Big Ol' Smitty

I know a lot of union guys that would argue with you on that one.

I don't really get what you mean here. The money wouldn't go to unions, it would go to schools. Education spending has increased over 40%. It isn't making it to the schools, apparently. SOMEBODY is siphoning it off for their own use. -=Mike ...That somebody isn't the President... How do you know it isn't making it to the schools? I've never heard these criticisms of teachers unions. The main knocks on the unions that I know of is that they try to control public education too much, that they stifle change in the system, and that the contracts they impose are too restraining. You guys seem to be suggesting that they are stealing money? I would like to hear more. I'm ambivalent about the unions. Workers have the right to organize collectively, to unionize. But if the unions are impeding progress in education--that's a problem. As Dubya so poignantly said, "the question we should be asking ourselves is 'is our children learning?'"

I don't really get what you mean here. The money wouldn't go to unions, it would go to schools.

NCLB funding falls short of the amount appropriated by Congress by several billion dollars. The act is not gonna do much good if it doesn't have any $ backing it up. Without proper funding, NCLB is just a series of mandates. In short, they had adequate reason to "[bitch]." Except, for ONE small problem --- Bush has somewhere in the neighborhood of ZERO control over the money. -=Mike All I'm trying to say is that NCLB is not going to work without adequate funding. I know Bush doesn't directly control the funding. I'm saying that the architects of NCLB had adequate reason to complain about it because it wasn't funded fully. What incentives do schools have to meet the mandates if there are not rewards for doing so? Personally, as a future teacher, I think it sucks, anyway. Funding it would be equivalent to pumping gas into a broken down engine.

Then I guess you wouldn't condemn this other douchebag radio host's remarks about Condy? Ah, so being "racist" is fine --- as long as you're of the correct political persuasion? Got it. The man also calls Powell an "Uncle Tom" --- ironic, considering that he's a paunchy cracka and all. -=Mike That's not at all what I insinuated. Wow. I'm saying that that douche's remarks are equally as deplorable as the remarks of kkk's douche, Limbaugh. If kkk thinks that none of these comments are outrageous, fine, at least he's being consistent. I think he's wrong and they're all fucking stupid and racist.

Then I guess you wouldn't condemn this other douchebag radio host's remarks about Condy?

C'mon Czech...I expect more of you. Hey, I expected more than "uneducated boorish fascist sheep," so I was just a bit annoyed. Yeah, but a bright guy like you should always take the...

C'mon Czech...I expect more of you.

NCLB funding falls short of the amount appropriated by Congress by several billion dollars. The act is not gonna do much good if it doesn't have any $ backing it up. Without proper funding, NCLB is just a series of mandates. In short, they had adequate reason to "[bitch]."

Source: Wikipedia

I. http://www.snopes.com/politics/quotes/limbaugh.asp II. http://209.157.64.200/focus/f-news/996835/posts I got this from a Free Republic commentary. The author claimed that it was just a joke. III. http://billandkent.com/blog/archives/000480.htm

On the subject of stupid partisan radio hosts...why do people listen to Rush Limbaugh and Michael Savage? -Limbaugh told an African-American caller, ''Take that bone out of your nose and call me back.'' -When a Mexican won the New York marathon, Limbaugh said, ''An immigration agent chased him the last 10 miles.'' -Complaining about American jobs lost to NAFTA, Limbaugh said, ''Let the unskilled jobs, let the kinds of jobs that take absolutely no knowledge whatsoever to do - let stupid and unskilled Mexicans do that work.'' -Savage called a gay caller a "sodomite" and told him to "get AIDS and die."

I thought the next UN SecGen was supposed to come from North America.

On the subject of extremist groups doing dumb things... In my hometown of Frankfort, KY, an anti-abortion group was handing out gruesome plastic fetuses at our annual October pumpkin festival which is intended for children and consists of jack-o-lantern carving, pumpkin painting and the like.

I agree that this is racist BS and should be labeled as such. Rice's skin color should not be a factor to her critics. There's lot of better things to criticize her for.

Another, in my opinion, good essay on the situation. This juxtaposes the shooting of the insurgent with the murder of Margaret Hassan:

I liked this article about Rice's daunting task from the Wall St. Journal:

Asshole. I was thinking the same thing. GB in the house representin for the '04 yo. OK, here's my contribution -- I always knew Clinton liked being around Bush (not to mention a pussy...) That's a mean thing to say about a nice guy like George HW Bush.

