kapkomet

When I was watching the local news, they were talking about "see... it's a CONSPIRACY - he's REALLY not a Christian because when he took his second oath there wasn't a bible! ". I about puked. Why can't people STFU?

QUOTE (lostfan @ Jan 22, 2009 -> 10:10 PM) Not worried about it, he said there'd be no waterboarding on his watch, as long as he and his boss are on the same page with what's supposed to happen I don't care what his personal views are. Honestly if we're gonna do shady stuff like that it really should be classified and we the public should never find out. DING DING DING DING DING DING DING, and DING! I can't underscore what a problem I have with this stuff being disclosed in the first place.

QUOTE (dasox24 @ Jan 22, 2009 -> 04:01 PM) I'm kind of jumping in here on this conversation, but in regards to textbooks, I don't have a problem with the big, stereotypical texts as long as they're supplemented with some extra, more in-depth type reading. I know the kids would hate it and half probably wouldn't do it, but if you can give them some sort of biographical or non-fictional novel that is interesting to read about, I think that would be a great idea. Not sure this would be easy to do, but in a subject like History or Science, I think it would. There definitely have to be some interesting non-fictional stuff about scientific discoveries or something that would interest students more than the typical stuff you learn. (Now, I know I'm in college and we're talking about secondary education mainly, but...) For instance, in my Operations Management class I'm in right now, we have a bulky, boring textbook that sucks to read, but everybody before me has read it and it obviously has to have some good stuff in it. However, we also have a fictional novel that we're supposed to also be reading throughout the semester that deals with a plant manager trying to make the plant more efficient and stop it from losing money. And if he doesn't, the company will close it. I've only read the 1st chapter but I'm interested in it, and it's a good way of explaining such things as the Theory of Constraints without having to read it in textbook form. The Goal. Good book.

Happy Birthday. It's your first one in 8 years (drink) not under OPPRESSION and TYRANNY.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jan 22, 2009 -> 07:04 AM) Exactly. Words change meaning over time and can acquire new meanings. "Liberal" in today's political landscape clearly does not mean Adam Smith, Thomas Jefferson classical liberalism. Modern/ Social Liberalism Classical Liberalism Honestly, if you don't know the difference, you are ignorant. He knows the difference. He was just trying to make me look like I was "ignorant". Nice try. Thank you, too. Carry on.

QUOTE (bmags @ Jan 21, 2009 -> 10:04 PM) ugh, what a boring argument peanut. Are you really going to argue classical liberalism for the modern day usage? Thank you.

QUOTE (DukeNukeEm @ Jan 21, 2009 -> 04:34 PM) I really can't handle reading Kap's sigline anymore. It's just so.... ignorant. Oh goodie. Then it must be true, if you find it "ignorant".

QUOTE (DukeNukeEm @ Jan 21, 2009 -> 08:10 PM) That sigline is ignorant because neither Ronald Reagan nor kap know what a liberal is. Priceless dude. Keep it up.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Jan 21, 2009 -> 01:33 PM) I was just trying to find one example where, with time, his presidency might even look worse than now. All these conservatives keep saying "Time will tell" with the implied assumption that we'll look at his presidency more favorably. I'm saying we might learn more and realize it was worse than first imagined. It's a possibility, no question. But until we know what all has really happened, I don't think anyone really knows.

QUOTE (DukeNukeEm @ Jan 21, 2009 -> 11:57 AM) $. And I think this one of the biggest actual policies issues that are killing the Republican party right now. They're trying to make the discussion on alternative energy sources about global warming and framing the debate around that. But really this issue is so much bigger than just climate change and I dont think the party ever distanced themselves enough from Bush's policies there. I agree. It's not about global warming. I'll address NSS's stuff later because I tend to disagree with parts of it and agree with other parts.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 21, 2009 -> 10:08 AM) Standarization, by its very nature, robs teachers of many of their teaching methods. When you tell a teacher the most important thing is for the kids to learn XYZ, and if enough of them don't your school and school system will lose funds, it means that they pretty much will be pushed to only teach XYZ, because that is the only thing that matters to the people who put school policy into place locally. Failing schools are what gets superintendants fired, and school boards voted out. In the end, they force the teachers to concentrate only on the standards. I have seen it first hand. I realize that. The methods of teaching become the standard. Yet, there should be certain things that kids know. Where's the line? If I could figure that out, I'd be in Barack's administration.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 21, 2009 -> 12:16 AM) Frankly, no. I viscerally despise that man. I am a Democrat because the Republicans nominated him in 2000. The man has screwed up virtually everything he touched. He has repeatedly broken the law. And proudly admits it. This man has moved this country literally as close to the brink of disaster as it has been since probably 1932. This man has the blood of thousands of people, probably hundreds of thousands of people, on his hands. This man ordered people tortured to death in our names. He has soured the face of America for an entire generation of the world's inhabitants. This man has been an utter disaster for this country and for this world, and the damage he has done will take years to overcome, if it is ever undone. And you know the worst part? If you listen to his press availabilities over the past month...he doesn't understand one bit how anyone could think he did a single thing wrong. He thinks his mistakes in New Orleans was not landing Air Force One there, not all of the other things screwed up beforehand. He thinks the reason people stopped liking him was because he picked the wrong time to push to destroy Social Security. He thinks the economic collapse and 9/11 were totally random events that had nothing to do with any specific government actions or policies. I really can't put in to words how glad I am to see him gone. I'd say that if Senator McCain had won. His Successor could make a wrong decision every time he had a choice to make over 8 years, and then only would tie 43 in how much damage he does. It is theoretically impossible to do a worse job. And not only that, he thinks it had nothing at all to do with him. Please. Almost everything you say here would be over the top as Kaperbole. You give him WAAAAAAAAAAY too much credit to say he (sic - his administration) did all this. Most of what we are dealing with have been decades in the making. It's the thinking here that has America so bitter in so many ways. I guess Bush Derangement Syndrome is alive and well. I do think that he made very poor decisions. But I also think that some things he did will be much more understood with time.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Jan 21, 2009 -> 09:51 AM) Satellite image of yesterday's crowd. The people really do look like ants. That is a crazy picture, but I agree with lostfan that it was either two hours before or 30 minutes after... because the mall was PACKED.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jan 21, 2009 -> 09:27 AM) 20/20 (John Stossel) just did a report on the cost of college and whether or not its really worth it for everyone to go. There's a big push in high schools and society in general that absolutely everyone should attend college. Vocational schools are stigmatized. http://abcnews.go.com/2020 -> "College: Worth the Price of Admission?" Now we get into education as a "right" and education as a "priveledge" (sort of like health care). College (as I think of the term traditionally) isn't for everyone. If we change how colleges do things (i.e. vocational stuff like mechanics, etc. are "college") then I'm for it. I think "trade schools" are better words then college, because we are all taught trades (econ, finance, mechanics, etc. etc. etc.) At that point, you start re-defining what education really is.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 21, 2009 -> 09:01 AM) It has gotten so bad, we literally had one of the schools in our system teaching kids how to take the ISTEP (IN standardized tests). We also had that same school steal some of the answers and try to specifically teach them to some of the worst students to bring up test scores. There is no doubt in my mind the pendulum has swung too much towards standardized testing. I think that there needs to be a standardization in some areas, but not in others. Math is pretty black and white. Science? I think standardization goes too far. History's history - although the political slant that is taught troubles me because kids aren't taught to see both sides of an issue and then learn to choose for themselves. I think standardization is good for curriculum, NOT how it's taught. It's like reading a college course guide. In this class, you will learn, XYZ. How it's taught should be left to the teacher to teach to his/her strengths. However, how much of that has the teacher been taught?

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 20, 2009 -> 11:27 PM) I can think of no better tribute to the 43rd President of the United States than having his appointed Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, John Roberts, flub the Oath of office of his successor. I know this is the Dem thread, but can you PLEASE get rid of your hatred now? It's over.

