_am_Tosk
wrote: In article , says... On Fri, 18 Mar 2011 12:19:45 -0400, I_am_Tosk wrote: In article , says... On Fri, 18 Mar 2011 10:27:15 -0400, I_am_Tosk wrote: In article , says... In article , says... On Thu, 17 Mar 2011 22:23:32 -0400, wrote: He is right about merit pay for teachers too so that is 2 things in a couple months. If a politician gets one big thing right a month I will be happy with them. What does he say about merit pay? Seems like a good idea to me. http://www2.jcfloridan.com/news/2011...ion-merit-pay- bill-mixed-ar-1594330/ "Fifty percent of a teacher's evaluation will depend on how much progress their students have made on the Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test or other exams over a three-year period." What this means is good teachers at low-income student schools will get screwed on pay. So the low-income student schools will end up with the poorest teachers. Real smart. I just saw a tivo of 60 minutes...$125K for charter school teachers. Apparently, it hasn't made a difference in kids' performance, at least not so far. Success of students to achieve their potential depends mostly on their parents. Initially charter schools get good performance because guess what? Involved parents are required to get kids in charter schools. Most have a waiting list for admission. Who is most responsible for getting the kids on the list? Involved parents. That's what gets successful education for kids. This whole deal about charter schools is pretty much misguided except it can allow some kids to get into a better environment for learning. That's good. Doesn't help those whose parents don't get them into a charter school. And way too many won't make that effort. It mostly comes down to parents, not teachers or schools. So much bull****... A good teacher can teach your kids in that 6 hours a day, not count on the parents to do the work for the other 18... I am sick and tired of folks trying to blame the Parents while they are at work all day and the teachers have the kids right there a captive audience. That is not really true. Good parents will help kids with homework and create a better learning experience at home. If a kid lives in a crack house with a bunch of drop outs and criminals, he is far more likely to be a crackhead, criminal, drop out. More likely I give you that, but a good teacher could reach out and let that kid get the most out of that 6 hours a day they have him or her... I just don't think this should be on the parents. If the schools spent more time teaching the basics instead of some of the crap they do, the kids could come out and learn. Now you're not talking 'teacher', you're talking 'school board' - the folks that develop the curriculum. Make the kids write, with pencil and paper, make them read, right there in class, out loud, like we did when we were kids, we learned. Or at least a lot of us did...;) I saw a news story on the text of one chapter taught in the NYC school system. It was a whole chapter on police brutality and corruption. Yeah, have a lesson on it, but a whole chapter, a whole month of the short school year? Again, you're talking curriculum, not what the teacher does. That is a waste and does nothing but create a divide between these kids and law and order. It certainly doesn't do anything to prepare them to come out to "normal" society outside of the ghetto or in collage that's for sure... Teach the kids, don't indoctrinate them and we will be just fine... You just need to figure out who you're putting down. Obviously, you should be writing to your local school board and attending some of their meetings. Why, my school system isn't at risk.. The teachers here are happy and well paid, and they really do teach the kids. I am talking about the failing schools particularly in the inner cities.. What do you expect when you've got a bunch of liberals and unions running the system? Their goal is to spend six hours a day showing fifth-graders how to put rubbers on cucumbers. |
It's snerk time in Florida...again.
|
It's snerk time in Florida...again.
On Fri, 18 Mar 2011 14:56:22 -0400, Ernie wrote:
On 3/18/2011 2:39 PM, Harryk wrote: wrote: On Fri, 18 Mar 2011 12:06:53 -0400, wrote: I saw that show and it is significant that these were "at risk" kids. I believe it will take time to turn them around. I do believe that teachers should be paid by their performance and not just time in grade, particularly since you can't really get rid of a bad teacher. One problem is that "performance" is too closely linked to the results of "standardized testing," and all those tests really test is whether the kids memorized those parts of their lessons that appear on the tests. The test results do not tell you if the kids are learning anything significant or, just as important, how to think. You better get used to standardized tests. That is the way the world judges people. You can do much of anything these days without passing a test. If the test is well written, "memorizing the answer" is actually learning the material since no 2 kids will get exactly the same test. We are moving to computer generated testing where there is a huge pool of questions and they randomize the tests. The tests do nothing or little to show whether a kid can think. Regurgitating canned information is not thinking. What a small mind you have. Problems can be presented on tests that require thinking to arrive at a correct answer. You must remember that Harry scored 1600 on his SAT, and he did so without thinking. Now, you should take back what you said about his mind. |
It's snerk time in Florida...again.
|
It's snerk time in Florida...again.
|
It's snerk time in Florida...again.
|
It's snerk time in Florida...again.