Nader/Camejo Challenge Electronic Voting Results in New Hampshire Washington, DC:The Nader/Camejo campaign has filed a challenge to the voting results in New Hampshire after receiving numerous complaints from voting rights activits. Below is Nader's letter to New Hampshire requesting a recount. Also, below is Nader's view on electronic voting without a paper trial. In addition, the Nader/Camejo campaign offered our campaign to poll watchers who wanted to be credentialed to be inside to monitor electronic voting. Hundreds of democracy activists in Maryland working with TrueVoteMD.org were credentialed to monitor polling through the Populist Party which was created by Nader-Camejo supporters in Maryland. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- November 5, 2004 Via fax: 603-271-6316 To The Secretary of State of New Hampshire: The Nader/Camejo campaign requests a hand recount of the ballots in the presidential election in New Hampshire. Numerous voting rights activists have requested that we seek a recount of this vote. We have received reports of irregularities in the vote reported on the AccuVote Diebold Machines in comparison to exit polls and trends in voting in New Hampshire. These irregularities favor President George W. Bush by 5% to 15% over what was expected. Problems in these electronic voting machines and optical scanners are being reported in machines in a variety of states. We are requesting that the state undertake this recount or a statistically significant sample audit of these vote counts. We would like to make sure every vote counts and is counted accurately. Sincerely, Ralph Nader Paperless Electronic Voting A bedrock of democracy is making sure that every vote counts. The counting of votes needs to be transparent so people can trust that their vote is counted as they cast it. Paperless electronic voting on touch screen machines does not provide confidence to ensure votes are counted the way voters intend. The software on which votes are counted is protected as a corporate trade secret and the software is so complex that if malicious code was embedded no analysis could discover it. Further, because there is no voter verified paper record, it is not possible to audit the electronic vote for accuracy, nor is it possible to conduct an independent recount. This Primary Day six million voters will be voting on paperless electronic voting machines. This is a grotesquely designed, over-complicated expensive system fraught with the potential for mistakes and undetected fraud. On July 23, 2003 the Johns Hopkins Information Security Institute reviewed the electronic voting system in Maryland and found that it had security “far below even the most minimal security standards . . . .” Johns Hopkins computer security experts concluded: “If we do not change the process of designing our voting systems, we will have no confidence that our election results will reflect the will of the electorate.” Computers are inherently subject to programming error, equipment malfunction, and malicious tampering. If we are to ensure fair and honest elections, and retain voter confidence in our democratic process, we need to ensure that there are no such questions. Therefore, it is crucial that any computerized voting system provide a voter-verifiable paper audit trail and that random audits of electronic votes be conducted on Election Day. Paperless electronic voting machines make it impossible to safeguard the integrity of our vote thereby threatening the very foundation of our democracy. The seller of the machines, the Diebold Corporation, is a supplier of money to one of the major party candidates, George W. Bush. The CEO and top officers of Diebold are major contributors to the Bush campaign. This does not pass the smell test. Voters should report immediately any suspected malfunctions and deficiencies at voting precincts around the country to their Board of Elections. And voters should urge their legislators to require a voter verified paper ballot trail for random audits and independent recounts. source: http://www.votenader.org/media_press/index.php?cid=400

Again, I'm not arguing about the results of the election, but about the transparency of the electoral process. Democracy is not in voting, but in vote counting.

I gotta hand it to him, Dubyah does look particularly badass there. Carter looks short and elfin.

Breakfast-Oatmeal w/ sugar & cinnamon, milk Lunch-Turkey wrap, potato salad, pickle, water, apple

http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/041118/sfth040_1.html UC Berkeley Study Questions Florida E-Vote Count Thursday November 18, 1:23 am ET Research Team Calls for Immediate Investigation BERKELEY, Calif., Nov. 18 /PRNewswire/ -- When: Thursday, November 18, 2004, 10:00 a.m. PST Where: UC Berkeley campus, Survey Research Center Conference Room -- 2538 Channing Way (intersection of Channing/Bowditch). Parking on Durant near Telegraph. What: A research team at UC Berkeley will report that irregularities associated with electronic voting machines may have awarded 130,000 - 260,000 or more excess votes to President George W. Bush in Florida in the 2004 presidential election. The study shows an unexplained discrepancy between votes for President Bush in counties where electronic voting machines were used versus counties using traditional voting methods. Discrepancies this large or larger rarely arise by chance -- the probability is less than 0.1 percent. The research team, led by Professor Michael Hout, will formally disclose results of the study at the press conference.

Here's a former Navy SEAL's take on this situation: