LowerCaseRepublican

QUOTE(EvilMonkey @ Apr 15, 2006 -> 12:02 PM) Sorry, thought I put the link in there. http://www.alliancedefensefund.org/news/story.aspx?cid=3724 Reading anything by David Horowitz is just like asking for somebody to take a s*** on your brain. I wouldn't ban anybody from reading it but rather just suggest a title that is a bit better than one written by an intellectually dishonest sack of bile.

QUOTE(EvilMonkey @ Apr 14, 2006 -> 11:40 PM) Don't laws specifying special protections for homosexuals do just that? Don't laws banning 'hate speech' do that? Why can't someone hate gay people, and say so? Yeah, they probably have other issues, but something in that line there sounds very odd to me. If I didn't have so damn much cold medicine in me, I might be able to put it into words. But to make something clear, I don't give a rats ass if gay people want to marry. Welcome to hell! Marraige hell, that is. Hate crime legislation is a pretty odd thing because most violent crimes are derived out of hate. It is, as South Park put it, a "savage hypocricy". People should have the ability to use free speech to say what they want (if they think that the gays and the 5 Jewish bankers control the world money supply from the center of the Earth, etc.) but they have no right to codify their biases into legislation denying homosexuals from entering a contract (that is what marriage is in a purely legalistic sense, a contract given by the state) That's the point I was going after.

Here's a link to my column that ran on Friday in the Joliet Herald http://www.suburbanchicagonews.com/heraldn...4_COMMON_S1.htm 80% of the responses I got were supportive (out of 10 e-mails...which is a pretty big response compared to what I usually get -- in the number of responses that is)

QUOTE(T R U @ Apr 4, 2006 -> 08:24 PM) Mysterio is dropping the belt to Randy Orton friday night on Smackdown.. Also.. Addy what your dad heard could possibly be true except for I dont believe they go through the matches and rehearse.. I think it would be kind of hard for Edge and Mick Foley to practice going through flaming tables till they get it right.. A lot of things are prolly talked about in advance but I dont think they would risk injury just practicing before the actual event.. My aunt works for a cable company in Chicago and she got to meat Johnny Nitro and Joey Mercury and got to hold one of the tag titles.. Im one of the biggest wrestling fans there is btw, but I agree it has gone downhill since its prime.. I miss Razor Ramon Difficult for Orton to drop when he's been suspended for "unprofessional conduct" for up to 60 days. And I agree with your assessment about Mysterio getting the strap. It is a f***ing travesty that RVD hasn't gotten a shot. /shakes fist about Vince's love of hosses. Perhaps the "Cena Sucks" and "Die Cena Die" chants on Raw might make WWE a bit more apt to take the title off him and not give it to Mr. 20 Minute Promo (not a knock against HHH's ability in the ring...just the fact that goddamn man, cut a promo in under 15 minutes)

QUOTE(Heads22 @ Mar 27, 2006 -> 02:39 PM) I also had four teeth pulled before braces. First they rubbed that stuff on the gums to numb them.....then they used three shots of novicaine for each. I felt the needle when it was deepest in....didn't necessarily hurt.....but it was just weird. Later that day I had a sore mouth but it was gone after a few days. Also, I drooled a ton...... Would that be drooling more than usual, Heads? I also had teeth pulled before braces. They get you numb with the rubbing stuff and then shots of novacaine. Just sore (obviously) and not too much discomfort for me during the procedure. Just annoyingly sore afterwards for a few days.

QUOTE(SleepyWhiteSox @ Mar 26, 2006 -> 08:46 PM) I'm not familiar with the u of i campus or champaign...but what's north of Green St? North of Green is engineering/computer science, etc. Basically the really competitive schools to get into.