On 3/18/2011 3:12 PM, John H wrote:
On Fri, 18 Mar 2011 14:56:22 -0400, wrote: On 3/18/2011 2:39 PM, Harryk wrote: wrote: On Fri, 18 Mar 2011 12:06:53 -0400, wrote: I saw that show and it is significant that these were "at risk" kids. I believe it will take time to turn them around. I do believe that teachers should be paid by their performance and not just time in grade, particularly since you can't really get rid of a bad teacher. One problem is that "performance" is too closely linked to the results of "standardized testing," and all those tests really test is whether the kids memorized those parts of their lessons that appear on the tests. The test results do not tell you if the kids are learning anything significant or, just as important, how to think. You better get used to standardized tests. That is the way the world judges people. You can do much of anything these days without passing a test. If the test is well written, "memorizing the answer" is actually learning the material since no 2 kids will get exactly the same test. We are moving to computer generated testing where there is a huge pool of questions and they randomize the tests. The tests do nothing or little to show whether a kid can think. Regurgitating canned information is not thinking. What a small mind you have. Problems can be presented on tests that require thinking to arrive at a correct answer. You must remember that Harry scored 1600 on his SAT, and he did so without thinking. Now, you should take back what you said about his mind. What mind? Oh, you must be talking about the cesspool atop his shoulders. |
It's snerk time in Florida...again.
wrote:
On Fri, 18 Mar 2011 13:18:38 -0700, wrote: On Fri, 18 Mar 2011 14:35:46 -0400, wrote: On Fri, 18 Mar 2011 12:06:53 -0400, wrote: I saw that show and it is significant that these were "at risk" kids. I believe it will take time to turn them around. I do believe that teachers should be paid by their performance and not just time in grade, particularly since you can't really get rid of a bad teacher. One problem is that "performance" is too closely linked to the results of "standardized testing," and all those tests really test is whether the kids memorized those parts of their lessons that appear on the tests. The test results do not tell you if the kids are learning anything significant or, just as important, how to think. You better get used to standardized tests. That is the way the world judges people. You can do much of anything these days without passing a test. If the test is well written, "memorizing the answer" is actually learning the material since no 2 kids will get exactly the same test. We are moving to computer generated testing where there is a huge pool of questions and they randomize the tests. Learning how to think critically is the most important type of education. If that can be demonstrated in a standardized test, then I'm all for it. I don't think it can very easily. Of course, you understand that critical thinking requires a broad liberal arts education... :) Most K-12 is still learning basic concepts and memorizing things. You don't "think" about why 6x12=72, or what the formula for the area of a circle is, you just remember it. Maybe in your school system it was that way. It sure as hell was not that way when I was in K-12. Sure, we learned the basics and there was memorization, but there was a lot more in terms of teaching us how to think. I don't know why, but my favorite math course in high school was the year of geometry, followed by calculus. I didn't like the two years of algebra all that much, though I did OK in it. I still remember some of every class in high school: Four years of English Four years of math: algebra, geometry, algebra II and calculus Four years of science: biology, chemistry, physics and physics II Four years of foreign languages: four years of Latin Four years of history: ancient, medieval, european and U.S. And for my electives: two years of music/chorus and two years of Russian. I remember many of my teachers, too. Most of them were absolutely first-rate, and three of them had doctorates. My third year history teacher had a doctorate, and he later became principal teacher. The teacher I best remember, though, taught English. She not only pushed me into writing, she sneaked some of her students into a local jazz club several times a year where her really famous musician husband performed. |
It's snerk time in Florida...again.
On Sat, 19 Mar 2011 12:35:22 -0400, wrote:
On Fri, 18 Mar 2011 13:18:38 -0700, wrote: On Fri, 18 Mar 2011 14:35:46 -0400, wrote: On Fri, 18 Mar 2011 12:06:53 -0400, Harryk wrote: I saw that show and it is significant that these were "at risk" kids. I believe it will take time to turn them around. I do believe that teachers should be paid by their performance and not just time in grade, particularly since you can't really get rid of a bad teacher. One problem is that "performance" is too closely linked to the results of "standardized testing," and all those tests really test is whether the kids memorized those parts of their lessons that appear on the tests. The test results do not tell you if the kids are learning anything significant or, just as important, how to think. You better get used to standardized tests. That is the way the world judges people. You can do much of anything these days without passing a test. If the test is well written, "memorizing the answer" is actually learning the material since no 2 kids will get exactly the same test. We are moving to computer generated testing where there is a huge pool of questions and they randomize the tests. Learning how to think critically is the most important type of education. If that can be demonstrated in a standardized test, then I'm all for it. I don't think it can very easily. Of course, you understand that critical thinking requires a broad liberal arts education... :) Most K-12 is still learning basic concepts and memorizing things. You don't "think" about why 6x12=72, or what the formula for the area of a circle is, you just remember it. It's about learning basics and it's about learning how to function in society. The latter isn't something you can memorize and it's learned early or not at all. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:25 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com