QUOTE (bmags @ Jan 20, 2009 -> 09:01 PM) It seems the true criticism of the selection of Warren for the invocation was that he is terrible at it. Who knew. And my objection was to his stance on the gay community. How naive! I have a hard time with this. While I may perscribe to the beliefs of Rick Warren, to some extent, I had trouble with his choosing before he pissed all over himself up there. But not because he's "persecuted" gays (which it ain't his place) - but because it was an obvious effort by Barack Obama to reach out to "evangelicals" (sp)... and the problem I have with general "evaneglicals" (sp) is that we as humans have no right to judge what is right and wrong. Rick Warren has a lot of "judgemental" attitudes that he carries with him, and for that I didn't like the pick. Oh well, I've pounded the crap out of this subject enough for one day.

Personally, I loved the fact that the Illinois float had SouthPaw and the Sox logo, and not a damn thing about the Cubs.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 20, 2009 -> 08:03 PM) Couldn't have said it any better myself. Here's to f***ing Ozzie Guillen. Ewww. That's gross.

It's a gray area to me. I laregly think it's up to the state and local goverments. I have a hard time with the "voucher" program, although I understand the intent. I do think that there should be a standardization by our national government but I don't think that national education funding should go back to the states based on a test score program... I have a serious problem with that because there's too many issues with that. I think that part of the budget should just get allocated back to the states based on the populations of said children. In that way, the NATIONAL money is equalized ($X/student). Fair? That depends on your view point. On a national level, I think it's fair. The state then distributes how it can. The biggest issue (and therefore problem) is population shifts, inner cities whose dynamics simply don't change or get worse. How do you take care of that? In that way, somehow, there has to be a revitalization of the areas - and that goes beyond education programs. The problems largely start at home and where these kids live. If you're in a disadvantaged area, you stay in a disadvantaged area. I don't really know how you take care of that... other then through some of the initiatives beyond education to get off of urban blight, if you will. Parents are the other hugely important role. If you have parents that screw just to pump out kids for the welfare money, that's obviously a huge problem too. And it happens in the more economically depressed areas in the country. Again, that transcends "education". What do we do about that? Education is more then children. It's about the whole population. Re-education is something that is sorely needed in this country. I guess I don't have a good answer.

QUOTE (Steff @ Jan 20, 2009 -> 07:10 PM) If that's your point fine. Then don't in the next breath give s*** to someone that doesn't share the same thoughts. QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Jan 20, 2009 -> 02:41 PM) The inauguration is a state function not a religious function. I find it completely unnecessary to perform religious ceremonies during something like this. Good lord. That'w what you are giving me crap over? I didn't even mean it about that comment. I meant it as there has to be a complaint on everything, I didn't mean it about that particular topic. OK, now I see what you were yelling at me for. By "it" I meant in general, not about "it" being religion.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Jan 20, 2009 -> 07:09 PM) I understand the point but find it unnecessary and not inclusive. Fair enough. I wasn't sure I was getting that across since apparently I had to get called out by Steff. Personally, I think we could do without all the whole thing. It's just a show, in reality, as I was saying.

QUOTE (Steff @ Jan 20, 2009 -> 07:05 PM) Maybe you need to read it again because it had nothing to do with what Obama did or didn't do on stage. I know it's the norm to toss s*** back at others and they crawl away but I think it was incredibly ignorant of you to attack BS and Rock's opinion on the prayer and I don't have a problem saying so. I don't know what your point was. But that was mine. I disagreed with their OPINION and stated my OPINION of their OPINION. Do you get that now or are you going to keep up your crusade of trying to make me look like an ass for some reason? Hell, I think Rock and BS even get what I was trying to say.

Why is it hard to understand the point? It's their CHOICE to have this included. Much of it is based on tradition. If they don't want to have it, they wouldn't. No, the Constitution doesn't have that mention, and it shouldn't. But this is a (I question the word "civil") ceremony - it's an inauguration - it's something that is not explicit to the Constitution. It's a ceremony that means nothing, really, since the Constitution explicitly says when the office is vacated by the former president. It's a big f***ing party for show. That's it.

QUOTE (santo=dorf @ Jan 20, 2009 -> 06:54 PM) I find that hard to believe considering there was a story on yahoo.com about how or whether they said his middle name. I'm not yahoo.com. I don't give a s*** about his religion or his name (I know, that wasn't your point - people are stupid in general). I don't care what the guy does as long as he doesn't outright lie (yea, he'll bend the truth, he's a damn politician).