By Ogden Nash
In Baltimore there lived a boy.
He wasn't anybody's joy.
Although his name was Jabez Dawes,
His character was full of flaws.
In school he never led his classes,
He hid old ladies' reading glasses,
His mouth was open when he chewed,
And elbows to the table glued.
He stole the milk of hungry kittens,
And walked through doors marked NO ADMITTANCE.
He said he acted thus because
There wasn't any Santa Claus.
Another trick that tickled Jabez
Was crying 'Boo' at little babies.
He brushed his teeth, they said in town,
Sideways instead of up and down.
Yet people pardoned every sin,
And viewed his antics with a grin,
Till they were told by Jabez Dawes,
'There isn't any Santa Claus!'
Deploring how he did behave,
His parents swiftly sought their grave.
They hurried through the portals pearly,
And Jabez left the funeral early.
Like whooping cough, from child to child,
He sped to spread the rumor wild:
'Sure as my name is Jabez Dawes
There isn't any Santa Claus!'
Slunk like a weasel of a marten
Through nursery and kindergarten,
Whispering low to every tot,
'There isn't any, no there's not!'
The children wept all Christmas eve
And Jabez chortled up his sleeve.
No infant dared hang up his stocking
For fear of Jabez' ribald mocking.
He sprawled on his untidy bed,
Fresh malice dancing in his head,
When presently with scalp-a-tingling,
Jabez heard a distant jingling;
He heard the crunch of sleigh and hoof
Crisply alighting on the roof.
What good to rise and bar the door?
A shower of soot was on the floor.
What was beheld by Jabez Dawes?
The fireplace full of Santa Claus!
Then Jabez fell upon his knees
With cries of 'Don't,' and 'Pretty Please.'
He howled, 'I don't know where you read it,
But anyhow, I never said it!'
'Jabez' replied the angry saint,
'It isn't I, it's you that ain't.
Although there is a Santa Claus,
There isn't any Jabez Dawes!'
Said Jabez then with impudent vim,
'Oh, yes there is, and I am him!
Your magic don't scare me, it doesn't'
And suddenly he found he wasn't!
From grimy feet to grimy locks,
Jabez became a Jack-in-the-box,
An ugly toy with springs unsprung,
Forever sticking out his tongue.
The neighbors heard his mournful squeal;
They searched for him, but not with zeal.
No trace was found of Jabez Dawes,
Which led to thunderous applause,
And people drank a loving cup
And went and hung their stockings up.
All you who sneer at Santa Claus,
Beware the fate of Jabez Dawes,
The saucy boy who mocked the saint.
Donner and Blitzen licked off his paint.
Monday, December 10, 2012
Monday, December 3, 2012
Health "Care"
I was on the phone trying to find a new endocrinologist this morning, in hopes of finding a physician who would talk to me in person, and ask about how I am actually doing, rather than reading numbers on a chart to determine I'm in "normal" range. The phone call didn't go too well. I was asked if I had insurance, then put on hold, and then hung up on. I don't think it's any accident that in less than one hour after that experience, I saw this article from the New York Times.
From the article:
"For decades, doctors in picturesque Boise, Idaho, were part of a tight-knit community, freely referring patients to the specialists or hospitals of their choice and exchanging information about the latest medical treatments.
But that began to change a few years ago, when the city’s largest hospital, St. Luke’s Health System, began rapidly buying physician practices all over town, from general practitioners to cardiologists to orthopedic surgeons. (AND ENDOCRINOLOGISTS!)
Boise’s experience reflects a growing national trend toward consolidation. Across the country, doctors who sold their practices and signed on as employees have similar criticisms. In lawsuits and interviews, they describe growing pressure to meet the financial goals of their new employers — often by performing unnecessary tests and procedures or by admitting patients who do not need a hospital stay.
Dr. David C. Pate, chief executive of St. Luke’s, denied the assertions by St. Alphonsus that the hospital’s acquisitions had limited patient choice or always resulted in higher prices. In some cases, Dr. Pate said, services that had been underpriced were raised to reflect market value. St. Luke’s, he argued, is simply embracing the new model of health care, which he predicted would lead over the long term to lower overall costs as fewer unnecessary tests and procedures were performed.
