On nat'l tv lindsay Graham has told us that if he'd said some of the loaded phrases attributed to Sotomayor,he'd no longer be in politics...but he hastened to say that he'll "be fair with her"...what ever the hell that means.What he;s doing is confriming that LEFTISTS ALWAYS GET ANOTHER CHANCE....when they say something vulgar ,to re-work their words & to shine them up,but the trent lotts of the world,the rush Limbaughs,the don Imuses,the fuzzy Zellers,the John Rockers,the Al Campanas,and Jimmy the greeks....are always dead on arrival
Has anyone considered that it's almost impossible to ..not..be able to re-work anything you say to sound acceptable?He is effectively telling us that no leftist can be condemned for anything he says.concentrate with me a moment. anyone can go back,if he said "We should Kill so & so and clean it up to read that he meant "We ..shouldn't ...kill..so & so."where does it end?
what you've effectively done is absolve the left of any responsibility.
So what is this about Graham now saying"I don't think she's a racist
i;ll try to be fair with her."HOW DO YOU KNOW WHO SHE IS ,LINDSAY"
If you're going to prejudge that"she's probably innocent...then your subsequent actions ,dear fellow, will direct you to cherry-pick the facts that will produce ..exactly that result!
There's an old French saying that "to understand...is to forgive"This effectively makes anyone you "understand'(as in "I understand why you did that now") ...it effectively ..gives them immunity
Friends .friends,friends.there's no future in this mea culpa that conservatives SO WILLINGLY engage in when judging the left.what they in effect are saying is"I'm the wise father,w/ broad shoulders that're always ready to absorb blame that should be directed to you."
In fact is that not exactly why all the above conservatives i've mentioned,or at least 'establishment members" always have to resign "when they've been bad boys"? And is this not ,possibly the very reason why we've ceded New york state to the left,and california,and texas is right on the brink of also going 'blue'?
If the other side is never as guilty as you ..THEN WHY SHOULDN'T THE VOTERS
VOTE FOR THEM? Anyone ready to review ..watergate w/ me?
Al, Lemon Grove
The Vast Write Wing
Forum is now open for registration
Vast Write Wing - June 2009
Moderator: Mod Squad
Vast Write Wing - June 2009
by lwoolley on Sun May 31, 2009 12:49 pm
- lwoolley
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9780
- Joined: Mon Mar 27, 2006 12:32 pm
Re: Vast Write Wing - June 2009
by lwoolley on Mon Jun 01, 2009 6:24 am
Wes Riddle’s Horse Sense #400
Dirty Dozen (Part 6)
Two eminent scholars, Thomas Woods, Jr. and Kevin Gutzman wrote a book last year with a startling and disconcerting thesis. Their argument is that the Constitution is dead not just dying, and they identified a dozen ways—the dirty dozen—in which all three branches of the federal government have removed restraining elements from federal officials so they can do whatever they want! Before discussing Number Six there’s a point worth making in terms of the broader sweep of history, which perhaps warrants a pause to consider just where we are headed. The point speaks to Original Intent and federalism, but also to a sea change in attitudes amongst the polity—those of us who vote and care enough to participate politically. It may speak to the harmful cumulative effect of inattention in a democracy, and the difficulty of holding government to account or hitting the reset button as it were. In my opinion, it speaks to the way in which freemen and freewomen are turned into vassals by their own government.
To wit, Americans knew that for the federal government to prohibit something like alcohol, it would require an amendment to the Constitution. The Eighteenth Amendment was adopted and ratified therefore to do just that. A policy that worked tolerably well at state level, however, demonstrably did not transfer well to the national level and instead gave rise to organized crime for much the same reason that drug violence is rife today in Mexico. The Eighteenth Amendment was overturned by the Twenty-First, the only constitutional amendment ever to have been repealed. Fast forward: Congress now bans products willy-nilly without the least constraining compunction, and marijuana is an excellent example because of its similarity to alcohol. This is done by the way without any amendment empowering it to do so!
Speaking of the harmful cumulative effect of inattention in a democracy, where once the people’s money was safe it is now utterly debased. The dollar may give way to an international currency yet, and it will when it is worthless. The dollar used to be based on gold and precious metal, then on confidence and a few shreds of integrity left in the system. Today the value of one dollar is close to a delete function away. The government won’t even tell you how many are in the economy. If they did, you might try to calculate what’s been done to it. And while you never know where the story will end, in hindsight it is easy to see the first big heist which is Number Six in our dirty dozen—the great gold robbery of 1933. Americans hardly read about it or know it happened, and that’s another story how history in public classrooms is almost as debased as the dollar.
The U.S. Dollar was defined as roughly one-twentieth of an ounce of gold throughout most of our history. Indeed, gold was the actual money but paper represented the specie, being lighter and easier to handle, etc. Assume your raffle ticket is good for a TV—it’s only good if you can make the exchange. The point is that paper notes could be redeemed for gold at any time prior to March 1933 when the federal government announced a banking emergency and, in order to cope with it “recalled” all the monetized gold in the U.S. That is to say, if you possessed gold in the bank or a stash of gold coins in the closet, the Government ordered you to turn it in. The Trading with the Enemy Act (left over from 1917!) was amended to give the president authority to “investigate, regulate, or prohibit” hoarding of gold. In other words, anyone who kept his gold money was unpatriotic and quite probably an enemy of the New Deal Republic to be dealt with accordingly. Now consider that the confiscation of gold was in the name of a banking and currency management crisis, so most Americans absolutely assumed it would be returned when the emergency abated. The difference between borrowing and theft has a lot to do with whether or not you give it back! People and corporations were given an equivalent amount of paper currency for their gold holdings because of the temporary shortage of gold in the banking system since banks had loaned out too much and held too little in reserve. As soon as the gold was collected, however, the president and Congress passed a joint resolution, which nullified the promise to repay in gold. Payment would henceforth be in whatever the government declared was legal tender. Democrat Senator Thomas Gore of Oklahoma told Franklin Roosevelt to his face, “Why, that’s just plain stealing, isn’t it, Mr. President?”
Not only that but it is hardly constitutional. In 1785, even before the Constitution was drafted and some four years before it was ratified, Congress declared the American monetary unit to be the dollar and the Treasury fixed its value to the silver Spanish milled dollar. The power to regulate the dollar in the Constitution is in the same clause as the power to fix weights and measures, i.e., to codify existing standards in order to ensure uniformity. The Constitution did not give politicians or bankers the power to assign arbitrary value to money, any more than Congress can say that one-tenth of a pound now equals a pound or an ounce is the same as a cup. While the value of precious metals does change, the idea behind congressional power to regulate currency is to set the exchange rate of coins and paper in circulation, vis-à-vis some objective standard for predetermined periods of time, and to make it publicly known. The reason they do this is to ensure that an equivalent means exists throughout the country for satisfying payment of debt or purchase of goods.
According to Woods and Gutzman, there are two fundamental reasons why the federal government turned criminal and basically stole from the American people. They are the same reasons we need to begin now reintroducing objective standards and redeemable equivalents in precious metals to our currency: first, “gold severely restricts the ability of government to manipulate the money supply on behalf of the politically well connected”; and second, “Irredeemable paper money…gives the government an easier time of financing war and welfare, which can be portrayed as essentially costless.” The government took us to the cleaners, but it’s time to get our money back.
_____________________
Wesley Allen Riddle is a retired military officer with degrees and honors from West Point and Oxford. Widely published in the academic and opinion press, he ran for U.S. Congress (TX-District 31) in the 2004 Republican Primary. Article based on the book by Woods and Gutzman, Who Killed the Constitution? (2008). Email: wes@wesriddle.com.
Dirty Dozen (Part 6)
Two eminent scholars, Thomas Woods, Jr. and Kevin Gutzman wrote a book last year with a startling and disconcerting thesis. Their argument is that the Constitution is dead not just dying, and they identified a dozen ways—the dirty dozen—in which all three branches of the federal government have removed restraining elements from federal officials so they can do whatever they want! Before discussing Number Six there’s a point worth making in terms of the broader sweep of history, which perhaps warrants a pause to consider just where we are headed. The point speaks to Original Intent and federalism, but also to a sea change in attitudes amongst the polity—those of us who vote and care enough to participate politically. It may speak to the harmful cumulative effect of inattention in a democracy, and the difficulty of holding government to account or hitting the reset button as it were. In my opinion, it speaks to the way in which freemen and freewomen are turned into vassals by their own government.
To wit, Americans knew that for the federal government to prohibit something like alcohol, it would require an amendment to the Constitution. The Eighteenth Amendment was adopted and ratified therefore to do just that. A policy that worked tolerably well at state level, however, demonstrably did not transfer well to the national level and instead gave rise to organized crime for much the same reason that drug violence is rife today in Mexico. The Eighteenth Amendment was overturned by the Twenty-First, the only constitutional amendment ever to have been repealed. Fast forward: Congress now bans products willy-nilly without the least constraining compunction, and marijuana is an excellent example because of its similarity to alcohol. This is done by the way without any amendment empowering it to do so!
Speaking of the harmful cumulative effect of inattention in a democracy, where once the people’s money was safe it is now utterly debased. The dollar may give way to an international currency yet, and it will when it is worthless. The dollar used to be based on gold and precious metal, then on confidence and a few shreds of integrity left in the system. Today the value of one dollar is close to a delete function away. The government won’t even tell you how many are in the economy. If they did, you might try to calculate what’s been done to it. And while you never know where the story will end, in hindsight it is easy to see the first big heist which is Number Six in our dirty dozen—the great gold robbery of 1933. Americans hardly read about it or know it happened, and that’s another story how history in public classrooms is almost as debased as the dollar.
