Still Hating America.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Spanky
Seems that the econonmist agrees with me that more testing is a good idea and that the teacher's Unions exert a damaging influence on the Democrat party.

I would emphasize the conclusion of that paragraph:

"Education is the area where progress is likely soonest. One of Mr Bush's domestic successes, the No Child Left Behind Act, requires schools to test pupils more and publish the results. It has helped improve basic literacy and numeracy a bit, but would work better if it were more rigorous. Republicans want to tighten up the testing part, but not to spend much more money. The Democrats, enslaved to the teachers' unions, want the precise opposite. A swift compromise, involving better tests and a bit more money, will not solve the problem of America's schools, but it is considerably better than nothing."

Both sides gotta give to get.

[sgtclub]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
They have many alternatives. What they don't have is agreement on one.

Hence, no alternative. If we change course, we have to change to something. Having ideas is one thing, but getting agreement on the change is quite another. I'm all for other options, but nothing coherent and thought out has been put forth by anyone on either side of the aisle, and before I would endorse a change of course, I need to know what the change actually is.

I thought Biden's plan was to split the country up into thirds -- a Sunni part, a Shi'ite part, and a Kurdish part, with Baghdad as sort of a federal capital.

I don't think so, but I also haven't been following as closely as usual. That plan has it's own set of challenges, and it will take a millenium to get an agreement there, if one can even be reached, especially regarding oil, and I think we are too far down the road on the current path/constitution for this to be a viable option.

I increasingly feel that pulling out is the only sane option, since it appears to me that the Shi'ites are using us to fight the Sunnis for us, but that there is no prospect of a non-Shi'ite dominated state -- meaning that the Sunnis will keep fighting and the Kurds will keep their distance -- or of any other sort of political reconciliation. There are no government troops -- there are only Shi'ite and Kurdish militias, some of which wear government uniforms. Under these circumstances, I don't see what our staying achieves.

And just to be clear, I have not made up my mind on this. But I have no faith that Bush will start managing things well.

I somewhat buy into the "crutch" argument, but I don't think we can implement it all at once, and I also think we will need to have a significant number of troops there for a significant period of time for a variety of reasons (AQ, border stability, oil stability, etc). They may be able to be moved outside the frey for the most part, but we will need a presence there for these and other reasons, mostly related to Iran.

[Spanky]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
I would emphasize the conclusion of that paragraph:

"Education is the area where progress is likely soonest. One of Mr Bush's domestic successes, the No Child Left Behind Act, requires schools to test pupils more and publish the results. It has helped improve basic literacy and numeracy a bit, but would work better if it were more rigorous. Republicans want to tighten up the testing part, but not to spend much more money. The Democrats, enslaved to the teachers' unions, want the precise opposite. A swift compromise, involving better tests and a bit more money, will not solve the problem of America's schools, but it is considerably better than nothing."

Both sides gotta give to get.

Contrary to what Bill Clinton said, there are only two things that government can invest it. Meaning, that if the government spends money on them, the resulting tax revenues reaped by the increased economic growth caused by the expenditures can exceed the money spent on them (in the long run).

Those two things are education and infrastructure. But unfortunately government can also waste an infinite amount of money on these projects. But if the money is spent efficiently and targeted well, the government can actually make money by spending money on them.

(actually a judicial and law enforcement system also brings such returns, but generally those don't cost that much).

I have no problem spending gobs of money on both, as long as I know the money is being used efficienty and productively. Right now I can't say that about the California educational system. Under the current system more money does not bring better results.

[Spanky]

Originally posted by sgtclub
Hence, no alternative. If we change course, we have to change to something. Having ideas is one thing, but getting agreement on the change is quite another. I'm all for other options, but nothing coherent and thought out has been put forth by anyone on either side of the aisle, and before I would endorse a change of course, I need to know what the change actually is.

2. And it seems to me to impede one strategy without providing a single alternative strategy is highly irresponsible. It is one thing to say, don't do this, we should do this, but it is quite another to say, we can't agree on alternative, but don't continue what you are doing. Why should anyone think that the Democrats have a better insight into how to fix the problem than the administration if they can't agree on an alternative? In fact, if they can't agree on an alternative, why should we have any confidence in their criticisms of the surge? If it is so easy to see why the surge is wrong, then why isn't it easy to see what the alternative should be?

I have never heard a coherent argument of why the surge will make things worse. And if it won't make things worse, why not give it a shot? Until the Democrats can agree on an alternative, it seems really iresponsible to me to simply mess with the current strategy. Until you can come up with an single alternative, don't mess with the current plan. Simply impeding one program, never giving it a chance to see if it can succeed, is not a legitimate policy alternative, and is not a responsible course of action to take.

[Spanky]

[sgtclub]

?

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally posted by sgtclub
?

Once it has been conclusively proven that the teacher's unions support terrorism, hate America, and caused all the problems in Iraq, what else is there to say?

[Adder]

Originally posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy
Once it has been conclusively proven that the teacher's unions support terrorism, hate America, and caused all the problems in Iraq, what else is there to say?