http://www.nbc5i.com/news/8259254/detail.html Lawmakers in TX are flummoxed as to why people are against this... "I'm getting all those same e-mails, the Nazi, Taliban, Gestapo e-mails," said commission spokeswoman Carolyn Beck. "I don't really understand the hateful outrage. I don't understand, 'Die in a fire.' " Rep. Kino Flores, chairman of the House Licensing and Administrative Procedures, said he plans to call a meeting next month to examine the commission's work. "We're looking at it and we're going to be looking at it: Are we going too far, or do we need to go further?" the Mission Democrat said. Sen. John Whitmire, a Houston Democrat and member of both the powerful Senate Finance Committee and the Criminal Justice Committee that oversees the commission, defended the principle of in-bar citations. "Even though a public drunk is not planning on driving, that could change in an instant," he said. "There is certainly potential danger." -- Go further than arrest people for what they might do? WTF?! There's a potential danger that I might fall out of my bed. Do we ban sleeping? I might burn myself cooking. Do we ban that too?

QUOTE(SnB @ Mar 25, 2006 -> 06:49 PM) It's the people that are in them, that's the problem. Ding ding ding. We have a winnar. Not every frat/sorority member is a douchebag but most of the douchebags I've ever met belonged to one.

QUOTE(3E8 @ Mar 24, 2006 -> 07:53 PM) I agree, that's why I said one of the items should just be a list of their assignments. I've got the two units I did in there as part of meeting some state standards. I taught a unit on the Industrial Revolution and I taught a unit on Andrew Jackson's presidency (bridged it into a unit on discrimination when talking about the Trail of Tears, etc.) I used worksheets (using the text as a guide to get information), worksheets (open ended questions like 'Give three reasons why you think the Industrial Revolution was good or bad.' and role reversals like 'If you thought it was good, would your opinion change if you were a worker? Why/why not?' and vice versa for bad), lots of informal discussions with guided group reading of sources, study guides, study games, the big project I gave, video, music (during a discussion on discrimination faced by blacks, I tied in that a lot of hip-hop had to deal with discrimination/social inequality/social problems being faced and then used "Changes" by Tupac to show them...led to a really interesting discussion), overheads etc. They really liked a lot of the stuff from the two units and did the assignments very well. I've got letters of recommendation from the teachers who saw my stuff in action. I'm trying to get them to let me use those instead of student work because student work is private. I think if they have the letters of rec who saw the stuff firsthand and examples of my templates, that that should suffice them. In the school I was teaching in, even if the student gives permission, I'd also have to contact the parent (just in case the parent doesn't want the work used). The area (for better or worse) is lower middle class so many of the parents are either single parents or both parents work constantly so it is incredibly difficult to get in contact with them until very late in the evenings. It really makes things problematic for a situation such as this. It seems to be a very thorny piece of the portfolio that it is just going to yield me a completion grade for my methods course -- not to mention that examples of their work (while very excellent) speak more to their ability, focus and putting their nose to the grindstone than it does my ability to say "Yay, I was able to find something interesting for them and still teach them the material." I'm not trying to sell myself short but in reality, I saw those kids 45 mins. a day in class. They have influence of family, peers, home, other classes, etc. playing in their motivations to do my work as well which is why I don't know if using their work is the most accurate portrayal of me as a teacher. I also have a job interview at the school where I was teaching, so I'm really hesitant about leaving any student work in that may tip off the administration to the kids' identities (during my time there, I had gotten to know a lot of the kids who were, for lack of a better term, troublemakers...and I'm not worried how that'll reflect on me if they want to think negatively of me getting to know them, I just don't want to betray that trust of "Hey, can I use this in my portfolio? I have no idea who or how many administrators are going to read it." I want to give them more details before I go and ask to use something of theirs that is really personal. I did get a big ass thank you card from a lot of the 7th graders I taught, I wonder if that'd be a good enough example for them of student work. I'm hoping so because then that way, no real privacy issues are breached.

I got in via LAS (History) 5 years ago. I graduate in May certified with a minor in social studies secondary education. I just look around the UIUC campus at some of the people who got in and I wonder "How the Bloody Hell did they get into here?" For anybody getting in the education minor, we had all these meetings telling us how hard it would be to get into the minor, that we should work on our essay applications for months in advance, etc. I wrote my application at 10:30 pm the night before it was due and got in. UIUC is turning into one big party school trying to make itself seem respectable. The disparity between north and south of Green is quite a sight to behold. Nothing says LAS like not having a mini-desk attached to your chair in the lecture hall (assuming the chair even works properly) It may just be my perception but it seems like it is more and more latte liberal rich kids who have mommy and daddy paying for all of their things getting let into this school. They bring their damn little Nalgene bottles with them like they'll never see water again, carrying coffees so big they could have their own Congressmen and think that their little Abercrombie shirts are badges to be Deputy Douchenozzle to any worker or other person they might see that's not in their frat/sorority who has done nothing wrong than not have their parents make over $90,000. I'm not saying that all frats or sororities are bad because I am good friends with a few people from both. However, and even they agree, the vast majority of them and others on the campus are self-absorbed asshats. I can't even count the times anymore where some kid made fun of an O&M staff person (basically the guys/gals who clean the buildings and are all purpose janitors) just because of their job while chatting on their damn cell phone about the latest 'Survivor'. Tons of people going to CO's and Kam's. I can piss all over my kitchen floor, turn off the lights and drink a stale beer standing in it -- and save myself $5 cover. It's all the ambiance of those two places without the airborne STDs, slutty girls, douchebag tool popped collar guys and the incredibly watered down alcohol. The damn hipsters are so annoying. But what really burns my ass is the growing number of kids at UIUC that say they like "every kind of music but country." Don't like country? Good for you, but don't f***ing advertise it. Funnier still is these same people will say "Well, I like 'I Love This Bar' by Toby Keith, 'Alcohol' by Brad Paisley, 'Tequila Makes Her Clothes Fall Off' by Joe Nichols, 'Devil Went Down to Georgia' by CDB and everything by Johnny Cash but it is okay because those aren't country." It is almost like saying that country = redneck = less than human. If it doesn't fit in with the Starbucks latte liberal-Mickey Mantle liver transplant level of favoritism, then it must be bad. My apologies for being so long winded, I just have a real ax to grind with this school and a lot of the people in it. I have met some quality people and had some quality times but too damn often I've met a bunch of very ignorant, classist, racist, homophobic and elitist f***s that refuse to admit their s*** stinks in my five years here. I'll admit that I'm f***ed up as well -- but the difference is that I admit and many people here do their best to hide it as if respectability simply means putting one's skeletons in a closet very well and acting like they're not there. And that isn't even talking about the DI editors getting fired for printing cartoons, the forced DI staff sensitivity training after an 'I Hate Pam' cartoon made fun of somebody that cried hard enough to the school about it, the faux Chief debate (as if a mascot is the most important issue facing this University that people would be so dedicated to either side of the issue, even for years after they left the University...If people were serious about respecting the Native Americans then they'd help out funding schools etc. for Native Americans and if the latte liberal f***s were serious about racism etc., then they need look no further than the racial/class disparities going on right in CU and the surrounding areas. But that calls into question their privileges so they can't do that) and the school messing up my grade/credit hour audit to be just a mere 100+ hours incorrect.

QUOTE(3E8 @ Mar 24, 2006 -> 11:45 AM) What percent of the professional portfolio are the student works supposed to take up? It has its own entire section of the portfolio. We've got our philosophy statements (on education, social studies and technology), our 22 state standards and artifacts that meet the standards (with 1 page responses of how each artifact meets the standard) and then a section on student work and reflection on how it looks upon us as a teacher. So, it is a pretty decent sized section of our portfolio requirement.

www.gkko.com www.newgrounds.com www.addictinggames.com Some ads etc. may be NSFW.