...consolidation is encouraged by some aspects of the Obama administration’s health care law.
But the consolidation of health care may be coming at a hefty price. By one estimate, under its current reimbursement system, Medicare is paying in excess of a billion dollars a year more for the same services because hospitals, citing higher overall costs, can charge more when the doctors work for them. Laser eye surgery, for example, can cost $738 when performed by a hospital-employed doctor, compared with $389 when done by an unaffiliated doctor, according to national estimates by the independent Congressional panel that oversees Medicare. An echocardiogram can cost about twice as much in a hospital: $319, versus $143 in a doctor’s office."
Do go and read the whole article. Even if it were true that nationalized health insurance would lower costs, which it isn't, what does it matter if you can't even get an appointment?
From the article:
"For decades, doctors in picturesque Boise, Idaho, were part of a tight-knit community, freely referring patients to the specialists or hospitals of their choice and exchanging information about the latest medical treatments.
But that began to change a few years ago, when the city’s largest hospital, St. Luke’s Health System, began rapidly buying physician practices all over town, from general practitioners to cardiologists to orthopedic surgeons. (AND ENDOCRINOLOGISTS!)
Boise’s experience reflects a growing national trend toward consolidation. Across the country, doctors who sold their practices and signed on as employees have similar criticisms. In lawsuits and interviews, they describe growing pressure to meet the financial goals of their new employers — often by performing unnecessary tests and procedures or by admitting patients who do not need a hospital stay.
Dr. David C. Pate, chief executive of St. Luke’s, denied the assertions by St. Alphonsus that the hospital’s acquisitions had limited patient choice or always resulted in higher prices. In some cases, Dr. Pate said, services that had been underpriced were raised to reflect market value. St. Luke’s, he argued, is simply embracing the new model of health care, which he predicted would lead over the long term to lower overall costs as fewer unnecessary tests and procedures were performed.
...consolidation is encouraged by some aspects of the Obama administration’s health care law.
But the consolidation of health care may be coming at a hefty price. By one estimate, under its current reimbursement system, Medicare is paying in excess of a billion dollars a year more for the same services because hospitals, citing higher overall costs, can charge more when the doctors work for them. Laser eye surgery, for example, can cost $738 when performed by a hospital-employed doctor, compared with $389 when done by an unaffiliated doctor, according to national estimates by the independent Congressional panel that oversees Medicare. An echocardiogram can cost about twice as much in a hospital: $319, versus $143 in a doctor’s office."
Do go and read the whole article. Even if it were true that nationalized health insurance would lower costs, which it isn't, what does it matter if you can't even get an appointment?
Wednesday, November 7, 2012
More unhappy thoughts
Robert Stacy McCain expresses in writing exactly what I feel here: http://spectator.org/archives/2012/11/07/doomed-beyond-all-hope-of-rede
While I never was convinced that Romney was the most "electable" candidate, he gained my respect as I learned more about his unsung acts of kindness and charity. I had planned to hold him accountable to conservative principles when he became president, but I had hope that his election would stall the impending downfall of America.
For all who will shrug their shoulders and tell me to lighten up, I invite them to take a look at this, and then ask me again to lighten up.
While I never was convinced that Romney was the most "electable" candidate, he gained my respect as I learned more about his unsung acts of kindness and charity. I had planned to hold him accountable to conservative principles when he became president, but I had hope that his election would stall the impending downfall of America.
For all who will shrug their shoulders and tell me to lighten up, I invite them to take a look at this, and then ask me again to lighten up.
Tuesday, November 6, 2012
Unhappy thoughts
One cannot understand the serious trouble we are in without understanding what the great American experiment was. That Romney (a good man, but not a constitutionally conservative one) was the man chosen to go up against Obama was proof enough that Americans have forgotten the values our country was founded on. That Americans voted for Obama, though, is proof that we have rejected the American dream altogether.
Monday, October 29, 2012
Propositions 3, 2 &1
Idaho is mentioned in the Wall Street Journal here: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204840504578086773381885236.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_AboveLEFTTop
I fear that I see a lot more "Vote No" signs than I do "Yes" signs around here, but I am voting "Yes" on all three propositions, with apologies to my brother-in-law who is the computer-guy for one of Idaho's high schools. (On the bright side--talk about job security!)
When Luna introduced these laws before, I was against the part that gave students laptops (Prop. 3). I have since re-considered. While I still agree that students are not likely to treat these laptops well, and I do not think it's government's business to give anyone a computer, the fact is that students treat textbooks just as poorly; and digital textbooks, so to speak, will be a lot cheaper than actual textbooks--not to mention the fact that textbooks become outdated fairly quickly, especially in subjects of Government and History. The other part of the laptop proposal is one that gives students a chance to study on-line, with the potential of early high school graduation. This is a chance for our best and brightest to work at their own speed and get ahead.
Proposition 2 is the most controversial proposition, in my opinion. This is the one that grants bonuses for teachers who do outstanding work, and allows for merit pay. I absolutely believe that teachers with high success rates should be rewarded more than teachers who run the clock from day to day. And while all sorts of teachers will say how hard the job is, and that it's not their fault if their classrooms do not perform well, and I'm not disagreeing with them, we all can look back and remember both our really outstanding teachers, and the horrible experiences we had in other classrooms. What concerns me about Proposition 2 is using standarized tests to evaluate a teacher's performance. I am very much against standardized testing, so this would have been a "No" vote, if it weren't for...
Proposition 1, which allows for more parental input. I believe that everything is best done at a local level, and this proposition puts more of the decision-making into the hands of local school administrators, and less into the hands of the National Teachers Association. As mentioned in the Wall Street Journal article linked above, the NEA has been a true hindrance to education across the nation. It's bad enough that our nation's education system has been essentially taken over by politicians, but it's even worse that these politicians are beholden to teacher's unions, who do not have the children's best interests at heart, contrary to their lofty claims, but their own pocketbooks and ambitions. Local control of schools doesn't even quite get to the heart of the matter--decisions about education are best made at home, and families have too few choices. Idaho's education system is not perfect, and these three propositions are not perfect, but Idaho should be proud to be one of the states proposing bold initiatives for education.
I fear that I see a lot more "Vote No" signs than I do "Yes" signs around here, but I am voting "Yes" on all three propositions, with apologies to my brother-in-law who is the computer-guy for one of Idaho's high schools. (On the bright side--talk about job security!)
When Luna introduced these laws before, I was against the part that gave students laptops (Prop. 3). I have since re-considered. While I still agree that students are not likely to treat these laptops well, and I do not think it's government's business to give anyone a computer, the fact is that students treat textbooks just as poorly; and digital textbooks, so to speak, will be a lot cheaper than actual textbooks--not to mention the fact that textbooks become outdated fairly quickly, especially in subjects of Government and History. The other part of the laptop proposal is one that gives students a chance to study on-line, with the potential of early high school graduation. This is a chance for our best and brightest to work at their own speed and get ahead.
Proposition 2 is the most controversial proposition, in my opinion. This is the one that grants bonuses for teachers who do outstanding work, and allows for merit pay. I absolutely believe that teachers with high success rates should be rewarded more than teachers who run the clock from day to day. And while all sorts of teachers will say how hard the job is, and that it's not their fault if their classrooms do not perform well, and I'm not disagreeing with them, we all can look back and remember both our really outstanding teachers, and the horrible experiences we had in other classrooms. What concerns me about Proposition 2 is using standarized tests to evaluate a teacher's performance. I am very much against standardized testing, so this would have been a "No" vote, if it weren't for...
Proposition 1, which allows for more parental input. I believe that everything is best done at a local level, and this proposition puts more of the decision-making into the hands of local school administrators, and less into the hands of the National Teachers Association. As mentioned in the Wall Street Journal article linked above, the NEA has been a true hindrance to education across the nation. It's bad enough that our nation's education system has been essentially taken over by politicians, but it's even worse that these politicians are beholden to teacher's unions, who do not have the children's best interests at heart, contrary to their lofty claims, but their own pocketbooks and ambitions. Local control of schools doesn't even quite get to the heart of the matter--decisions about education are best made at home, and families have too few choices. Idaho's education system is not perfect, and these three propositions are not perfect, but Idaho should be proud to be one of the states proposing bold initiatives for education.
Halloween Humdrum
I clicked on an article entitled, Trick or treat? Trend to ban Halloween is mixed bag for educators, parents, thinking I might be in for a thoughtful discussion from both sides of the aisle. When political discourse can rarely be said to be "thoughtful," I don't know why I expected more from this article. (Is there an emoticon that suggests an eye-roll? Imagine one right here.)
From the article:
... said Skokie, Ill., District 69 Superintendent Quintin Shepherd, in a letter to parents. “Many students cannot afford costumes and there is an economic disparity. We also have students that are unable to participate for religious or cultural reasons.”
...“Why suck the fun out of school?” one student posted online on the school's website. “Halloween isn't a religious or political holiday; it's only about having fun.”
“It’s the best part of the school year,” posted another student. “Everyone dresses up and gives out candy. How can that be bad?”.
...Administrators say school is not the place for Halloween, and at least a few parents in Skokie agree.
“We'll take a personal day with my children away from school expressing ourselves through costume and possible Satan worshipping,” wrote one poster on the District 69 website.
(Did the author of this article NOT see the sarcasm here?!?!)
The article then goes on to blame high-stakes testing, political correctness, and the banning of everything from Christmas to the Pledge of Allegience. However, the fundamental question seems to be, Will we still get candy?
Here are some of my questions and thoughts--which may or may not be any more intelligent than anything I quoted above...
When a school district "bans" Halloween, what exactly does that mean? Is it the same as banning books? When a school bans a book, or a holiday, is it really preventing people from reading said book, or celebrating said holiday?
Do holiday celebrations serve an educational purpose? If so, in what ways? And if so, wouldn't trick-or-treating also serve an educational purpose? (In other words, are we being redundant?) If there is no educational purpose, do I need to finish asking this question?
And finally, is there anyone left in the world who thinks that candy is good for children's brains?
You can probably tell what my bias is here. Don't get me wrong, I'm not going to start crusading against school parties. I'm just suggesting that this argument is yet another distraction from the real purpose of schooling and education.
From the article:
... said Skokie, Ill., District 69 Superintendent Quintin Shepherd, in a letter to parents. “Many students cannot afford costumes and there is an economic disparity. We also have students that are unable to participate for religious or cultural reasons.”
...“Why suck the fun out of school?” one student posted online on the school's website. “Halloween isn't a religious or political holiday; it's only about having fun.”
“It’s the best part of the school year,” posted another student. “Everyone dresses up and gives out candy. How can that be bad?”.
...Administrators say school is not the place for Halloween, and at least a few parents in Skokie agree.
“We'll take a personal day with my children away from school expressing ourselves through costume and possible Satan worshipping,” wrote one poster on the District 69 website.
(Did the author of this article NOT see the sarcasm here?!?!)
The article then goes on to blame high-stakes testing, political correctness, and the banning of everything from Christmas to the Pledge of Allegience. However, the fundamental question seems to be, Will we still get candy?
Here are some of my questions and thoughts--which may or may not be any more intelligent than anything I quoted above...
When a school district "bans" Halloween, what exactly does that mean? Is it the same as banning books? When a school bans a book, or a holiday, is it really preventing people from reading said book, or celebrating said holiday?
Do holiday celebrations serve an educational purpose? If so, in what ways? And if so, wouldn't trick-or-treating also serve an educational purpose? (In other words, are we being redundant?) If there is no educational purpose, do I need to finish asking this question?
And finally, is there anyone left in the world who thinks that candy is good for children's brains?
You can probably tell what my bias is here. Don't get me wrong, I'm not going to start crusading against school parties. I'm just suggesting that this argument is yet another distraction from the real purpose of schooling and education.
Betrayal of American Education
Book review on American Spectator here: http://spectator.org/archives/2012/10/29/hustlers-hucksters-and-the-bet
Friday, September 21, 2012
Speaking of Paul Kengor...
Here's a great interview: http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/327870/obama-frankly-interview?pg=1
What I like about Kengor is that he never makes a claim unless he has documentation to back it up.
What I like about Kengor is that he never makes a claim unless he has documentation to back it up.
Monday, September 17, 2012
Books
I recently read a book about the Smothers Brothers that made me wonder if I, like Tom Smothers, am losing my sense of humor because of my politics. But then I read books and articles by authors I respect (as opposed to the author, David Bianculli), and I become too worried to care whether or not I have a sense of humor. Recent books that I have read, and recommend, include:
Mark Levin's Ameritopia, which delves into the two major philosophies in the world that have been at odds with each other since the world began: One that says humans are free to act for themselves, and will be rewarded according to their own choices; and the other that says we can achieve a utopian state of existence, if we will but put our trust in one "wise and benevolent" ruler. I can see why the second option sounds tempting--until you remember the adage that "absolute power corrupts," and that the second plan is akin to Satan's plan.
Paul Kengor's Dupes, which researches communism in the United States, particularly among celebrities. I respect my dad a lot, and he thinks that Senator McCarthy was a nut, but Dupes gives evidence that many of the so-called "brave" celebrities who refused to cooperate with government investigations were, in fact, big "C" Communists (members of the party), and little "c" communists (people who sympathise with Communists). One of those, in fact, was Pete Seeger, who admitted as much in a 2008 interview on The American Experience. One can argue about the effectiveness of the McCarthy hearings, and talk about why or why not black-listing was wrong (or is still wrong today), but so often, we skip those arguments, and go straight to name-calling. History is repeating itself as we condemn anti-Islamic sentiment, without asking pertinent questions, such as, "Is there a real and valid threat against the United States?" Events of this past week tell me that, yes, there is a real threat, whether or not you agree that the United States should have ever intervened in the Middle East to begin with.
Amity Shlaes' The Forgotten Man. This book gives an in-depth look by an economist of the policies of Herbert Hoover and FDR that prolonged the Great Depression. There are stunning paralels to today's political environment. It is because of this book that I have come to realize that no amount of "tinkering" is likely to reverse the course we are set on--the best possible course is to get out of the way, and let the free market work.
Andrew Breitbart's Righteous Indignation. First of all, this books shows how you can think seriously about issues, and still keep a sense of humor. Secondly, I just love Andrew Breitbart.
Anything by Mark Steyn. This man has been compared to Cyrano de Bergerac and Voltaire. The comparison is justified.
I have yet to read one of Thomas Sowell's books (there are so many to choose from), but I read his articles regularly, and the man is a genius, as well as a pretty decent photographer!
Mark Levin's Ameritopia, which delves into the two major philosophies in the world that have been at odds with each other since the world began: One that says humans are free to act for themselves, and will be rewarded according to their own choices; and the other that says we can achieve a utopian state of existence, if we will but put our trust in one "wise and benevolent" ruler. I can see why the second option sounds tempting--until you remember the adage that "absolute power corrupts," and that the second plan is akin to Satan's plan.
Paul Kengor's Dupes, which researches communism in the United States, particularly among celebrities. I respect my dad a lot, and he thinks that Senator McCarthy was a nut, but Dupes gives evidence that many of the so-called "brave" celebrities who refused to cooperate with government investigations were, in fact, big "C" Communists (members of the party), and little "c" communists (people who sympathise with Communists). One of those, in fact, was Pete Seeger, who admitted as much in a 2008 interview on The American Experience. One can argue about the effectiveness of the McCarthy hearings, and talk about why or why not black-listing was wrong (or is still wrong today), but so often, we skip those arguments, and go straight to name-calling. History is repeating itself as we condemn anti-Islamic sentiment, without asking pertinent questions, such as, "Is there a real and valid threat against the United States?" Events of this past week tell me that, yes, there is a real threat, whether or not you agree that the United States should have ever intervened in the Middle East to begin with.