Trade is good?

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy
Once it has been conclusively proven that the teacher's unions support terrorism, hate America, and caused all the problems in Iraq, what else is there to say?

What strikes me about those cartoons is that the authors are interested in scoring political points off Democrats, not in what's happening on the ground in Iraq. How do you talk to someone with those priorities?

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally posted by Adder
Trade is good?

What will you give me for all the WMD in Iraq?

[Spanky]

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
What strikes me about those cartoons is that the authors are interested in scoring political points off Democrats, not in what's happening on the ground in Iraq. How do you talk to someone with those priorities?

talk how you normally talk to democrats, but into a mirror?

[Spanky]

RT, what kind of state do you live in?

Flat-earth society's warriors
By ROBYN BLUMNER
Published February 25, 2007



The late columnist and to-the-bone Texan Molly Ivins couldn't have thought this one up if her absurdity-meter were spring-loaded, revved up and set to overdrive. Sorry she missed it.

Rep. Warren Chisum, a self-described creationist who is also a Republican state representative from the Texas Panhandle, Appropriations Committee chairman of the House and the second most powerful member of that august body, must have figured that he had that lefty evolution-touting crowd dead to rights. In a memo Chisum circulated to all 149 Texas state representatives, Darwin's theory of evolution was described as nothing more than a Jewish plot.

"Indisputable evidence - long hidden but now available to everyone - demonstrates conclusively that so-called secular evolution science is the Big Bang 15-billion-year alternate 'creation scenario' of the Pharisee Religion," the memo said.

Now, here's the clincher. The memo suggests that because of the evolution theory's connection to ancient "Rabbinic writings" it "cannot legally be taught in taxpayer supported schools, according to the Constitution."

Hah! Chisum had hoisted that science-not-religion crowd on its own petard. They were always crying about church-state separation and the First Amendment, a stricture Chisum undoubtedly never much cared for before. But now there is proof that evolution is just dressed up religion and the JEEEWWWS are behind it. Talk about your poetic justice.

The fact that the six-day story of creation that people like Chisum get so exercised over comes from the Old Testament, the book of the Jewish people, must have slipped Chisum's unengaged mind.

The memo Chisum sent to every colleague was ostensibly written by Rep. Ben Bridges, a five-term Republican from the Georgia state Legislature. Chisum's cover letter vouches for Bridges and expresses great appreciation for "his information on this important topic."

But it appears that the actual author of the memo is Marshall Hall, president of the Cornelia, Ga.-based Fair Education Foundation and the developer of the Web site "www.fixedearth.com." On that Web site you'll find a lunatic brew of anti-Semitism, conspiracy theories and attacks on the scientific establishment. Hall's chief targets are Darwin and Copernicus and their Jewish purveyors such as "Kabbalist physicist Albert Einstein."

Hall believes not only that evolution is a crock but so is the idea that the Earth rotates and circles the sun.

Here's just a tidbit: "The Bible teaches that the Earth is stationary and immovable at the center of a 'small' universe with the sun, moon, and stars going around it every day. All observational and experimental evidence - and non-occult math, i.e., true science - supports the Bible teaching."

That these kinds of rantings have inspired legislative interest rather than involuntary commitment proceedings is a testament to the fierce ignorance that qualifies as leadership today. Wrap anything in religion and biblical literalism and you've punched your ticket to the halls of power in way too many parts of this country.

Bridges and Chisum have had to respond to the press due to their promotion of Hall's ideas and demands by the Anti-Defamation League for a repudiation and apology. Both have predictably backpedaled, though not as much as one would expect in a society that has moved beyond fire and the wheel.

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution reports that Bridges maintains it wasn't his memo, so he really shouldn't have to apologize to the Jews. "I regret that these people have been offended, but I didn't offend them because I didn't put the memo out," Bridges told the paper.

Hall claims that Bridges saw the text of the memo and told him to do anything that helps the cause. Hall's wife had been Bridges' campaign manager.

Also, Bridges has demonstrated plenty of common cause with the likes of Hall, having tried in the past to derail the teaching of evolution in schools by sponsoring legislation to that effect. And regarding the memo's contents, Bridges told the Journal-Constitution "I agree with it more than I would the Big Bang Theory or the Darwin Theory."

Back in Texas, Chisum has been more publicly contrite. In his letter to Mark Briskman, director of the ADL North Texas-Oklahoma Regional Office, Chisum says he is "truly sorry" for having disrespected "the religious views held by any person or group." He says that the memo "through further review" does not reflect his views "about such a complicated and deep subject."

Stupid is as stupid does, as Mr. Gump would say. No "further review" is necessary.

[Adder]

Originally posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy
What will you give me for all the WMD in Iraq?

The question is what will Bush given for them. And the answer is apparently a shitload of money (literally tons of cash), 3k+ American lives, America's creditability on the international stage, a resurgent Iran, and stability in the Middle East.

And all that with no gaurantees required on your end.

[Adder]

Originally posted by Spanky

I thought the point of cartoons was humor?

And, btw, anyone think Gore isn't running after the Oscar performances?