|
Apology to gay losers
On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 12:15:38 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote:
wrote in message ... On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 08:06:06 -0800, Chuck Gould wrote: Compare the average level of educational achievement on, say, the left coast with the average education in customarily red states like Mississippi, Alabama, Missouri. Then reevaluate. Thanks. It's worse than that: http://www.thebluestate.com/2005/10/...06_smarte.html Note, the 21 states that spend the least on education, are all red. I always get a kick out of the rationalization that education (or money spent on it) automatically implies"smartness" in people. There's a lot of stupid people with years of advanced degrees, just as there are many "smart" people with limited education. Eisboch As a former teacher, I agree wholeheartedly. Lots of money spent on education does not equate to better education. -- John H |
Apology to gay losers
On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 10:07:15 -0800 (PST), Chuck Gould
wrote: On Feb 10, 9:15?am, "Eisboch" wrote: wrote in message ... On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 08:06:06 -0800, Chuck Gould wrote: Compare the average level of educational achievement on, say, the left coast with the average education in customarily red states like Mississippi, Alabama, Missouri. Then reevaluate. Thanks. It's worse than that: http://www.thebluestate.com/2005/10/...06_smarte.html Note, the 21 states that spend the least on education, are all red. I always get a kick out of the rationalization that education (or money spent on it) ?automatically implies"smartness" in people. There's a lot of stupid people with years of advanced degrees, just as there are many "smart" people with limited education. Eisboch I agree with you entirely. The basis for even considering education in the discussion was a claim that D's oppose "No Child Left Behind", and thaty they do so because if the amount of education were increased across the country the number of people supporting the D's would decrease. Which, by the way, was a valid claim. -- John H |
NCLB
"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message ... On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 10:07:15 -0800 (PST), Chuck Gould wrote: On Feb 10, 9:15?am, "Eisboch" wrote: wrote in message ... On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 08:06:06 -0800, Chuck Gould wrote: Compare the average level of educational achievement on, say, the left coast with the average education in customarily red states like Mississippi, Alabama, Missouri. Then reevaluate. Thanks. It's worse than that: http://www.thebluestate.com/2005/10/...06_smarte.html Note, the 21 states that spend the least on education, are all red. I always get a kick out of the rationalization that education (or money spent on it) ?automatically implies"smartness" in people. There's a lot of stupid people with years of advanced degrees, just as there are many "smart" people with limited education. Eisboch I agree with you entirely. The basis for even considering education in the discussion was a claim that D's oppose "No Child Left Behind", and thaty they do so because if the amount of education were increased across the country the number of people supporting the D's would decrease. Talk to middle and high school teachers about NCLB and see what they say about the system. It's a total disaster. And in states that require mainstreaming of those children who are developmentally, physically, mentally or emotionally "challenged", it's almost impossible to achieve the standards required by NCLB. So what's the solution? In MA and CT, it's teach the mastery test. Simple as that. There is a huge hole in this article as well. Look at the states that spend the least (in order): Utah, Arizona, Arkansas, Oklahoma, Mississippi, Tennessee, Idaho, North Carolina, Alabama -- and I still have not reached a blue state yet. I'll keep going: North Dakota, Florida, Nevada, Texas, New Mexico, Missouri, Iowa, Louisiana, Kansas, Nebraska, South Dakota, Kentucky, and then finally California. The 21 states that spend the least amount on education dollars per student are all red. Let's take this state-by-state - these "red" states using state legislatures as our guide. Utah -Gov/R - Senate/R - House/R - red Arizona - Gov/D - Senate/R - House/R - red Arkansas - Gov/D - Senate/D - House/D - blue Oklahoma - Gov/D - Senate/D - House/R - blue Mississippi - Gov/R - Senate/D - House/D - blue Tennessee - Gov/D - Senate/R - House/D - blue Idaho - Gov/R - Senate/R - House/R - red North Carolina - Gov/D - Senate/D - House/D - blue Alabama - Gov/R - Senate/D - House/D - blue North Dakota - Gov/R - Senate/R - House/R - red Florida - Gov/R - Senate/R - House/R - red Nevada - Gov/R - Senate/R - House/D - red Texas - Gov/R - Senate/R - House/R - red New Mexico - Gov/D - Senate/D - House/D - blue Missouri - Gov/R - Senate/R - House/R - red Iowa - Gov/D - Senate/D - House/D - blue Louisiana - Gov/R - Senate/D - House/D - blue Kansas - Gov/D - Senate/R - House/R - red Nebraska - Gov/R - Unicameral Legislature/R - red South Dakota - Gov/R - Senate/R - House/R - red Kentucky - Gov/D - Senate/R - House/D - blue California - Gov/R - Senate/D - House/D - blue 11 state governments are predominately Republican, 10 are predominately Democratic. Move on to Federal level. Utah -Senate/R - House/R - red Arizona - Senate/R - House/split - red Arkansas - Senate/D - House/D - blue Oklahoma - Senate/R - House/R - red Mississippi - Senate/R - House/split - red Tennessee - Senate/R - House/D - push Idaho - Senate/R - House/R - red North Carolina - Senate/R - House/D - push Alabama - Senate/R - House/R - red North Dakota - Senate/D - House/D - blue Florida - Senate/Split - House/R - red Nevada - Senate/Split - House/R - red Texas - Senate/R - House/R - red New Mexico - Senate/Split - House/R - red Missouri - Senate/Split - House/R - red Iowa - Senate/Split - House/D - blue Louisiana - Senate/Split - House/R - red Kansas - Senate/R - House/Split - red Nebraska - Senate/Split - House/R - red South Dakota - Senate/Split - House/D - blue Kentucky - Senate/R - House/Split - red California - Senate/D - House/D - blue 15 states with predominately Republican Senate/House combinations, 4 states with predominately Democratic combinations and two push. So, any way you want to look at it, all of these states can't be called "red" in any sense of the word. It's a very distorted view presented for a particular purpose. And how he could possibly call California "red" is completely beyond me. Easy. Communist. |
Apology to gay losers
"Gene Kearns" wrote in message ... On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 10:37:24 -0800, Calif Bill penned the following well considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats: Oversized for your size boat is not a revenue generator. Then ar more likely trying to keep the traffic flowing smoothly. So the permit requires you to know when and where you can not tow. There is no restriction on where... only when.... and most people aren't dragging a big (wide) boat around in the dark, anyway. Even then, the permit is not openly displayed nor is any placarding or flagging necessary. -- Grady-White Gulfstream, out of Oak Island, NC. Homepage http://pamandgene.idleplay.net/ Rec.boats at Lee Yeaton's Bayguide http://www.thebayguide.com/rec.boats --- avast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean. Virus Database (VPS): 080209-0, 02/09/2008 Tested on: 2/10/2008 3:06:32 PM avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2008 ALWIL Software. http://www.avast.com Here, you can not tow on the bridges during certain hours. As well as some freeways. |
Apology to gay losers
On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 11:09:27 -0500, HK wrote:
Yeah, well, I'd prefer to die after a weekend in the sack with Salma Hayek, Penelope Cruz and Marion Cotillard than squished by a runaway boat trailer. Perhaps, but your chances are better with a boat trailer. |
Apology to gay losers
On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 09:46:46 -0500, Gene Kearns
wrote: Your guy with the 33 footer likely would exceed the 60' overall length. I see boats over 40 ft being towed all the time. |
Apology to gay losers
Wayne.B wrote:
On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 11:09:27 -0500, HK wrote: Yeah, well, I'd prefer to die after a weekend in the sack with Salma Hayek, Penelope Cruz and Marion Cotillard than squished by a runaway boat trailer. Perhaps, but your chances are better with a boat trailer. Mike Huckabee said if I prayed a lot, it would happen. |
Apology to gay losers
On Feb 10, 5:05*pm, Wayne.B wrote:
On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 09:46:46 -0500, Gene Kearns wrote: Your guy with the 33 footer likely would exceed the 60' overall length. I see boats over 40 ft being towed all the time. By boats over 60 feet?? |
Apology to gay losers
Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 11:09:27 -0500, HK wrote: Eisboch wrote: "HK" wrote in message ... The one thing I really don't like about hauling big boats is looking out the rear view mirror and seeing the "Battleship Missouri" two feet behind me. Always gives me the willies. pansy Yeah, well, I'd prefer to die after a weekend in the sack with Salma Hayek, Penelope Cruz and Marion Cotillard than squished by a runaway boat trailer. I would prefer not to die period. Thank you very much. I believe my preference is more possible than yours. |
Apology to gay losers
On Feb 10, 4:08*pm, HK wrote:
Wayne.B wrote: On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 11:09:27 -0500, HK wrote: Yeah, well, I'd prefer to die after a weekend in the sack with Salma Hayek, Penelope Cruz and Marion Cotillard than squished by a runaway boat trailer. Perhaps, but your chances are better with a boat trailer. Mike Huckabee said if I prayed a lot, it would happen. Did he really, Harry? |
Apology to gay losers
Tim wrote:
On Feb 10, 4:08 pm, HK wrote: Wayne.B wrote: On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 11:09:27 -0500, HK wrote: Yeah, well, I'd prefer to die after a weekend in the sack with Salma Hayek, Penelope Cruz and Marion Cotillard than squished by a runaway boat trailer. Perhaps, but your chances are better with a boat trailer. Mike Huckabee said if I prayed a lot, it would happen. Did he really, Harry? Yes, Tim, he did. |
Apology to gay losers
On Feb 10, 12:06�pm, John H.
The basis for even considering education in the discussion was a claim that D's oppose "No Child Left Behind", and thaty they do so because if the amount of education were increased across the country the number of people supporting the D's would decrease. Which, by the way, was a valid claim. -- Then according to your theory, the states with the greatest numbers of Republicans will be those states with the most successful and comprehensive educational systems. By the same token, the states with the smallest number of Republicans will be those states where the Democrats have succeeded on destroying the education system and thereby protecting their base. Care to offer some examples? Half a dozen or so of each would be sufficient to establish a trend, rather than an exception. |
NCLB
On Feb 10, 12:25�pm, Short Wave Sportfishing
Talk to middle and high school teachers about NCLB and see what they say about the system. It's a total disaster. �And in states that require mainstreaming of those children who are developmentally, physically, mentally or emotionally "challenged", it's almost impossible to achieve the standards required by NCLB. Both of my kids are teaching in the classroom. My son (HS Social Studies) as a career and my daughter (MS Science) as a step toward eventually becoming a school administrator. The have been some positive aspects of the NCLB. For instance, teachers must demonstrate a level of expertise in the subjec they teach. The schools can't simply hire a guy because he's a great football coach and then say, "Oh, yeah...and you'll be teaching two periods of astronomy every morning so better read a chapter or two ahead of the students in the text book. Oh, and next semester you'll be teaching advanced trig, but don't worry about that- nobody will understand the subject well enought to realize you have no facility what-so-ever for math." But in general, the system is not so good. Far too many districts are strictly "teaching to the test". My son has several classes of HS freshmen who are spending the entire 9th grade simply studying to pas the 10th grade NCLB test- it's that critical to the district that nearly all the 10th graders pass so that the district will continue to get federal school dollars. |
Apology to gay losers
"HK" wrote in message ... Calif Bill wrote: "HK" wrote in message ... Eisboch wrote: "HK" wrote in message ... The one thing I really don't like about hauling big boats is looking out the rear view mirror and seeing the "Battleship Missouri" two feet behind me. Always gives me the willies. pansy Eisboch Yeah, well, I'd prefer to die after a weekend in the sack with Salma Hayek, Penelope Cruz and Marion Cotillard than squished by a runaway boat trailer. Chance of either is infinitely small. Unless Scott is towing his trailer near you. My wife sez if I can arrange a weekend at the NoTell Motel with Salma, Penelope and Marion, it's ok with her. But I can't get any of them to return my phone calls. Not even the motel! :- Your reputation precedes you. ;- |
Apology to gay losers
|
Apology to gay losers
On Feb 10, 5:13*pm, HK wrote:
Tim wrote: On Feb 10, 4:08 pm, HK wrote: Wayne.B wrote: On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 11:09:27 -0500, HK wrote: Yeah, well, I'd prefer to die after a weekend in the sack with Salma Hayek, Penelope Cruz and Marion Cotillard than squished by a runaway boat trailer. Perhaps, but your chances are better with a boat trailer. Mike Huckabee said if I prayed a lot, it would happen. Did he really, Harry? Yes, Tim, he did. Harry, I think you're hearing imaginary voices floating around inside your head. |
Apology to gay losers
Tim wrote:
On Feb 10, 5:13 pm, HK wrote: Tim wrote: On Feb 10, 4:08 pm, HK wrote: Wayne.B wrote: On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 11:09:27 -0500, HK wrote: Yeah, well, I'd prefer to die after a weekend in the sack with Salma Hayek, Penelope Cruz and Marion Cotillard than squished by a runaway boat trailer. Perhaps, but your chances are better with a boat trailer. Mike Huckabee said if I prayed a lot, it would happen. Did he really, Harry? Yes, Tim, he did. Harry, I think you're hearing imaginary voices floating around inside your head. No more than Mike Huckabee. |
Apology to gay losers
On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 16:23:55 -0800 (PST), Chuck Gould
wrote: On Feb 10, 12:06?pm, John H. The basis for even considering education in the discussion was a claim that D's oppose "No Child Left Behind", and thaty they do so because if the amount of education were increased across the country the number of people supporting the D's would decrease. Which, by the way, was a valid claim. -- Then according to your theory, the states with the greatest numbers of Republicans will be those states with the most successful and comprehensive educational systems. By the same token, the states with the smallest number of Republicans will be those states where the Democrats have succeeded on destroying the education system and thereby protecting their base. Care to offer some examples? Half a dozen or so of each would be sufficient to establish a trend, rather than an exception. Education isn't a statewide function anywhere that I know of. It's a county or city function normally. How do Los Angeles, New York City, and Washington DC do for areas where the base is protected? -- John H |
Apology to gay losers
On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 18:13:18 -0500, HK wrote:
Tim wrote: On Feb 10, 4:08 pm, HK wrote: Wayne.B wrote: On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 11:09:27 -0500, HK wrote: Yeah, well, I'd prefer to die after a weekend in the sack with Salma Hayek, Penelope Cruz and Marion Cotillard than squished by a runaway boat trailer. Perhaps, but your chances are better with a boat trailer. Mike Huckabee said if I prayed a lot, it would happen. Did he really, Harry? Yes, Tim, he did. Truth doesn't mean much to you, does it? -- John H |
NCLB
On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 20:25:34 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote: On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 10:07:15 -0800 (PST), Chuck Gould wrote: On Feb 10, 9:15?am, "Eisboch" wrote: wrote in message ... On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 08:06:06 -0800, Chuck Gould wrote: Compare the average level of educational achievement on, say, the left coast with the average education in customarily red states like Mississippi, Alabama, Missouri. Then reevaluate. Thanks. It's worse than that: http://www.thebluestate.com/2005/10/...06_smarte.html Note, the 21 states that spend the least on education, are all red. I always get a kick out of the rationalization that education (or money spent on it) ?automatically implies"smartness" in people. There's a lot of stupid people with years of advanced degrees, just as there are many "smart" people with limited education. Eisboch I agree with you entirely. The basis for even considering education in the discussion was a claim that D's oppose "No Child Left Behind", and thaty they do so because if the amount of education were increased across the country the number of people supporting the D's would decrease. Talk to middle and high school teachers about NCLB and see what they say about the system. It's a total disaster. And in states that require mainstreaming of those children who are developmentally, physically, mentally or emotionally "challenged", it's almost impossible to achieve the standards required by NCLB. How one thinks education is a state function is beyond me, other than for the establishment of overall standards. Using the challenged as an example of why NCLB doesn't work makes very little sense. In states with a very strong teachers' union, NCLB doesn't work. Why? Because the unions don't like their teachers having to meet standards. To say that standards shouldn't be used to judge the educational process makes absolutely no sense. To say that children shouldn't be taught a curriculum which enables them to meet the standards makes even less sense. To say that children shouldn't be tested to ensure they meet the standards makes the least sense of all. -- John H |
NCLB
On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 16:33:34 -0800 (PST), Chuck Gould
wrote: On Feb 10, 12:25?pm, Short Wave Sportfishing Talk to middle and high school teachers about NCLB and see what they say about the system. It's a total disaster. ?And in states that require mainstreaming of those children who are developmentally, physically, mentally or emotionally "challenged", it's almost impossible to achieve the standards required by NCLB. Both of my kids are teaching in the classroom. My son (HS Social Studies) as a career and my daughter (MS Science) as a step toward eventually becoming a school administrator. The have been some positive aspects of the NCLB. For instance, teachers must demonstrate a level of expertise in the subjec they teach. The schools can't simply hire a guy because he's a great football coach and then say, "Oh, yeah...and you'll be teaching two periods of astronomy every morning so better read a chapter or two ahead of the students in the text book. Oh, and next semester you'll be teaching advanced trig, but don't worry about that- nobody will understand the subject well enought to realize you have no facility what-so-ever for math." But in general, the system is not so good. Far too many districts are strictly "teaching to the test". My son has several classes of HS freshmen who are spending the entire 9th grade simply studying to pas the 10th grade NCLB test- it's that critical to the district that nearly all the 10th graders pass so that the district will continue to get federal school dollars. Chuck - in case you don't remember, teachers have been teaching to the test since mid-terms, quarter exams, semester exams, and finals were given back in ought-two. Did you never take a 'chapter test'? Do you not believe you were taught the information to enable you to pass the test? You folks with your 'teach the test' idea seem to forget all about your own education, unless you were never tested. If the tests are developed and administered properly, the teachers don't know what's on the test anyway. They know what the standards of learning are, and they try to ensure the students can meet the standards. -- John H |
NCLB
On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 01:20:49 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote: On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 16:33:34 -0800 (PST), Chuck Gould wrote: On Feb 10, 12:25?pm, Short Wave Sportfishing Talk to middle and high school teachers about NCLB and see what they say about the system. It's a total disaster. ?And in states that require mainstreaming of those children who are developmentally, physically, mentally or emotionally "challenged", it's almost impossible to achieve the standards required by NCLB. Both of my kids are teaching in the classroom. My son (HS Social Studies) as a career and my daughter (MS Science) as a step toward eventually becoming a school administrator. The have been some positive aspects of the NCLB. For instance, teachers must demonstrate a level of expertise in the subjec they teach. The schools can't simply hire a guy because he's a great football coach and then say, "Oh, yeah...and you'll be teaching two periods of astronomy every morning so better read a chapter or two ahead of the students in the text book. Oh, and next semester you'll be teaching advanced trig, but don't worry about that- nobody will understand the subject well enought to realize you have no facility what-so-ever for math." Well, I would think that's a slight exaggeration. In CT, MA, RI and NY you have to be certified to teach both subject and grade level. Maybe it's different out there in the Great Northwest, but it's been that way here for at least 30 years and longer as Mrs. Wave will be finishing her 38th year this June. As far as I know, the only thing that the NCLB act did was formalize that practice nationally - I can't speak to areas outside of NE. But in general, the system is not so good. Far too many districts are strictly "teaching to the test". My son has several classes of HS freshmen who are spending the entire 9th grade simply studying to pas the 10th grade NCLB test- it's that critical to the district that nearly all the 10th graders pass so that the district will continue to get federal school dollars. That's about the size of it ok. Horse****. Ask the next question - do the teachers know the test questions? If so, then the whole thing's been compromised anyway. -- John H |
Apology to gay losers
Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 21:16:23 -0500, John H. wrote: On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 16:23:55 -0800 (PST), Chuck Gould wrote: On Feb 10, 12:06?pm, John H. The basis for even considering education in the discussion was a claim that D's oppose "No Child Left Behind", and thaty they do so because if the amount of education were increased across the country the number of people supporting the D's would decrease. Which, by the way, was a valid claim. -- Then according to your theory, the states with the greatest numbers of Republicans will be those states with the most successful and comprehensive educational systems. By the same token, the states with the smallest number of Republicans will be those states where the Democrats have succeeded on destroying the education system and thereby protecting their base. Care to offer some examples? Half a dozen or so of each would be sufficient to establish a trend, rather than an exception. Education isn't a statewide function anywhere that I know of. It's a county or city function normally. Unbelievable. And you used to teach? Who certified you - Wal-Mart? Herring worked as a substitute teacher. The qualifications for a substitute teacher in Alexandra, Virginia, where Herring lives, are minimal: * at least 60 hours of college coursework * evidence of a negative tuberculin test (or chest x-ray) * a completed online application * attend an orientation session (see below) * criminal background check — at the orientation session, you will schedule an appointment to return for fingerprinting (the cost to the applicant is $42) That's it. No certification. Any idiot can sub teach. That would include Herring. The Virginia Department of Education is intimately involved in educational programming and standards in that state. You may recall that while he worked as a sub, Herring whined extensively and repeatedly about the students placed in his charge. These were mainly minority kids, if memory serves. He was unable to motivate them, as a properly trained teacher might. Perhaps they didn't respond to his "Army" ways. Herring has also had problems with the Latinos living down the street from him. |
Apology to gay losers
HK wrote:
Herring has also had problems with the Latinos living down the street from him. Harry, I don't believe I have seen anyone use an minority group as an insult except for you. Why in the world would you use the word gay as an insult, unless you really believed that would be insulting? What do you believe is wrong with gays that you would ever call someone a gay loser? |
Apology to gay losers
Reginald P. Smithers III wrote:
HK wrote: Herring has also had problems with the Latinos living down the street from him. Harry, I don't believe I have seen anyone use an minority group as an insult except for you. Why in the world would you use the word gay as an insult, unless you really believed that would be insulting? What do you believe is wrong with gays that you would ever call someone a gay loser? I have a problem with the Madrasa two doors down. |
NCLB
On Feb 10, 6:24�pm, John H. wrote:
On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 20:25:34 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote: On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 10:07:15 -0800 (PST), Chuck Gould wrote: On Feb 10, 9:15?am, "Eisboch" wrote: wrote in message ... On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 08:06:06 -0800, Chuck Gould wrote: Compare the average level of educational achievement on, say, the left coast with the average education in customarily red states like Mississippi, Alabama, Missouri. Then reevaluate. Thanks. It's worse than that: http://www.thebluestate.com/2005/10/...06_smarte.html Note, the 21 states that spend the least on education, are all red. I always get a kick out of the rationalization that education (or money spent on it) ?automatically implies"smartness" in people. There's a lot of stupid people with years of advanced degrees, just as there are many "smart" people with limited education. Eisboch I agree with you entirely. The basis for even considering education in the discussion was a claim that D's oppose "No Child Left Behind", and thaty they do so because if the amount of education were increased across the country the number of people supporting the D's would decrease. Talk to middle and high school teachers about NCLB and see what they say about the system. It's a total disaster. �And in states that require mainstreaming of those children who are developmentally, physically, mentally or emotionally "challenged", it's almost impossible to achieve the standards required by NCLB. How one thinks education is a state function is beyond me, other than for the establishment of overall standards. Using the challenged as an example of why NCLB doesn't work makes very little sense. In states with a very strong teachers' union, NCLB doesn't work. Why? Because the unions don't like their teachers having to meet standards. To say that standards shouldn't be used to judge the educational process makes absolutely no sense. To say that children shouldn't be taught a curriculum which enables them to meet the standards makes even less sense. To say that children shouldn't be tested to ensure they meet the standards makes the least sense of all. -- John H- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - One of the risks of rigidly enforced "national cirriculum standards" is the potential for the federal government to manipulate too many of the details of public education. For example: What if, in order to qualify for federal aid, a school district were *required* to teach the "theory of intelligent design" enough hours to equal any time spent on the "theory of evolution"? Once we are to that step, how remote would it be to have a very progressive or very conservative government then dictate that the theory of intelligent design was to be the *only* theory discussed in the classroom- (or, conversely, that it could not be mentioned at all). Shall we teach as a matter of science, rather than faith, that the human embryo has a soul at the moment of conception and that abortion is therefore a "sin"? Shall we teach that responsible teenagers take precautions to avoid STD's and pregnancy- or shall we teach that responsible teenagers just say "no" to sex, drugs, and alcohol? Point is, that some of these decisions should be made at the local level and reflect the values of the communities in which the schools are located. If some district in the Bible Belt wants to concentrate on Intelligent Design as the best available theory explaining the origin and modification of species, then that district should be accountable first to the local taxpayers supporting the school rather than first accountable to a national standard that (might possibly) mandate Evolution as the preferred explanation.. If some Nazi-like group somehow ascended to federal power 100 years from now, of what would the "official national cirriculum" be likely to consist? Scary to contemplate. |
NCLB
"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message ... On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 21:29:59 -0500, John H. wrote: On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 01:20:49 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote: On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 16:33:34 -0800 (PST), Chuck Gould wrote: On Feb 10, 12:25?pm, Short Wave Sportfishing Talk to middle and high school teachers about NCLB and see what they say about the system. It's a total disaster. ?And in states that require mainstreaming of those children who are developmentally, physically, mentally or emotionally "challenged", it's almost impossible to achieve the standards required by NCLB. Both of my kids are teaching in the classroom. My son (HS Social Studies) as a career and my daughter (MS Science) as a step toward eventually becoming a school administrator. The have been some positive aspects of the NCLB. For instance, teachers must demonstrate a level of expertise in the subjec they teach. The schools can't simply hire a guy because he's a great football coach and then say, "Oh, yeah...and you'll be teaching two periods of astronomy every morning so better read a chapter or two ahead of the students in the text book. Oh, and next semester you'll be teaching advanced trig, but don't worry about that- nobody will understand the subject well enought to realize you have no facility what-so-ever for math." Well, I would think that's a slight exaggeration. In CT, MA, RI and NY you have to be certified to teach both subject and grade level. Maybe it's different out there in the Great Northwest, but it's been that way here for at least 30 years and longer as Mrs. Wave will be finishing her 38th year this June. As far as I know, the only thing that the NCLB act did was formalize that practice nationally - I can't speak to areas outside of NE. But in general, the system is not so good. Far too many districts are strictly "teaching to the test". My son has several classes of HS freshmen who are spending the entire 9th grade simply studying to pas the 10th grade NCLB test- it's that critical to the district that nearly all the 10th graders pass so that the district will continue to get federal school dollars. That's about the size of it ok. Horse****. Not at all - it's a fact. Ask the next question - do the teachers know the test questions? What do you think they teach to? If so, then the whole thing's been compromised anyway. That's the point. True. Have been complaints out here of the teaching to the test. No cures, they still teach to the test. |
Apology to gay losers
Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 22:06:15 -0500, HK wrote: Short Wave Sportfishing wrote: On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 21:16:23 -0500, John H. wrote: On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 16:23:55 -0800 (PST), Chuck Gould wrote: On Feb 10, 12:06?pm, John H. The basis for even considering education in the discussion was a claim that D's oppose "No Child Left Behind", and thaty they do so because if the amount of education were increased across the country the number of people supporting the D's would decrease. Which, by the way, was a valid claim. -- Then according to your theory, the states with the greatest numbers of Republicans will be those states with the most successful and comprehensive educational systems. By the same token, the states with the smallest number of Republicans will be those states where the Democrats have succeeded on destroying the education system and thereby protecting their base. Care to offer some examples? Half a dozen or so of each would be sufficient to establish a trend, rather than an exception. Education isn't a statewide function anywhere that I know of. It's a county or city function normally. Unbelievable. And you used to teach? Who certified you - Wal-Mart? Herring worked as a substitute teacher. The qualifications for a substitute teacher in Alexandra, Virginia, where Herring lives, are minimal: * at least 60 hours of college coursework * evidence of a negative tuberculin test (or chest x-ray) * a completed online application * attend an orientation session (see below) * criminal background check — at the orientation session, you will schedule an appointment to return for fingerprinting (the cost to the applicant is $42) Subs here in CT are required to have a four year degree, have to pass a teaching methods course and the usual fingerprint checks, etc. Teacher Aides have to have a two year degree Middle school and up unless - at the Elementary level it's not required. Virginia is part of the South. Did you get my note about your possibly "lunch-by"? This coming weekend is fine, but I will be gone the weekend of the 23rd. |
Apology to gay losers
Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 06:38:01 -0500, HK wrote: Short Wave Sportfishing wrote: On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 22:06:15 -0500, HK wrote: Short Wave Sportfishing wrote: On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 21:16:23 -0500, John H. wrote: On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 16:23:55 -0800 (PST), Chuck Gould wrote: On Feb 10, 12:06?pm, John H. The basis for even considering education in the discussion was a claim that D's oppose "No Child Left Behind", and thaty they do so because if the amount of education were increased across the country the number of people supporting the D's would decrease. Which, by the way, was a valid claim. -- Then according to your theory, the states with the greatest numbers of Republicans will be those states with the most successful and comprehensive educational systems. By the same token, the states with the smallest number of Republicans will be those states where the Democrats have succeeded on destroying the education system and thereby protecting their base. Care to offer some examples? Half a dozen or so of each would be sufficient to establish a trend, rather than an exception. Education isn't a statewide function anywhere that I know of. It's a county or city function normally. Unbelievable. And you used to teach? Who certified you - Wal-Mart? Herring worked as a substitute teacher. The qualifications for a substitute teacher in Alexandra, Virginia, where Herring lives, are minimal: * at least 60 hours of college coursework * evidence of a negative tuberculin test (or chest x-ray) * a completed online application * attend an orientation session (see below) * criminal background check — at the orientation session, you will schedule an appointment to return for fingerprinting (the cost to the applicant is $42) Subs here in CT are required to have a four year degree, have to pass a teaching methods course and the usual fingerprint checks, etc. Teacher Aides have to have a two year degree Middle school and up unless - at the Elementary level it's not required. Virginia is part of the South Did you get my note about your possibly "lunch-by"? This coming weekend is fine, but I will be gone the weekend of the 23rd. Well, so much for that. However, all is not lost. Scott is bugging me to take a trip down with him in the Spring - he wants to visit his daughter, I can visit mine while down there and we can hook up for fishing for a day. Shoot for the *real* spring, late April or sometime in May, when the chances of a decent day are pretty high. I ordered some "stuff" for son of Yo Ho that probably will be installed by the dealer in March-April. It's the height of "rigging season," so he wants the boat for a week to 10 days after we remove the shrinkwrap. |
Apology to gay losers
On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 02:52:14 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote: On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 21:16:23 -0500, John H. wrote: On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 16:23:55 -0800 (PST), Chuck Gould wrote: On Feb 10, 12:06?pm, John H. The basis for even considering education in the discussion was a claim that D's oppose "No Child Left Behind", and thaty they do so because if the amount of education were increased across the country the number of people supporting the D's would decrease. Which, by the way, was a valid claim. -- Then according to your theory, the states with the greatest numbers of Republicans will be those states with the most successful and comprehensive educational systems. By the same token, the states with the smallest number of Republicans will be those states where the Democrats have succeeded on destroying the education system and thereby protecting their base. Care to offer some examples? Half a dozen or so of each would be sufficient to establish a trend, rather than an exception. Education isn't a statewide function anywhere that I know of. It's a county or city function normally. Unbelievable. And you used to teach? Who certified you - Wal-Mart? JimH's argument methods...cut what you don't like and make comments about the rest. I was certified by the state of Virginia, Tom. -- John H |
Apology to gay losers
On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 22:06:15 -0500, HK wrote:
Short Wave Sportfishing wrote: On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 21:16:23 -0500, John H. wrote: On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 16:23:55 -0800 (PST), Chuck Gould wrote: On Feb 10, 12:06?pm, John H. The basis for even considering education in the discussion was a claim that D's oppose "No Child Left Behind", and thaty they do so because if the amount of education were increased across the country the number of people supporting the D's would decrease. Which, by the way, was a valid claim. -- Then according to your theory, the states with the greatest numbers of Republicans will be those states with the most successful and comprehensive educational systems. By the same token, the states with the smallest number of Republicans will be those states where the Democrats have succeeded on destroying the education system and thereby protecting their base. Care to offer some examples? Half a dozen or so of each would be sufficient to establish a trend, rather than an exception. Education isn't a statewide function anywhere that I know of. It's a county or city function normally. Unbelievable. And you used to teach? Who certified you - Wal-Mart? Herring worked as a substitute teacher. The qualifications for a substitute teacher in Alexandra, Virginia, where Herring lives, are minimal: * at least 60 hours of college coursework * evidence of a negative tuberculin test (or chest x-ray) * a completed online application * attend an orientation session (see below) * criminal background check — at the orientation session, you will schedule an appointment to return for fingerprinting (the cost to the applicant is $42) That's it. No certification. Any idiot can sub teach. That would include Herring. The Virginia Department of Education is intimately involved in educational programming and standards in that state. You may recall that while he worked as a sub, Herring whined extensively and repeatedly about the students placed in his charge. These were mainly minority kids, if memory serves. He was unable to motivate them, as a properly trained teacher might. Perhaps they didn't respond to his "Army" ways. Herring has also had problems with the Latinos living down the street from him. Such vitriol! Harry, I taught for ten years before my first day as a sub. -- John H |
Apology to gay losers
On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 11:25:14 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote: Subs here in CT are required to have a four year degree, have to pass a teaching methods course and the usual fingerprint checks, etc. Teacher Aides have to have a two year degree Middle school and up unless - at the Elementary level it's not required. With a few exceptions, right? "Substitute Teaching Substitute positions are ideal for college students since they offer the flexibility to accept assignments that do not conflict with your schedule of classes. You gain the opportunity to network with professionals in the field of education and learn valuable job skills as you supplement your income. The current rates of pay for substitute teachers are $62.00 per day for the first 15 days assigned as a sub teacher with an increase in rate to $70.00 per day after 15 days of teacher subbing in the district. The hourly rate for substitute teacher aides is $7.25 and for cafeteria workers is $8.25. Substitute crossing guards earn $7.25 per hour. The Connecticut State Department of Educations now issues authorizations for college students who do not yet hold a Bachelor's degree to serve as substitute teachers? The request for such authorization must be initiated by the school district. Windham Public Schools encourages ECSU, UCONN, and QVCC students, particularly education majors interested in gaining valuable classroom experience, to pursue this option. To apply for authorization to work as a substitute teacher, the applicant must complete an ED-174 form, "Application for Substitute Teacher Authorization for Candidates who have not completed a Bachelor's degree". The application packet must be returned to the Personnel Office and must be submitted by the school district on behalf of the applicant. Processing by the Bureau of Certification takes an average of 2-6 weeks. In the interim, applicants who are awaiting this special authorization may serve in the capacity of a substitute teacher aide. This allows a period of time to observe normal classroom activities under the direction of a certified teacher prior to accepting an assignment as a substitute teacher who must assume full charge of a classroom." http://www.windham.k12.ct.us/DSS_Web...l/Policies.htm Note that I didn't look very hard to find this. If a teacher calls in sick, and a sub is needed for that class, is that one-day sub required to have a four year degree and pass the teaching course? Or, is it a requirement for a 'long term' sub? I can see that CT would have a big problem getting subs for teachers who get sick for a day. -- John H |
Apology to gay losers
JimH wrote:
On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 07:57:04 -0500, John H. wrote: On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 02:52:14 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote: On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 21:16:23 -0500, John H. wrote: On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 16:23:55 -0800 (PST), Chuck Gould wrote: On Feb 10, 12:06?pm, John H. The basis for even considering education in the discussion was a claim that D's oppose "No Child Left Behind", and thaty they do so because if the amount of education were increased across the country the number of people supporting the D's would decrease. Which, by the way, was a valid claim. -- Then according to your theory, the states with the greatest numbers of Republicans will be those states with the most successful and comprehensive educational systems. By the same token, the states with the smallest number of Republicans will be those states where the Democrats have succeeded on destroying the education system and thereby protecting their base. Care to offer some examples? Half a dozen or so of each would be sufficient to establish a trend, rather than an exception. Education isn't a statewide function anywhere that I know of. It's a county or city function normally. Unbelievable. And you used to teach? Who certified you - Wal-Mart? JimH's argument methods...cut what you don't like and make comments about the rest. Go foch yourself John. What the hell do *I* have to do with this discussion? You really are an asshole. JimH, You are Harry are screwing up big time, you keep forgetting who you have in your bozo bin (or is it septic tank) and responding directly to their post. You are suppossed to pretend you have JohnH filtered and then you, Harry and Don can make juvenile insults without responding directly to JohnH. But to the point, you do like to cut and paste and then rewrite the post you are responding so you can change the meaning of the original person's post. It was a trick you learned from Skipper and Harry. |
NCLB
On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 02:46:06 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote: On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 21:28:36 -0500, John H. wrote: If the tests are developed and administered properly, the teachers don't know what's on the test anyway. They know what the standards of learning are, and they try to ensure the students can meet the standards. Unfortunately, you are out of touch. That may be how it used to work, but not under the new NCLB "Standard". The reason? They have to teach across a broad population from the slowest to the brightest including those who can't/won't learn. They have to up the high end as far as possible to raise the average to acceptable levels for continued funding or the dreaded take over by the State. So, are you saying that the teachers in CT know what the test questions will be and actually use those questions to design their curriculum? Then your school system has big problems. Why does it work in Virginia, but not in your school district? We've been using the Virginia Standards of Learning (SOL) test for years and it meets all the requirements of the NCLB. -- John H |
NCLB
On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 02:42:18 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote: On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 21:29:59 -0500, John H. wrote: On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 01:20:49 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote: On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 16:33:34 -0800 (PST), Chuck Gould wrote: On Feb 10, 12:25?pm, Short Wave Sportfishing Talk to middle and high school teachers about NCLB and see what they say about the system. It's a total disaster. ?And in states that require mainstreaming of those children who are developmentally, physically, mentally or emotionally "challenged", it's almost impossible to achieve the standards required by NCLB. Both of my kids are teaching in the classroom. My son (HS Social Studies) as a career and my daughter (MS Science) as a step toward eventually becoming a school administrator. The have been some positive aspects of the NCLB. For instance, teachers must demonstrate a level of expertise in the subjec they teach. The schools can't simply hire a guy because he's a great football coach and then say, "Oh, yeah...and you'll be teaching two periods of astronomy every morning so better read a chapter or two ahead of the students in the text book. Oh, and next semester you'll be teaching advanced trig, but don't worry about that- nobody will understand the subject well enought to realize you have no facility what-so-ever for math." Well, I would think that's a slight exaggeration. In CT, MA, RI and NY you have to be certified to teach both subject and grade level. Maybe it's different out there in the Great Northwest, but it's been that way here for at least 30 years and longer as Mrs. Wave will be finishing her 38th year this June. As far as I know, the only thing that the NCLB act did was formalize that practice nationally - I can't speak to areas outside of NE. But in general, the system is not so good. Far too many districts are strictly "teaching to the test". My son has several classes of HS freshmen who are spending the entire 9th grade simply studying to pas the 10th grade NCLB test- it's that critical to the district that nearly all the 10th graders pass so that the district will continue to get federal school dollars. That's about the size of it ok. Horse****. Not at all - it's a fact. Ask the next question - do the teachers know the test questions? What do you think they teach to? If so, then the whole thing's been compromised anyway. That's the point. That's the point where *you* live. That's not the point where standards are established, used for curriculum design, taught, and tested. Here the teachers have no idea of the test questions on the tests. In fact, the testing room is proctored to ensure the teachers don't give help to the kids taking the test. What I see is a state which doesn't want to use standards (CT) being compared to a state which uses them successfully. I suppose it's another way to put down Bush - keep whining that NCLB won't work. -- John H |
NCLB
On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 20:58:53 -0800, "Calif Bill"
wrote: "Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message .. . On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 21:29:59 -0500, John H. wrote: On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 01:20:49 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote: On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 16:33:34 -0800 (PST), Chuck Gould wrote: On Feb 10, 12:25?pm, Short Wave Sportfishing Talk to middle and high school teachers about NCLB and see what they say about the system. It's a total disaster. ?And in states that require mainstreaming of those children who are developmentally, physically, mentally or emotionally "challenged", it's almost impossible to achieve the standards required by NCLB. Both of my kids are teaching in the classroom. My son (HS Social Studies) as a career and my daughter (MS Science) as a step toward eventually becoming a school administrator. The have been some positive aspects of the NCLB. For instance, teachers must demonstrate a level of expertise in the subjec they teach. The schools can't simply hire a guy because he's a great football coach and then say, "Oh, yeah...and you'll be teaching two periods of astronomy every morning so better read a chapter or two ahead of the students in the text book. Oh, and next semester you'll be teaching advanced trig, but don't worry about that- nobody will understand the subject well enought to realize you have no facility what-so-ever for math." Well, I would think that's a slight exaggeration. In CT, MA, RI and NY you have to be certified to teach both subject and grade level. Maybe it's different out there in the Great Northwest, but it's been that way here for at least 30 years and longer as Mrs. Wave will be finishing her 38th year this June. As far as I know, the only thing that the NCLB act did was formalize that practice nationally - I can't speak to areas outside of NE. But in general, the system is not so good. Far too many districts are strictly "teaching to the test". My son has several classes of HS freshmen who are spending the entire 9th grade simply studying to pas the 10th grade NCLB test- it's that critical to the district that nearly all the 10th graders pass so that the district will continue to get federal school dollars. That's about the size of it ok. Horse****. Not at all - it's a fact. Ask the next question - do the teachers know the test questions? What do you think they teach to? If so, then the whole thing's been compromised anyway. That's the point. True. Have been complaints out here of the teaching to the test. No cures, they still teach to the test. Easily fixed, if so desired. Don't let the teachers see the test. -- John H |
NCLB
On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 19:39:53 -0800 (PST), Chuck Gould
wrote: Using the challenged as an example of why NCLB doesn't work makes very little sense. In states with a very strong teachers' union, NCLB doesn't work. Why? Because the unions don't like their teachers having to meet standards. To say that standards shouldn't be used to judge the educational process makes absolutely no sense. To say that children shouldn't be taught a curriculum which enables them to meet the standards makes even less sense. To say that children shouldn't be tested to ensure they meet the standards makes the least sense of all. -- John H- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - One of the risks of rigidly enforced "national cirriculum standards" is the potential for the federal government to manipulate too many of the details of public education. Did I say something about 'national curriculum standards'. There is always the potential for the federal government to do as you say. You are simply coming up with another excuse here. The establishment of minimal standards for various subjects should not *have* to be a federal government job. Sadly, too many states don't or didn't have standards. For example: What if, in order to qualify for federal aid, a school district were *required* to teach the "theory of intelligent design" enough hours to equal any time spent on the "theory of evolution"? Once we are to that step, how remote would it be to have a very progressive or very conservative government then dictate that the theory of intelligent design was to be the *only* theory discussed in the classroom- (or, conversely, that it could not be mentioned at all). What if, what if, what if. "If" is for children building daydreams. What if the federal government forced all 13 year-olds to join the Hitler Youth Group? Shall we teach as a matter of science, rather than faith, that the human embryo has a soul at the moment