I'm sorry that the site has been down since last night. The power supply on my VM host failed. It was $15.00 and lasted for about 2.5 years. If you ask me, that's a pretty good bargain!

Note: You DO NOT need to register to leave a comment.

Is it just me, or is there a pattern here? I remember as soon as I heard about the shooting at Fort Hood; we were told by the FBI, "It's not a terror related incident". Of course the FBI couldn't tell why it happened, but they could tell us why it didn't? What did it end up being? A Muslim terrorist. Hmm... Then you have the attempted bombing of Times Square. Again we were told that it must be some lone gun, someone with a chip on their shoulder, it couldn't be terror related. Again Muslim terrorist.

Now I'm not saying that this has anything to do with Muslim terrorists. I'm just questioning what we are supposed believe. We are again hearing that it's NOT what it appears to be. Nobody can say what it is, but everyone knows what it's not.

(CBS) More than a day after a CBS camera caught video of an unidentified projectile leaving a condensation trail off the California coast, the situation remains a mystery, with the Defense Department insisting that it was not a missile.

The Pentagon is still not sure what that was in the sky off the coast of California -- except that it was not a missile fired by the U.S. or some other country, reports CBS News Pentagon correspondent David Martin.

The Federal Aviation Administration did not receive any reports of a missile from other pilots in the area or track any unusually fast objects. The Air Defense Command determined the object was not traveling fast enough or have a big enough exhaust plume to be a military missile.

The best guess right now is that it was either an airliner or an amateur rocket, but we may never know for certain.

The Pentagon spends billions of dollars a year making sure it is never surprised by a missile launch - so finding out what the camera saw became a top priority. Both the Navy and the Air Force insisted they had not launched any missiles and the North American Air Defense Command - which is supposed to track incoming missiles - declared it had not been fired by any other military. But nobody could say what it was.

I don't claim to know exactly what it is, but I can tell you that I highly doubt anything the Pentagon claims. The FAA has already said that there were no flights scheduled in that area at that time; what else, if not a missile, could it be?

If it were an airplane wouldn't that be even worse? If what the Pentagon is saying is correct; that would mean that there are airplanes flying around right off the west coast and the FAA and NORAD have no knowledge of it!

Note: You DO NOT need to register to leave a comment.

This is a post from my old blog "HaveABadDay" on JournalSpace.

Posted: 02/25/07

You might think that this is a normal story about people taking their kids to school right? Wrong! This is a story about how people are so helpless that they can’t make sure that their kids even go to school, much less a good one. Now these people are freaking out because they have choice and there is no government nanny system to tell them what to do. I wonder if any of these people drive cars. Did they not buy an automobile because there was so much choice, they didn’t know what to do?

But Liam’s mother, Elana Seaman, a psychotherapist, said she found little funny about middle school admissions. “It has just been incredibly stressful and confusing,” she said. “I have seen a couple of mothers break down crying.”

That is a good thing, at least they are trying, and are concerned for their kids!

Then you have the side of the educators. Government educators always have a problem with anything that involves change. I like this quote, perfect example.

...some educators say greater school choice primarily benefits students with savvy, motivated parents who are able to spend time figuring out the best schools to list on applications, and puts at a further disadvantage the children with little support at home.

They mention “parents who are able to spend time” what it should say is parents who “MAKE TIME” Making time is what you do when you have a priority. I consider a kid to be a TOP priority. They claim that school choice benefits primarily “savvy, motivated parents.” Savvy motivated parents will do the best in any circumstance. If you refuse to take the time required to get your kid into a nice school, then you might end up with your kid at a low ranked school. Besides if the kids have parents that can’t get them into government school then those kids are already in serious trouble, no school is likely to save them. So the belief is that we need to dumb down the process so that the people who could excel now can’t, and are knocked off the top. We need all kids equally ignorant! Sorry, but you don’t achieve a higher level of education by striving towards the lowest level of accomplishment. That is a ridiculous thought process!

And while some parents said that the local elementary and middle schools in their neighborhoods were good enough that there was no need to get involved in the admissions race, others said they only wished that were the case.

Well there is an admitted problem with the schools. People see this. Why then is their opposition to the choice system? Now these people have the freedom to send their kids to a school that ranks higher. I don’t see the problem here.
Look what happens at the end of the article though. They try hard to make it look bad, but there is some light at the end of the tunnel. The editor had better have his eyes peeled, looking for a new job.

“The application process is overwhelming,” said Marcia Lalla, who lives in the Bronx but whose daughter attends one of the new, small high schools in Manhattan. “However, if you and your child do the research, you will be pleased with your choices.”