As you all may know, I'm finishing up my student teaching right now. One of the requirements to graduate is that we have a professional portfolio of artifacts that meet the various state standards, etc. One of the final requirements of this portfolio is that we also include examples of student work. I'm really in a pickle here and need some advice as to what any of you would do... During my first placement, we spent a lot of time discussing in class about different topics. The one very big assignment that I gave was a project regarding discrimination. I had the students research what happened to their families and also their ethnic group as they reached the US (with a focus on whether or not they faced discrimination -- and if they did, what happened) Many of the students told very personal stories and accounts in these assignments because I told them that only my cooperating teacher and I would read them. I'm hitting this moral dilemma because I'm refusing to go back on my word to the students. But this was the best work that the students had done in my seven (7) weeks of teaching and the thing they spent the most time on. I'm caught between my needing to fulfill a requirement for the portfolio (the examples of student work and how they discuss my abilities as a teacher) and giving my students a promise that I would not allow outside people to read their work. I feel that it is my professional duty to honor my agreement with the students and find it morally reprehensible to go ask them "Hey, after I told you I wouldn't let anybody else read them, would you ladies and gents mind if I took a few of your discrimination projects to show off for my minor program and also for future job interviews?" I also feel that including their work doesn't necessarily say much about me as a teacher. All I did was find material that was interesting to that particular student/group of students and adapted my methods of teaching the curriculum to their interests. The fact that the student(s) sat down and did much of their work outside of class reflects more upon the individual effort that they put into the project, much more than my efforts. I sat down with the students and told them my high expectations which the very vast majority of them met but I think that including their work speaks more to their efforts and abilities much more than my assistance/belief in their abilities to meet my high standards. There is just something in the pit of my stomach about including student work as a proverbial billboard for myself that is making me quite uneasy. Since this is one of the final parts of the portfolio that I need to do, I am trying now to figure out what it is that I should do -- even including other work they've done (worksheets etc.) is questionable for me because outside of the written project, much of the better work done in class was class discussions on important topics like discrimination, racial profiling, etc. so there are no written 'artifacts' of student response. I'd appreciate a well thought out response because this is really weighing on my mind because if I don't give examples of student work in my portfolio, I can't use it to finish the program/job interview. But I think it is very unethical for me to use the efforts of others to score points/job opportunities for myself. I think that the use of student works speaks partially for me as a teacher since I was able to find topics and projects that interested them, but the real success of the project came at the hands of the students who focused and did the work to an excellent degree. There are many other factors affecting the success of a student in the classroom rather than just the teacher. There is the student himself, the community, parents, relatives, friends, peer groups, etc. etc. etc. Just like I think it is bunk that teachers take the brunt of the responsibility during NCLB testing for being the supposed only influence on students, I think that it is unfair for me to claim that a student's ability to excel on any given piece of work speaks greatly about me as a teacher because the student has many other factors that influence their success. While I see the value in using student work, I am just having severe problems with justifying morally. Any assistance/suggestions about what to do would be very appreciated. PS: I've contacted the people who will be grading it and I have yet to hear back from them.

Definitely not the best work, but they can't be entirely blamed after they lose the voice of a very recurring character on the show right near the beginning of the season. But I think they did a decent and tasteful job of dealing with the quitting of Chef. They could have done a whole lot worse to him and really gave him a hatchet job. It is cool that Matt and Trey saw through the BS and put the blame where it belongs...on the Church of $cientology. The plot of the show was less than spectacular but it was good for them to put forth what a lot of fans of the show were feeling and give an "appropriate" sendoff to Chef given the constraints of what'd they be able to do with the episode. They had to make the best of a bad situation and I don't think this is going to be like the rest of the season -- because they had to do this ep with one voice completely out of the mix.

To never let tampons violate the sanctity of my hoo-hoo, because tampons are really nothing more than thirsty little albino penises.

QUOTE(AbeFroman @ Mar 21, 2006 -> 01:56 PM) I don't like bush, or his answer. But I'm happy he's started step out of this protective shell many feel he has hidden behind for a long time. When you make people sign loyalty oaths before they can come to one of your campaign events, perhaps he is behind a protective shell http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles...at_rnc_rallies/ http://www.slate.com/id/2108852 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loyalty_oath -- see the 2004 Presidential campaign It is difficult for Bush to deal with critics when he insulates himself from them.

QUOTE(samclemens @ Mar 21, 2006 -> 12:36 PM) while it remains at this point unproven that he actually had WMDs, look to the testimony from a multitude of former saddam officials. saddam ordered his men to purposely go out of their way to create the impression that they had WMDs. and our intel reflected this. http://www.danielpipes.org/article/1271 (before you criticize this guy, he is a respected columnist who is published around the country's newspapers, both left and right leaning) are you going to argue that saddam was justified in creating this impression to gain tactical advantage over the US and other countries? when you continually threaten and allude that you are going to shoot me and go out of your way to create the impression that you have a gun in your pocket, i could reasonably believe that you are going to shoot me. what did saddam expect? you cant have it both ways, saddam, and thats why you are where you are now- in a jail cell awaiting a death sentence. so what was unreasonable about our intel's conclusions? perhaps something was wrong with the german intel that was mentioned above (namely that they had a latent anti-american socialist running the country who i personally think was doing business with saddam, like the french were). thats the euro way, to pussy out until you absolutely have to act and you barely avert dissaster. Daniel Pipes is a guy who says he has an "internal radar" to pick out people that want an Islamist government in the US. Coincidentally, that happens to be anybody who raises even the slightest criticism of him. What Saddam was doing was posturing -- just like Bush and his "We'll shoot first and ask questions later" foreign policy of pre-emptive strikes (the doctrine of pre-emption was, oddly enough, negated as a legal basis for starting a war in the Nuremburg Tribunals) It is posturing...

QUOTE(Kid Gleason @ Mar 21, 2006 -> 12:28 PM) Well, that's one hell of a twist to the story. It was Xenu that wrote the press release...duh.

SPOILERS ENTAILED IN ARTICLE!!!!! http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=49340 Former Project Arkansas, Richard Mellon Scaife "conservatives" off the starboard bow! Some Bush cultists are calling it a neo-Marxist, terrorist supporting, left wing propaganda apology for terrorism. My personal favorite was the allusion to 9/11 in the article. ::sigh::

QUOTE(WCSox @ Mar 18, 2006 -> 03:53 PM) Nobody said that it was an anti-Bush movie. But I'm sure that the current political climate in this country had a lot to do with the timing of its release. The investors are looking to capitalize on the anti-Bush target market, plain and simple. I'm sure that it's a really good flick, but I'm not going to contribute towards Hollywood's anti-Bush campaign. I'll put it on my Nexflix queue sometime next year. Actually the Bros. had a script written in the early 90s but couldn't get enough people behind it because they hadn't really earned their chops (i.e. the popularity of the Matrix movies) It isn't so much that there is a Hollywoood anti-Bush bias but that they finally got to make the movie they had a working script for.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Mar 18, 2006 -> 10:58 AM) And that was one of the best parts of the movie. The source material was obviously not about Bush, but the way the movie was presented, it was "America's War" that was the turning point - showing images from Iraq (and mentioning that conflict multiple times). It was, unquestionably, a statement about western politics today, and more particularly the current set of US foreign policy doctrines. Ergo, it was about the policies being pursued by the west under the guidance of BushCo. Note that I did say that the points they tried to drive at are important, and the US (including its voters) has gone astray. I agree. I see little in this Administration's record to defend. I just think this film did an inconsistent, lackluster job of getting to that point. The point isn't the problem, the film's presentation was. They did take on a whole lot. But for 2+ hrs., I think they did do a pretty good job. They stayed pretty faithful to the source material with what V was doing (was he a freedom fighter or just a madman bent on revenge) The main thrust of the comic story was "Is V an insane terrorist who has completely made up reasons for doing what he is doing or is he a freedom fighter against a government gone amok?" I think they were trying to hit that rather than go full throttle into "V is a great guy!" Yeah, it was a condemnation of any government that usurps authority in the name of security and the masses that allow essential liberty to go by the wayside in the name of being secure and in that they were kinda wishy washy at getting the point across -- but I think it was also a commentary on what differentiates a freedom fighter from a terrorist. There is a pretty thin line there and I think the film was trying to ride that line to get people discussing "Yeah, V may be an anti-government terrorist but is what he is doing good?" and "Is V really motivated by political reasons or just mere revenge?" You know, when do violent methods against a government become good or bad? With that discussion, I think they really hit the nail on the head and leave a lot for the viewer to ponder.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Mar 18, 2006 -> 08:33 AM) ** out of **** Had some great ideas, and painted a few striking pictures. Some excellent visuals and, at times, strong dialogue. But overall, this movie was disjointed in the extreme. Any sense of style, flow and momentum were non-existent - and I think those things (particularly momentum and energy) would be necessary for a film like this to work. It was, not surprisingly, strident in its message. It was also downright ham-handed in putting this situation squarely on Bush's shoulders, as much as is possible without actually mentioning his name. The message here is important - our personal freedoms are being eroded in the name of a crusade. And its true. But this film was only occasionally successful at accomplishing that. It isn't an anti-Bush movie. The source material was written in 1983. The Bros. had wanted to make this flick but couldn't get big investors etc. until after the success of the Matrix movies. For Christ's sake, the guy who wrote the source material was British, so if anything it is more of a commentary on any government that tries to usurp liberty in the name of security -- and how people usually just go along with it. They took out one of the speeches he gives (for time reasons since the movie is already 2+ hrs. long) that is in the comic that hammers home this point: "In fact, let us not mince words… the management is terrible! We’ve had a string of embezzlers, frauds, liars, and lunatics making a string of catastrophic decisions. This is plain fact. But who elected them? It was you! You who appointed these people! You who gave them the power to make decisions for you! While I’ll admit that anyone can make a mistake once, to go on making the same lethal errors century after century seems to me to be nothing short of deliberate. You have encouraged these malicious incompetents, who have made your working life a shambles. You have accepted without question their senseless orders. You have allowed them to fill your workplace with dangerous and unproven machines. All you had to say was “No.” You have no spine. You have no pride. You are no longer an asset to the company."

Just got back. *** out of ****. Excellently done, storywise. They took a few liberties with the plot (and took out my favorite speech) that deviated from the comic, but overall, it was pretty good. The glorification of V as a hero was paired nicely with segments where his intentions came into question and the viewer came away at parts with trying to know if what he was doing was "freedom fighting" or "monstrous terrorism". A really good fantasy story that gets people thinking about these issues and how they're defined by media/culture. Definitely worth seeing.

QUOTE(Flash Tizzle @ Mar 17, 2006 -> 06:08 PM) You can't exclude acts of terrorism within 'V for Vendetta' from the storyline. Foxnews may suggest otherwise, but as you alluded to, the fascist government basically limits personal freedoms within the film. Portman and the masked figure are fighting a just cause. Beyond the plot, I have no idea what else happens in the movie, or to the extent the new regime controls society. I heard there are numerous Nazi comparisons. People shouldn't expect the terrorism begins because 'V' says, "hey, you illegally wiretapped my phones--now I'm going to blow up the English Parliament!" It is a very hypothetical society. Basically Britain's government is one of the few survivors of the Cold War MAD and the government ushers in a whole lot of authority and really limits personal freedoms (the walls where they can see in a la 1984, etc.) Moore's book does an excellent job of keeping the viewer questioning "Is what V is doing for a just cause or just the ravings and antics of a lunatic madman?" The line is really thin and Moore's idea for the comic does an excellent job in keeping the viewer guessing and really leaving it up to a lot of interpretation. V is quite an anti-hero in some respects (a la Frank Castle as the Punisher, etc.) and kinda adds to the discussion of when is violence just and when is it considered "terrorism"? But Moore wasn't involved with this film. After problems with "The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen" and "From Hell", he's washed his hands of Hollywood. So, the co-creator of "V For Vendetta" is doing the movie. If it stays faithful to the comic, this movie is going to be f***ing awesome.

QUOTE(Gene Honda Civic @ Mar 17, 2006 -> 05:29 PM) Isn't the book about the Thatcher administration? Supposedly it is an allegory written by Moore based on his perception in the 1980s so it could be a critique of the Thatcher administration. I'd think that he took that truth, spun it with some Brave New World, 1984 etc. etc. and this was the result. It makes for a really interesting discussion on what exactly a "terrorist" is and when is that bad/good because there is a thin line between terrorist and freedom fighter.