of conception and that abortion is therefore a "sin"? Shall we teach that responsible teenagers take precautions to avoid STD's and pregnancy- or shall we teach that responsible teenagers just say "no" to sex, drugs, and alcohol? Another 'what if'. Even more liberal! At the moment of conception a life is formed. Abortion then becomes the taking of a life. In most civil areas of the world, taking a life is considered wrong, although maybe not defined as 'sin'. Point is, that some of these decisions should be made at the local level and reflect the values of the communities in which the schools are located. If some district in the Bible Belt wants to concentrate on Intelligent Design as the best available theory explaining the origin and modification of species, then that district should be accountable first to the local taxpayers supporting the school rather than first accountable to a national standard that (might possibly) mandate Evolution as the preferred explanation.. Yes, some of those decisions should be made locally. You are confusing standards and curriculum. Standards determine how well a student should understand a given subject. Not all subjects are subject to meeting 'standards'. Photography, for example, is taught locally but not testable by the state. If some Nazi-like group somehow ascended to federal power 100 years from now, of what would the "official national cirriculum" be likely to consist? Scary to contemplate. If it's scary, don't vote for Hillary or Obama. They'll just get us one step closer. -- John H |
Apology to gay losers
On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 13:12:42 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote: On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 07:57:04 -0500, John H. wrote: And you used to teach? Who certified you - Wal-Mart? JimH's argument methods...cut what you don't like and make comments about the rest. I was certified by the state of Virginia, Tom. Sorry - that was tounge and cheek. My apologies. What I meant to say was that, at least in this state, you have to be certified to teach. That certification is set to state standards and you have to pass a core curriculum, pass a subject area knowledge test, be mentored for a minimum of one year as a teacher then pass the BEST program which is a whole 'nother story. Very similar to the certification requirements in Virginia. Here the test is called the Praxis. To teach high school math, a teacher must pass two of them, one general and one math specific. No offense meant. With respect to the state and standards - it is true that the state sets standards. However your interpretation of "standards" and their interpretation of "standards" is very different. I can't address that. Here, a standard may be: "The student will solve multistep linear equations and inequalities in one variable, solve literal equations (formulas) for a given variable, and apply these skills to solve practical problems. Graphing calculators will be used to confirm algebraic solutions." http://tinyurl.com/2b784r Here, every Mastery Test is written, ordered and controlled by the state. It is corrected by the state and the statistics developed from the test are controlled by the state. Much like the SAT/GAT prep pre-testing program and "pass/fail" classes, the test is taught directly to the students. You mean to say that the tests are given to the teachers early enough in the year for them to teach only the test questions? If that's the case, then it's simple fraud. You've got a right to complain, but not about NCLB. There is a whole industry, Kaplan's comes to mind, that practically teaches the SAT, test taking concepts, essay prompts, logical progression of answer plots - it's teaching the test. A lot of the Mastery Test prep program is based on Kaplan's techniques I believe. I'd have to ask Mrs. Wave to be exact. Yes, there are many 'tricks' to taking a multiple choice test, just as there are many 'tricks' to the design of detractors and solutions to the questions on the test. Students should have a general understanding of how to take a multiple choice test, how to figure the odds, and when to guess and not guess. Teaching that is *not* 'teaching THE test', but teaching 'test taking'. Be that as it may, I don't see how you can look at it any other way than teaching the test. -- John H |
Apology to gay losers
On Feb 11, 8:19*am, "JimH" wrote:
On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 07:57:04 -0500, John H. wrote: On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 02:52:14 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote: On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 21:16:23 -0500, John H. wrote: On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 16:23:55 -0800 (PST), Chuck Gould wrote: On Feb 10, 12:06?pm, John H. The basis for even considering education in the discussion was a claim that D's oppose "No Child Left Behind", and thaty they do so because if the amount of education were increased across the country the number of people supporting the D's would decrease. Which, by the way, was a valid claim. -- Then according to your theory, the states with the greatest numbers of Republicans will be those states with the most successful and comprehensive educational systems. By the same token, the states with the smallest number of Republicans will be those states where the Democrats have succeeded on destroying the education system and thereby protecting their base. Care to offer some examples? Half *a dozen or so of each would be sufficient to establish a trend, rather than an exception. Education isn't a statewide function anywhere that I know of. It's a county or city function normally. Unbelievable. And you used to teach? *Who certified you - Wal-Mart? JimH's argument methods...cut what you don't like and make comments about the rest. Go foch yourself John. *What the hell do *I* have to do with this discussion? You really are an asshole.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Does your priest know you act like that, Jim? |
Apology to gay losers
On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 08:19:34 -0500, "JimH" wrote:
On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 07:57:04 -0500, John H. wrote: On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 02:52:14 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote: On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 21:16:23 -0500, John H. wrote: On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 16:23:55 -0800 (PST), Chuck Gould wrote: On Feb 10, 12:06?pm, John H. The basis for even considering education in the discussion was a claim that D's oppose "No Child Left Behind", and thaty they do so because if the amount of education were increased across the country the number of people supporting the D's would decrease. Which, by the way, was a valid claim. -- Then according to your theory, the states with the greatest numbers of Republicans will be those states with the most successful and comprehensive educational systems. By the same token, the states with the smallest number of Republicans will be those states where the Democrats have succeeded on destroying the education system and thereby protecting their base. Care to offer some examples? Half a dozen or so of each would be sufficient to establish a trend, rather than an exception. Education isn't a statewide function anywhere that I know of. It's a county or city function normally. Unbelievable. And you used to teach? Who certified you - Wal-Mart? JimH's argument methods...cut what you don't like and make comments about the rest. Go foch yourself John. What the hell do *I* have to do with this discussion? You really are an asshole. Facts are facts, Jimh. If you don't like seeing your acts in public, don't perform them. -- John H |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:20 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com