Interesting how leopards never change their spots. Clarence Page is one of them. He takes the Reps on the Super Committee, indeed, all Reps who favor spending cuts over higher taxes, to task. It's their fault the SC didn't succeed because they refused "to cut a deal." Yep, curioser and curioser. Why is it that the Reps always need "to cut a deal," never the Dems? How about, for once, the Dems don't get everything they want? In fact, how about Americans getting something they want, not some half-baked "compromise," "bi-partisanship," or whatever new name is used to call that hooey? This Page guy cites some poll, but not naming it, that claims Americans are willing to pay higher taxes and cut spending to reduce the deficit. Maybe, maybe not...but I don't know of many people who want higher taxes, unless they are on the "other guy." And, of this, "higher taxes and cut spending," the history of the past four or five decades has been "a deal," one which the Dems have lied. They get an agreement for more taxes and reduced spending, then renege on "the deal." They don't reduce spending, merely going back to the dolts who keep agreeing to "deals" the Reps must know aren't being kept. Fools, all of them.
BTW, I got a laugh out of the "cartoon" on the same page. OK, it wasn't a cartoon, but a photo that accompanied the column. Its caption read, "Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget." Yep, that's really the old committee's title..."Responsible." Heh Heh.
I see Barney Frank is leaving the House. No doubt he'll be lionized by the media. There's no choice. To point out how much he hurt the country would be "homophobic." Bah! The guy is a major reason for, at least, the housing trouble. Just check his record on it, specifically Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Or, perhaps, I am wrong, that there was nothing wrong with the housing market, Fannie, and Freddie, among other things. He's another guy who is addicted to spending other people's money because he knows what's good for us better than we do. I wonder why there's been no investigation, no real investigation, into Fannie and Freddie, esp the high salaries and bonuses their obvious less than capable managers received.
Here's another one of those "You Can't Make This Stuff Up" stories. Actually, it's a bunch of them, from George Will. At least half a dozen states, maybe more, and who knows how many local gov'ts have shut down kids' lemonade/Kool-Aid stands because they didn't procure the necessary licenses from whatever bureaucracies. Imagine that, telling kids they can't have their lemonade/Kool-Aid stands because the gov't is there to protect us from them (and from us)! How can we let the fools continue with this crap??????
I had a talk with a guy a few weeks ago about the Wayne Co mess, the "patronage" among politicians and their friends, the "cronyism" that is so lambasted everywhere else. I was assured that Ficano "is OK," that he wasn't like his predecessor(s). Hmmm.... So, in yesterday's newspaper comes this--he has 85 "at-will" appointees who make at least $100,000. Where to start? Let's see, that number, 85, is more than Detroit, Oak Co, and Macomb Co combined. Oh, you say, but Wayne Co is larger than those. OK, let's toss in the number of "at-will" appointments by the state/governor. Oh, if we do that, the number in Wayne Co is still more than all the other combined. Hmmm.... $100,000 a year? Gee, I wonder what it is that these guys do. What is it they do that, say, Bittinger and Kittle couldn't do--and did do, for a far lot less money? What ever happened to the Founders' concept of citizen-servants or even Frederick the Great's "first servant of the servants?"
First, they came after the communists, but I wasn't a communist, so I said nothing. Then they came after the Gypsies, but I wasn't a Gypsie, so I said nothing. Then they came after the Jews, but I wasn't a Jew, so I said nothing.... Then they came after the lemonade/Kool-Aid stands, but I didn't have a lemonade/Kool-Aid stand, so I said nothing. I'm not being frivolous or irreverent here, but mindful of the Dutch editor who said of the censorship over the Muhammad cartoons, "I was too busy enjoying my freedom to do anything to protect it." Yep, that's us. As long as we can watch the NFL on CBS, Dancing with the Stars, the Simpsons, I guess we're OK. Death, slow death, by gov't is for the other guy.
More from Will: Yale is offering a course on "How people with disabilities are portrayed in fiction." Huh? Study after study shows that our college grads, yes even our Ivy Leaguers, don't know a lot. So, this is being offered. And the part of the course description Will adds is funny, if it wasn't true. Will reminds us that Obama has said ATMs have cost us many jobs and that Jesse Jackson Jr claims I-Pads are "responsible for eliminating thousands of American jobs [including] all of the jobs associated with paper." And these elitists think they are smarter than the rest of us?
In the education dept, Rahm Emanuel sends his kids to private, not public, schools, admitting he made the choice, not as the mayor of Chicago, but "as a father." Hmmm, there's one for thought. And, in a Seattle school, Easter eggs are now called "spring spheres." Yep, there are our teachers, too. How much can a flight from Denver to Ely, NV cost? Ignoring who might actually be making that flight, the federal gov't contributes almost $4000 to subsidize passenger service, that's each ticket!, between the two "hot spots."
Good joke, he adds. "A Spaniard, an Italian, and a Greek go into a bar. They drink until dawn. Who pays the tab? A German." I suppose, with some of the talk going on in DC, soon the punch line will be "An American."
Out to run before the kids get up.
Wednesday, November 30, 2011
Thursday, November 24, 2011
Under My Government
Decades ago, a Free Press columnist, Judd Arnett, had a frequent column entitled "Under My Government." In it, he solved the problems of, if not the world, at least our United States. So, here goes my version of "Under My Government."
College athletes would have to be bona fide students, not sham students. I heard an interview with an Amherst professor at halftime of a Jeffs game a few weeks ago. He said something like, "Amherst players have to take the same classes and do the same work as everyone here." Yep, that's how it should be. If they can't handle it, find someplace else to play, but not at a college. People, namely professors, coaches, and alumni, if caught helping players to evade this academic responsibility should be charged with fraud or some other crime. The same goes for college administrators who aid and abet, or even look the other way.
Any players, at whatever levels, should be penalized for showboating. Especially so are those who carry on after making a tackle when their team is losing by four TDs. A second violation will result in "disqualification" from participation.
There will be no high school football playoffs. I was reminded of this in an e-mail by one of my college teammates, who was getting set to go to a Thanksgiving Day game, the last one of the season in CT, his old HS vs the biggest rival. What's wrong with ending a season that way? One of my buddies noted how much fun playing in the Rubber Bowl in Akron on Thanksgiving Day. Without the playoffs, the high school football season is 12-13 weeks long, far too much. And what's wrong with not having a champion "on the field?" Why can't people debate what team is best? How much more interesting! In '73, Fordson and cross-town rival Edsel Ford played the last game of the season; both were undefeated and ranked #2 and #3 respectively. What a great game to finish with! FHS won by about 4o points and yet didn't finish ranked #1 in the newspaper poll, the only rankings at the time. What a great conversation starter for years and years to come.
For that matter, colleges would return to the old bowl system, getting rid of this BCS crap. We don't need a "champion on the field." Leave all that to the professionals. We can have voting, by coaches and by writers. Then we can argue all winter, spring, and summer long about how right or wrong they were. That's much more fun.
High school basketball? A tournament? Well, OK, maybe. But, I'd cut the season to 18 instead of 20 games or limit the number of weeks--to play 20 games, a team needs to play twice a week and that includes during the Chris break. And there would be no more 40+ game baseball or softball seasons in HS either. I'd go down the list and pare back the number of contests in all sports if needed.
Recent immigrants to the US will not immediately qualify for welfare. Those who circumvent this law will be deported--after being fined or made to pay back. If they don't have any money, they can pick up papers along the side of the road, pick weeds, etc.
Elected officials cannot tell people what kind of light bulbs to use, what types of televisions to watch, what kind of cars to buy, etc. They should not be able to tell me what kind of food, fast food, I can or can't eat. I'm a big boy and can make decisions for myself.
Elected officials must also follow the same laws we do. For instance, Nancy Pelosi and John Boehner engaged in inside trading based on what they had exclusive knowledge about and did nothing but make money. Martha Stewart and many others went to jail. NO MORE!