I’m sorry though, Marcia Lalla must be one of those “savvy” parents. We can’t use her example until the very end of the article.

Note: You DO NOT need to register to leave a comment.

Over the next couple of days I'm going to put in my two cents on the Florida ballot.

Florida Constitutional Amendment Number 8 as written on a sample ballot:

NO. 8
CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT
ARTICLE IX, SECTION 1
ARTICLE XII, SECTION 31

Revision Of The Class Size Requirements For Public Schools

The Florida Constitution currently limits the maximum number of students assigned to each teacher in public school classrooms in the following grade groupings: for prekindergarten through grade 3, 18 students; for grades 4 through 8, 22 students; and for grades 9 through 12, 25 students. Under this amendment, the current limits on the maximum number of students assigned to each teacher in public school classrooms would become limits on the average number of students assigned per class to each teacher, by specified grade grouping, in each public school. This amendment also adopts new limits on the maximum number of students assigned to each teacher in an individual classroom as follows: for prekindergarten through grade 3, 21 students; for grades 4 through 8, 27 students; and for grades 9 through 12, 30 students. This amendment specifies that class size limits do not apply to virtual classes, requires the Legislature to provide sufficient funds to maintain the average number of students required by this amendment, and schedules these revisions to take effect upon approval by the electors of this state and to operate retroactively to the beginning of the 2010-2011 school year.

This amendment represents a retraction of the class size limits enacted back in 2002. Obviously the legislature underestimated the cost of implementing the class reduction plan, now they want a way out.

I would consider releasing some control at the state level to be a good thing. History has proven that when control of a complex system is centralized its efficiency and quality decrease. I'm sure that more teaching jobs would be filled if the class size limits were left as they are now, but that doesn't necessarily mean that the level of education will increase.

The general lack of quality public/government education throughout the entire country is a direct result of the centralization of power within the school system. When a standard is set, what do most people do? They meet the standard. Since there is no incentive to surpass the standard; you end up with a large bloated system devoid of improvement. Or in the case of Florida you end up with teachers who teach kids how to take tests, not subject matter.

In other words; the entire government school system is poorly structured and inefficient. Class sizes, outside of extremes, will have no effect on this whatsoever.

Note: You DO NOT need to register to leave a comment.

Over the next couple of days I'm going to put in my two cents on the Florida ballot.

Florida Constitutional Amendment Number 5 as written on a sample ballot:

NO. 5
CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT
ARTICLE III, SECTION 21

Standards For Legislature To Follow In Legislative Redistricting

Legislative districts or districting plans may not be drawn to favor or disfavor an incumbent or political party. Districts shall not be drawn to deny racial or language minorities the equal opportunity to participate in the political process and elect representatives of their choice. Districts must be contiguous. Unless otherwise required, districts must be compact, as equal in population as feasible, and where feasible must make use of existing city, county and geographical boundaries. The fiscal impact cannot be determined precisely. State government and state courts may incur additional costs if litigation increases beyond the number or complexity of cases which would have occurred in the amendment’s absence.

There are a few key words here that should make anyone questions this. Such as; "Unless otherwise required, districts must be compact, as equal in population as feasible, and where feasible must make use of existing city, county and geographical boundaries."

Let me ask a few questions. Is it true that metro areas often tend to have higher populations than urban areas? Is it not true that metro areas often attract more liberal individuals? So, under this proposal, would it be safe to assume that the metro areas will end up with more legislative representation than more urban areas?

Florida Constitutional Amendment Number 5 as written on a sample ballot:

NO. 6
CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT
ARTICLE III, SECTION 20

Standards For Legislature To Follow In Congressional Redistricting

Congressional districts or districting plans may not be drawn to favor or disfavor an incumbent or political party. Districts shall not be drawn to deny racial or language minorities the equal opportunity to participate in the political process and elect representatives of their choice. Districts must be contiguous. Unless otherwise required, districts must be compact, as equal in population as feasible, and where feasible must make use of existing city, county and geographical boundaries. The fiscal impact cannot be determined precisely. State government and state courts may incur additional costs if litigation increases beyond the number or complexity of cases which would have occurred in the amendment’s absence.

Again we have the same wording as in amendment 5 only this time concerning congressional districts. "Unless otherwise required, districts must be compact, as equal in population as feasible, and where feasible must make use of existing city, county and geographical boundaries." This time congressional redistricting is the goal. And once again you have the same criteria by which the redistricting is to occur.

Either one of these amendments, if passed, will result in legislative districts being drawn on ideological boundaries. These boundaries are already set based on where people have decided to live. This could not be any more transparent.

Note: You DO NOT need to register to leave a comment.