Amity Shlaes' The Forgotten Man. This book gives an in-depth look by an economist of the policies of Herbert Hoover and FDR that prolonged the Great Depression. There are stunning paralels to today's political environment. It is because of this book that I have come to realize that no amount of "tinkering" is likely to reverse the course we are set on--the best possible course is to get out of the way, and let the free market work.
Andrew Breitbart's Righteous Indignation. First of all, this books shows how you can think seriously about issues, and still keep a sense of humor. Secondly, I just love Andrew Breitbart.
Anything by Mark Steyn. This man has been compared to Cyrano de Bergerac and Voltaire. The comparison is justified.
I have yet to read one of Thomas Sowell's books (there are so many to choose from), but I read his articles regularly, and the man is a genius, as well as a pretty decent photographer!
Tuesday, July 3, 2012
Articles that don't defend Roberts, and outline why we cannot miss our one last chance to repeal "Obamataxmare"
http://spectator.org/archives/2012/07/03/obamacares-hideous-history-rec/
http://spectator.org/archives/2012/07/02/supreme-beings
http://spectator.org/archives/2012/07/02/undoing-obamacare
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/304641/roberts-opinion-fred-thompson
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/304619/judicial-betrayal-thomas-sowell
and the ever-brilliant Mark Steyn
http://spectator.org/archives/2012/07/02/supreme-beings
http://spectator.org/archives/2012/07/02/undoing-obamacare
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/304641/roberts-opinion-fred-thompson
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/304619/judicial-betrayal-thomas-sowell
and the ever-brilliant Mark Steyn
Thursday, June 28, 2012
On the Supreme Court Decision
http://www.humanevents.com/2012/06/28/erick-erickson-roberts-forces-us-to-deal-with-health-care-politically/
This is an article in defense of Roberts. Erickson makes some good points--and it's possible that Roberts has done us all a favor by identifying the problem with excessive taxation for any program--whether it's Obamacaretax, Medicaretax, Medicaidtax, educationtax, etc., that all of these programs for the "collective good" are really just taxes.
Now, I'm still uncomfortable with Roberts treating this like a "chess game," because the longer it takes to get rid of Obamacaretax, the harder it's going to be, period. I understand the principle of preferring the legislative branch to repeal it, but I am not convinced that an electorate who put Obama in office, who is going to replace him with a Republican who gave him the blueprint for Obamacaretax, is up to the task of selecting a majority of faithful conservatives. If we continue to vote in pansy compromisers, we will not make a significant dent in the giant government bureaucratic mess that hangs over us. This is simply not going to end, and I had hoped that the Supreme Court would have acted in the interests of the people now, rather than trying to teach us a lesson for later.
But the decision has been handed down. Let's hope that the American people will learn that we cannot rely on our leaders to look out for us, and that it is imperative that we understand the issues; support candidates who can be trusted to uphold the Constitution; and withdraw our support from those who abuse that trust.
This is an article in defense of Roberts. Erickson makes some good points--and it's possible that Roberts has done us all a favor by identifying the problem with excessive taxation for any program--whether it's Obamacaretax, Medicaretax, Medicaidtax, educationtax, etc., that all of these programs for the "collective good" are really just taxes.
Now, I'm still uncomfortable with Roberts treating this like a "chess game," because the longer it takes to get rid of Obamacaretax, the harder it's going to be, period. I understand the principle of preferring the legislative branch to repeal it, but I am not convinced that an electorate who put Obama in office, who is going to replace him with a Republican who gave him the blueprint for Obamacaretax, is up to the task of selecting a majority of faithful conservatives. If we continue to vote in pansy compromisers, we will not make a significant dent in the giant government bureaucratic mess that hangs over us. This is simply not going to end, and I had hoped that the Supreme Court would have acted in the interests of the people now, rather than trying to teach us a lesson for later.
But the decision has been handed down. Let's hope that the American people will learn that we cannot rely on our leaders to look out for us, and that it is imperative that we understand the issues; support candidates who can be trusted to uphold the Constitution; and withdraw our support from those who abuse that trust.
Friday, May 25, 2012
Free Speech?
I'm too chicken to write the story in my own words, but here are some links.
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=51743
http://patterico.com/2012/05/25/convicted-bomber-brett-kimberlin-neal-rauhauser-ron-brynaert-and-their-campaign-of-political-terrorism/
http://michellemalkin.com/2012/05/23/free-speech-show-solidarity-for-targeted-conservative-bloggers/
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2010/10/11/Progressives-Embrace-Convicted-Terrorist
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/05/25/Kimberlin-2012
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=51743
http://patterico.com/2012/05/25/convicted-bomber-brett-kimberlin-neal-rauhauser-ron-brynaert-and-their-campaign-of-political-terrorism/
http://michellemalkin.com/2012/05/23/free-speech-show-solidarity-for-targeted-conservative-bloggers/
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2010/10/11/Progressives-Embrace-Convicted-Terrorist
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/05/25/Kimberlin-2012
Saturday, April 14, 2012
Breitbart is Here!
I've never been anyone's groupie, the only celebrity deaths that have ever really saddened me were those of Luciano Pavarotti and Beverly Sills. But last month, on March 1st, I sat down to do my daily reading of the BIGS, and learned that Andrew Breitbart had suddenly passed away the previous night. And then I went through all of the stages of grief as if he had been a close friend. I cried for days. Not just for the loss of such a giant, but for the blow it is to our country's future. No one will be able to fill his shoes.
Breitbart would want us to continue where he left off--to hold journalists accountable for biased reporting, to confront hypocrisy, and to simply stand up for the rights and freedoms that are being eroded. I haven't found the courage to step into the fray in a public way, but I did buy this shirt!
Breitbart would want us to continue where he left off--to hold journalists accountable for biased reporting, to confront hypocrisy, and to simply stand up for the rights and freedoms that are being eroded. I haven't found the courage to step into the fray in a public way, but I did buy this shirt!
Thursday, February 16, 2012
School Levy
No one in their right mind would publicly say, "I don't support our local schools," (the opposite of the bumper sticker and fliers I'm seeing all around town in support of raising property taxes to raise $14 million for schools in Boise), but I am going to say it here on my blog. I do not support a tax increase to raise money for schools.
1. Everyone likes to say, "Think outside the box." But when it comes to schools, very few people can think outside the box of public education. I believe people should be able to keep what they earn. If we had more personal discretionary income, and privatized education, schools would be more competitive, and our children would be more competitive in the real world.
2. Schools operate better when they have less money. I really believe this. When they are forced to budget, they stop buying things our kids don't need. Library books are a popular item we always "need" to buy. I have a huge beef with our school's library. I'll tell you about it sometime. But I wish they would quit forcing my children to borrow books. Also, experimental programs, like sending 9th graders to high school (and this, after spending a ton of money building a new junior high?), get put on hold.
3. I just attended an informative meeting about the potential of F-35's gracing the skies of Boise. If they come here, many schools, including the one my kids attend, will not be able to operate at their current locations. Why do I want to spend money on schools that may have to be deserted anyway? I wish I had a vote regarding the F-35's. All I can do is write letters to representatives who ignore me. But I do have a vote concerning the levy, and I'm voting no.
1. Everyone likes to say, "Think outside the box." But when it comes to schools, very few people can think outside the box of public education. I believe people should be able to keep what they earn. If we had more personal discretionary income, and privatized education, schools would be more competitive, and our children would be more competitive in the real world.
2. Schools operate better when they have less money. I really believe this. When they are forced to budget, they stop buying things our kids don't need. Library books are a popular item we always "need" to buy. I have a huge beef with our school's library. I'll tell you about it sometime. But I wish they would quit forcing my children to borrow books. Also, experimental programs, like sending 9th graders to high school (and this, after spending a ton of money building a new junior high?), get put on hold.
3. I just attended an informative meeting about the potential of F-35's gracing the skies of Boise. If they come here, many schools, including the one my kids attend, will not be able to operate at their current locations. Why do I want to spend money on schools that may have to be deserted anyway? I wish I had a vote regarding the F-35's. All I can do is write letters to representatives who ignore me. But I do have a vote concerning the levy, and I'm voting no.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)