Politicians who promise one thing during campaigns and then do another once elected would be prosecuted for fraud. Let a jury of their peers decide their fate.
School administrators will be chosen from among the best teachers, not the worst or, at the least, the most mediocre. And, they will be required to teach at least one class each semester or term so they don't forget what it's like to teach.
"Greed" will be applied to more than CEOs, Big Oil, Wall Street, or Big Bankers. They don't hold a monopoly on greed. What about the Hollywood-types, professional athletes, hippy-rock singers, etc.? They, too, will then be wearing the same label. Gas station owners who charge a dime or more for credit card purchases will have to justify the extra money or be compelled to post a sign reading, "WE ARE GREEDY!" I think we might also do the same for electricians, plumbers, etc. who charge more for a half hour of work than I do in teaching two nights a week.
Public shame and humiliation will return. This will help to hold people accountable and responsible for their actions. It will be illegal to continue with "Let's not point fingers," "Let's not cast blame," "Let's move on," "Let's get beyond this," "Let's not look at the past," etc. Those who deserve blame will be identified and held accountable.
Politicians who cut taxes (or at least make speeches touting tax cuts) in election years, after ranting against them in the past, will have to wear large campaign buttons that read, "Fraud" or "Hypocrite."
That should help get our new gov't off the ground....
College athletes would have to be bona fide students, not sham students. I heard an interview with an Amherst professor at halftime of a Jeffs game a few weeks ago. He said something like, "Amherst players have to take the same classes and do the same work as everyone here." Yep, that's how it should be. If they can't handle it, find someplace else to play, but not at a college. People, namely professors, coaches, and alumni, if caught helping players to evade this academic responsibility should be charged with fraud or some other crime. The same goes for college administrators who aid and abet, or even look the other way.
Any players, at whatever levels, should be penalized for showboating. Especially so are those who carry on after making a tackle when their team is losing by four TDs. A second violation will result in "disqualification" from participation.
There will be no high school football playoffs. I was reminded of this in an e-mail by one of my college teammates, who was getting set to go to a Thanksgiving Day game, the last one of the season in CT, his old HS vs the biggest rival. What's wrong with ending a season that way? One of my buddies noted how much fun playing in the Rubber Bowl in Akron on Thanksgiving Day. Without the playoffs, the high school football season is 12-13 weeks long, far too much. And what's wrong with not having a champion "on the field?" Why can't people debate what team is best? How much more interesting! In '73, Fordson and cross-town rival Edsel Ford played the last game of the season; both were undefeated and ranked #2 and #3 respectively. What a great game to finish with! FHS won by about 4o points and yet didn't finish ranked #1 in the newspaper poll, the only rankings at the time. What a great conversation starter for years and years to come.
For that matter, colleges would return to the old bowl system, getting rid of this BCS crap. We don't need a "champion on the field." Leave all that to the professionals. We can have voting, by coaches and by writers. Then we can argue all winter, spring, and summer long about how right or wrong they were. That's much more fun.
High school basketball? A tournament? Well, OK, maybe. But, I'd cut the season to 18 instead of 20 games or limit the number of weeks--to play 20 games, a team needs to play twice a week and that includes during the Chris break. And there would be no more 40+ game baseball or softball seasons in HS either. I'd go down the list and pare back the number of contests in all sports if needed.
Recent immigrants to the US will not immediately qualify for welfare. Those who circumvent this law will be deported--after being fined or made to pay back. If they don't have any money, they can pick up papers along the side of the road, pick weeds, etc.
Elected officials cannot tell people what kind of light bulbs to use, what types of televisions to watch, what kind of cars to buy, etc. They should not be able to tell me what kind of food, fast food, I can or can't eat. I'm a big boy and can make decisions for myself.
Elected officials must also follow the same laws we do. For instance, Nancy Pelosi and John Boehner engaged in inside trading based on what they had exclusive knowledge about and did nothing but make money. Martha Stewart and many others went to jail. NO MORE!
Politicians who promise one thing during campaigns and then do another once elected would be prosecuted for fraud. Let a jury of their peers decide their fate.
School administrators will be chosen from among the best teachers, not the worst or, at the least, the most mediocre. And, they will be required to teach at least one class each semester or term so they don't forget what it's like to teach.
"Greed" will be applied to more than CEOs, Big Oil, Wall Street, or Big Bankers. They don't hold a monopoly on greed. What about the Hollywood-types, professional athletes, hippy-rock singers, etc.? They, too, will then be wearing the same label. Gas station owners who charge a dime or more for credit card purchases will have to justify the extra money or be compelled to post a sign reading, "WE ARE GREEDY!" I think we might also do the same for electricians, plumbers, etc. who charge more for a half hour of work than I do in teaching two nights a week.
Public shame and humiliation will return. This will help to hold people accountable and responsible for their actions. It will be illegal to continue with "Let's not point fingers," "Let's not cast blame," "Let's move on," "Let's get beyond this," "Let's not look at the past," etc. Those who deserve blame will be identified and held accountable.
Politicians who cut taxes (or at least make speeches touting tax cuts) in election years, after ranting against them in the past, will have to wear large campaign buttons that read, "Fraud" or "Hypocrite."
That should help get our new gov't off the ground....
Wednesday, November 23, 2011
"The Two Most Important Questions"
Bill Bennett the other day claimed that the two most important questions a society can ask of itself are "Who are the teachers?" and "What are they teaching?" I don't know if they are the most important, but they are right up near the top.
And, upon reflection, the answers don't exactly inspire confidence that we are on the correct path. I'll preface my brief remarks by saying there are some great, great teachers out there. I know that from personal experience. And, in fact, I commiserate over their frustration with incompetent and insecure administrators, unprepared and unmotivated students, and a society that rewards celebrity far more than achievement.
But, if I recall correctly (and I don't remember the studies), the teachers of the past 30 years wouldn't have been admitted to colleges 40 or 50 years ago. The education majors of today, with their easy education classes, still have the lowest GPAs of any college major. To answer the first question, those are our teachers (again, recognizing there are exceptions, some great teachers out there).
And they buy into all the crap the colleges, media, etc. throw at them. For instance, how many classes in the schools incorporate "man-made global warming" into their lessons/studies, even though it's purely theoretical, not at all provable (at least it hasn't been yet)? How many claim that carbon dioxide is a "pollutant," when it's actually a vital component of the eco-system? How many echo that FDR was a "great President" because that's what their textbooks and college professors have insisted? The list goes on. What follows from the previous paragraph is that there are no critical-thinking skills; there is no ability or even thought of questioning what is being taught. So, the same stuff gets passed down to current generations of students. What is it the computer geeks say, "Garbage in, Garbage out?"
Speaking of "out," out to take my casserole out of the oven and pop in my berry pie.
And, upon reflection, the answers don't exactly inspire confidence that we are on the correct path. I'll preface my brief remarks by saying there are some great, great teachers out there. I know that from personal experience. And, in fact, I commiserate over their frustration with incompetent and insecure administrators, unprepared and unmotivated students, and a society that rewards celebrity far more than achievement.
But, if I recall correctly (and I don't remember the studies), the teachers of the past 30 years wouldn't have been admitted to colleges 40 or 50 years ago. The education majors of today, with their easy education classes, still have the lowest GPAs of any college major. To answer the first question, those are our teachers (again, recognizing there are exceptions, some great teachers out there).
And they buy into all the crap the colleges, media, etc. throw at them. For instance, how many classes in the schools incorporate "man-made global warming" into their lessons/studies, even though it's purely theoretical, not at all provable (at least it hasn't been yet)? How many claim that carbon dioxide is a "pollutant," when it's actually a vital component of the eco-system? How many echo that FDR was a "great President" because that's what their textbooks and college professors have insisted? The list goes on. What follows from the previous paragraph is that there are no critical-thinking skills; there is no ability or even thought of questioning what is being taught. So, the same stuff gets passed down to current generations of students. What is it the computer geeks say, "Garbage in, Garbage out?"
Speaking of "out," out to take my casserole out of the oven and pop in my berry pie.
Saturday, November 19, 2011
Reminders
I'm glad newspapers like The Oakland Press run columns by people like E.J. Dionne. It's good to be reminded of how bereft of reality many columnists are. This guy is out of it. Really, though, I do wonder how anyone can pay him for what he writes. Today, he talks about "mindless opposition to government." "Mindless?" Of course, he's using this gambit to attack conservatives, who, according to Dionne are stupid. OK, he sort of makes it seem he doesn't give such a blanket indictment by signalling Bill Bennett as reasonable. But, c'mon.... Opposition to gov't isn't mindless in most people concerned with the growth of the federal gov't, its intrusion into people's lives, and its rewards for bad behavior. The gov't has no business telling me what kind of light bulbs I have to use, what type of television I must have, what sort of car I will have to drive, etc. It's none of gov't's business. That the gov't debt is completely ridiculous, amounts nobody can reasonably fathom cannot be argued by anyone with half a brain. The malfeasance of corporate execs in banking, the auto industry, etc. was rewarded with the bailouts; members of Congress can engage in insider trading that sent Martha Stewart and others to jail; mothers are encouraged to have more and more babies with whatever fathers they can find because the gov't steals our money to give to them. But, Dionne insists opposition to gov't is "mindless." And that comes from someone whose columns are almost always "mindless."
On the same page, Walter Williams has this to say about Robert Reich, "Berkley's pretend economist." Great line!
On the same page, Walter Williams has this to say about Robert Reich, "Berkley's pretend economist." Great line!
Friday, November 11, 2011
Fumbling
I guess I could never be a candidate for President. When Rick Perry the other night in the OU debate (and it's not a debate) couldn't remember the third Cabinet post he'd eliminate or curtail, the pundits claimed that was the end of his candidacy. I forget stuff all of the time. The very next day, in class, I was going over the Zimmerman Telegram from the First World War. I couldn't remember that it is/was also called the Z Note and the Z Dispatch. I've taught this stuff, what?, a million times? But I couldn't recall those until, as usual, I hit the expressway on the drive home.
Should this disqualify someone for President? Hmmm. Wouldn't that same President be surrounded by dozens of aides who might give him a cue? And hasn't Obama fumbled for words occasionally? Where were the comments about those? Don't we all forget things, things we know very well?
Should this disqualify someone for President? Hmmm. Wouldn't that same President be surrounded by dozens of aides who might give him a cue? And hasn't Obama fumbled for words occasionally? Where were the comments about those? Don't we all forget things, things we know very well?
Mottos and Goals?
I've always wondered about mottos and goals of individuals and teams. I've never been a big fan of them. No doubt, when teams win championships, they cite their mottos and goals. "We won this because we set a goal...." Hmmm.... Didn't a lot of teams set goals, even to win the same championships? So, why was it one goal worked, but more than one didn't? I'm not saying failure to win a championship means a failed season; not at all. Look at all the tee shirts and signs in weight rooms...it was those that played major roles in winning. So, does that mean all the losing teams didn't have tee shirts and signs? Is that all it takes? If so, why aren't there more championship teams? Oh, that's why.....
Why does one need a goal or a motto to work hard, to try one's best, to play hard? I don't think it's necessary. I don't need a tee shirt to tell me I work harder than you so I finished ahead of you, whether I did or didn't.
My guess the mottos and shirts are for the times the playing days are over. Isn't everyone, ten years afterward, "All-League" or "All-State" or whatever "All-" they want to believe they were? I even had one guy tell me he was a high school "All-American," but, it seemed odd to me, wasn't offered a college scholarship--not Div 1, not Div 2, not Div 3, or even some community college. It's sort of like Springsteen's "Glory Days."
I suppose these things don't hurt, but I'd guess they are vastly overrated, given far too much credit because the winner always seem to wear the shirts, spout the mottos, etc. Gee, what would it look like if the losers are wearing the same shirts, spouting the same mottos?
Wouldn't practicing and playing hard, trying to be the best one can be just as good?
Why does one need a goal or a motto to work hard, to try one's best, to play hard? I don't think it's necessary. I don't need a tee shirt to tell me I work harder than you so I finished ahead of you, whether I did or didn't.
My guess the mottos and shirts are for the times the playing days are over. Isn't everyone, ten years afterward, "All-League" or "All-State" or whatever "All-" they want to believe they were? I even had one guy tell me he was a high school "All-American," but, it seemed odd to me, wasn't offered a college scholarship--not Div 1, not Div 2, not Div 3, or even some community college. It's sort of like Springsteen's "Glory Days."
I suppose these things don't hurt, but I'd guess they are vastly overrated, given far too much credit because the winner always seem to wear the shirts, spout the mottos, etc. Gee, what would it look like if the losers are wearing the same shirts, spouting the same mottos?
Wouldn't practicing and playing hard, trying to be the best one can be just as good?
Wednesday, November 9, 2011
Education
I'm opposed to the incessant state and national mania surrounding standardized testing. On the whole, it's counterproductive, doesn't really measure education, leads to cheating (deliberate or otherwise), etc. But I fully understand the clamors for it.
People can't trust teachers any more. For instance, how is one to assess a school where the GPA for all students is 3.5 or higher? How can a whole dept have grades that average to 3.2? At some universities A- or B+ is the average course grade. C'mon, we've all seen the products of these schools and depts and they certainly don't merit grades like that. So, why, then, are such grades given? Hence, the need for standardized testing. Teachers and schools say one thing (in giving high grades) when the evidence points in the opposite direction. And, compounding this is the claim by teachers and administrators of demanding higher standards. Bologna/Baloney!
Britain has a national system, one that is highly resented by teachers and students alike. But it serves its purpose: it keeps educational programs/classes, etc. honest.
On the college/university level, and I suspect in the public schools as well, the number of administrators and other nonteaching employees has multiplied over the recent decades. The primary purpose of schools is no longer classroom learning, that is, education.
Far too many instructors at all levels have become enamored with technology. Technology, no doubt, has its place. But it has become a way to avoid real teaching. Oh, the justification is that today's students relate more to the visual, the video games (oops! did I mean to write that? yep.), but face-to-face academic confrontation, the stuff of learning, is lost.
Yet, many US colleges and universities remain the standards for the rest of the world to envy and try to emulate. I guess a good question is why other colleges and universities and even public schools don't try to emulate (and adapt, obviously, for age/grade/level differences) the teaching at these top schools. (See my earlier post on the Socratic method for one possible explanation why they don't.) It's almost as if we design our schools with the lowest common denominators in mind, setting up students for the most mediocre of educations.
But, who will listen? The education-types will bring out all kinds of studies, some flawed, some deliberately misleading, some with results all too predictable because of current methods to justify the latest trendy fashion in education. But how many have actually tried what worked in the past, what works at the best colleges and universities? Has anyone tried hard work, with lots of reading and writing? Has anyone tried really high standards? If so, they are in the minority.
People can't trust teachers any more. For instance, how is one to assess a school where the GPA for all students is 3.5 or higher? How can a whole dept have grades that average to 3.2? At some universities A- or B+ is the average course grade. C'mon, we've all seen the products of these schools and depts and they certainly don't merit grades like that. So, why, then, are such grades given? Hence, the need for standardized testing. Teachers and schools say one thing (in giving high grades) when the evidence points in the opposite direction. And, compounding this is the claim by teachers and administrators of demanding higher standards. Bologna/Baloney!
Britain has a national system, one that is highly resented by teachers and students alike. But it serves its purpose: it keeps educational programs/classes, etc. honest.
On the college/university level, and I suspect in the public schools as well, the number of administrators and other nonteaching employees has multiplied over the recent decades. The primary purpose of schools is no longer classroom learning, that is, education.
Far too many instructors at all levels have become enamored with technology. Technology, no doubt, has its place. But it has become a way to avoid real teaching. Oh, the justification is that today's students relate more to the visual, the video games (oops! did I mean to write that? yep.), but face-to-face academic confrontation, the stuff of learning, is lost.
Yet, many US colleges and universities remain the standards for the rest of the world to envy and try to emulate. I guess a good question is why other colleges and universities and even public schools don't try to emulate (and adapt, obviously, for age/grade/level differences) the teaching at these top schools. (See my earlier post on the Socratic method for one possible explanation why they don't.) It's almost as if we design our schools with the lowest common denominators in mind, setting up students for the most mediocre of educations.
But, who will listen? The education-types will bring out all kinds of studies, some flawed, some deliberately misleading, some with results all too predictable because of current methods to justify the latest trendy fashion in education. But how many have actually tried what worked in the past, what works at the best colleges and universities? Has anyone tried hard work, with lots of reading and writing? Has anyone tried really high standards? If so, they are in the minority.
Monday, November 7, 2011
Worth?
Out running the other AM, I ran past a guy loading his SUV outside a very, very nice house on a lake. The whole package must have cost a pretty penny. And, then, the guy must have had a job that paid a whole lot. I thought, "I wonder if this guy thinks he is worth it [his pay]." No doubt the answer is he does. How about his co-workers or others who do the same type of work he does? Does he think, do they think they are worth what they are paid? My guess is they think so. How about the UAW folks who received $6000 merely for ratifying their recent contract(s) with the auto companies? Of course, just for ratifying, they think they deserve the money. Why, then, is it always teachers (and other public employees) who are "overpaid" and get "extravagant perks" such as health insurance and retirement packages? Remember, I still think far too many teachers get far too much money (while others don't get nearly enough). Yet, the $100,000 incentive to retire at the auto companies makes my incentive pale in comparison (and, it was a one-time deal with the school district). OK, I'm not arguing others aren't what they get paid (although maybe I could). What concerns me is the guy with the mansion on the lake, with the car that costs as much as my house and the guy who makes $100,000 working in a factory. Many of them think teachers make too much money. Many of them think the bankers, Big Oil, Wall Street, etc. are "greedy." I guess it's in one's definition of "greed," isn't it?
I also saw where some school board member (I forget if it was local or state) thinks teachers should be compelled to undertake some after-school activities. I don't remember if it was community-based or just within a school or school district. But I bristle as these do-gooders! First, I hope they are volunteering their time in such endeavors. Second, do they expect teachers to do this for free? No doubt they do. So, I would be, for free, giving up time with my own family, my own children to do things for other people's children? Is that it? Yeah, right. Third, who says many teachers don't already do things like this, maybe not with the school district, but with other community organizations?
Maybe I don't know the entire story, but it seems to me we have a strange system of justice here. In Detroit, a judge acknowledged that the mayor's people destroyed evidence against him in the case of a murdered stripper/party girl, then dismissed the lawsuit due to a lack of evidence. What? Is it that simple to beat the rap? Somehow/Someway, there's something rotten in Denmark.
I also saw where some school board member (I forget if it was local or state) thinks teachers should be compelled to undertake some after-school activities. I don't remember if it was community-based or just within a school or school district. But I bristle as these do-gooders! First, I hope they are volunteering their time in such endeavors. Second, do they expect teachers to do this for free? No doubt they do. So, I would be, for free, giving up time with my own family, my own children to do things for other people's children? Is that it? Yeah, right. Third, who says many teachers don't already do things like this, maybe not with the school district, but with other community organizations?
Maybe I don't know the entire story, but it seems to me we have a strange system of justice here. In Detroit, a judge acknowledged that the mayor's people destroyed evidence against him in the case of a murdered stripper/party girl, then dismissed the lawsuit due to a lack of evidence. What? Is it that simple to beat the rap? Somehow/Someway, there's something rotten in Denmark.
Friday, November 4, 2011
Priceless
What is it the commercials say, "Priceless?" Well that's what about 10-15 minutes outside this evening were, "Priceless!" Michael and I were outside with binoculars looking for the International Space Station, which was scheduled to be overhead just before 8:00.
Waiting, we first focused our binocks on Venus, rising in the Eastern sky. Then we took in a bit of the half moon. While searching for the ISS, suddenly a "shooting star" came flying across a neighbor's roof! And that was particularly cool because on the way home from basketball practice the other night, Bopper saw a shooting star that I missed. He was giddy over it all night and then tonight....
But we didn't have time to think much about tonight's because following a high-soaring plane we originally thought might be the ISS, the real ISS showed. We actually spent more time looking without the binocks, just watching its very steady pace across the sky, from about ten o'clock to six o'clock (NNW to almost due S). While watching it, I asked Bopp if he'd like to be on it, like the astro/cosmonauts and scientists have been. He just thought about it.
Amid our thoughts and conversation, I had a more solemn moment. For whatever reason, I recalled nighttime labs in Prof. Cogan's Astronomy course at AC, watching the skies from Memorial Hill and Hitchcock Field with Bill Bradley. It capped a moving and memorable 20-minute episode this evening. Nope, I couldn't put a price on it....
Waiting, we first focused our binocks on Venus, rising in the Eastern sky. Then we took in a bit of the half moon. While searching for the ISS, suddenly a "shooting star" came flying across a neighbor's roof! And that was particularly cool because on the way home from basketball practice the other night, Bopper saw a shooting star that I missed. He was giddy over it all night and then tonight....
But we didn't have time to think much about tonight's because following a high-soaring plane we originally thought might be the ISS, the real ISS showed. We actually spent more time looking without the binocks, just watching its very steady pace across the sky, from about ten o'clock to six o'clock (NNW to almost due S). While watching it, I asked Bopp if he'd like to be on it, like the astro/cosmonauts and scientists have been. He just thought about it.
Amid our thoughts and conversation, I had a more solemn moment. For whatever reason, I recalled nighttime labs in Prof. Cogan's Astronomy course at AC, watching the skies from Memorial Hill and Hitchcock Field with Bill Bradley. It capped a moving and memorable 20-minute episode this evening. Nope, I couldn't put a price on it....
Ageing or Aging
Hmmm...which spelling is correct? I don't have time to look it up, but as I often say in my classes, "I can do anything I want. It's my TV show." So....
Perhaps I haven't yet reached "old age." I know I was talking with someone the other day about "senior discounts." Gee, from what this guy was saying, I certainly qualify for all of them now. I think the only one I've ever really had is at the Denny's/Lenny's in Las Vegas. I don't remember any others, but I don't remember them. But, it was a humorous conversation.
Old, but not old enough yet.... That's what I've been thinking. According to conventional wisdom, once one reaches a certain age, he doesn't care what he says--favorable or unfavorable. Well, I still have a few things I'd like to tell people, mostly very favorable and flattering, but am leery of doing that. I guess, among other things, I don't want any embarrassment--and not on my part.
So I guess I'll wait just a little longer, but not too long!
Perhaps I haven't yet reached "old age." I know I was talking with someone the other day about "senior discounts." Gee, from what this guy was saying, I certainly qualify for all of them now. I think the only one I've ever really had is at the Denny's/Lenny's in Las Vegas. I don't remember any others, but I don't remember them. But, it was a humorous conversation.
Old, but not old enough yet.... That's what I've been thinking. According to conventional wisdom, once one reaches a certain age, he doesn't care what he says--favorable or unfavorable. Well, I still have a few things I'd like to tell people, mostly very favorable and flattering, but am leery of doing that. I guess, among other things, I don't want any embarrassment--and not on my part.
So I guess I'll wait just a little longer, but not too long!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