The U.S. Dollar was defined as roughly one-twentieth of an ounce of gold throughout most of our history. Indeed, gold was the actual money but paper represented the specie, being lighter and easier to handle, etc. Assume your raffle ticket is good for a TV—it’s only good if you can make the exchange. The point is that paper notes could be redeemed for gold at any time prior to March 1933 when the federal government announced a banking emergency and, in order to cope with it “recalled” all the monetized gold in the U.S. That is to say, if you possessed gold in the bank or a stash of gold coins in the closet, the Government ordered you to turn it in. The Trading with the Enemy Act (left over from 1917!) was amended to give the president authority to “investigate, regulate, or prohibit” hoarding of gold. In other words, anyone who kept his gold money was unpatriotic and quite probably an enemy of the New Deal Republic to be dealt with accordingly. Now consider that the confiscation of gold was in the name of a banking and currency management crisis, so most Americans absolutely assumed it would be returned when the emergency abated. The difference between borrowing and theft has a lot to do with whether or not you give it back! People and corporations were given an equivalent amount of paper currency for their gold holdings because of the temporary shortage of gold in the banking system since banks had loaned out too much and held too little in reserve. As soon as the gold was collected, however, the president and Congress passed a joint resolution, which nullified the promise to repay in gold. Payment would henceforth be in whatever the government declared was legal tender. Democrat Senator Thomas Gore of Oklahoma told Franklin Roosevelt to his face, “Why, that’s just plain stealing, isn’t it, Mr. President?”
Not only that but it is hardly constitutional. In 1785, even before the Constitution was drafted and some four years before it was ratified, Congress declared the American monetary unit to be the dollar and the Treasury fixed its value to the silver Spanish milled dollar. The power to regulate the dollar in the Constitution is in the same clause as the power to fix weights and measures, i.e., to codify existing standards in order to ensure uniformity. The Constitution did not give politicians or bankers the power to assign arbitrary value to money, any more than Congress can say that one-tenth of a pound now equals a pound or an ounce is the same as a cup. While the value of precious metals does change, the idea behind congressional power to regulate currency is to set the exchange rate of coins and paper in circulation, vis-à-vis some objective standard for predetermined periods of time, and to make it publicly known. The reason they do this is to ensure that an equivalent means exists throughout the country for satisfying payment of debt or purchase of goods.
According to Woods and Gutzman, there are two fundamental reasons why the federal government turned criminal and basically stole from the American people. They are the same reasons we need to begin now reintroducing objective standards and redeemable equivalents in precious metals to our currency: first, “gold severely restricts the ability of government to manipulate the money supply on behalf of the politically well connected”; and second, “Irredeemable paper money…gives the government an easier time of financing war and welfare, which can be portrayed as essentially costless.” The government took us to the cleaners, but it’s time to get our money back.
_____________________
Wesley Allen Riddle is a retired military officer with degrees and honors from West Point and Oxford. Widely published in the academic and opinion press, he ran for U.S. Congress (TX-District 31) in the 2004 Republican Primary. Article based on the book by Woods and Gutzman, Who Killed the Constitution? (2008). Email: wes@wesriddle.com.
- lwoolley
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9780
- Joined: Mon Mar 27, 2006 12:32 pm
Re: Vast Write Wing - June 2009
by lwoolley on Mon Jun 01, 2009 12:11 pm
On Novemeber 19 Mitt Romney wrote,"If the Detroit car makers get a bailout
from the government you can kiss the Detroit auto industry goodbye.It won't happen overnight ,but their demise will be virtually guaranteed" He further continues that w/ no bailout ,the companies will be forced to re-structure,but w/ a bailout ,they'll continue the path to destruction"
Hm. Sounds like the effect welfare has... on the inner city!!
WELCOME TO THE REPUBLICAN PARTY.
Oh ,did obama say anything like that? Of Course not.He's a socialist.Did McCain vote for the bailout ? Yes.He's the mixed up "maverick"
i think GM's bankruptcy today,after we wasted..... billions via bailout
has shown our voters to be impotent.THEN WHY DIDN'T WE VOTE FOR THE GUY WHO KNEW WHAT HE WAS DOING FROM THE BEGINNING?
Al, Lemon Grove
from the government you can kiss the Detroit auto industry goodbye.It won't happen overnight ,but their demise will be virtually guaranteed" He further continues that w/ no bailout ,the companies will be forced to re-structure,but w/ a bailout ,they'll continue the path to destruction"
Hm. Sounds like the effect welfare has... on the inner city!!
WELCOME TO THE REPUBLICAN PARTY.
Oh ,did obama say anything like that? Of Course not.He's a socialist.Did McCain vote for the bailout ? Yes.He's the mixed up "maverick"
i think GM's bankruptcy today,after we wasted..... billions via bailout
has shown our voters to be impotent.THEN WHY DIDN'T WE VOTE FOR THE GUY WHO KNEW WHAT HE WAS DOING FROM THE BEGINNING?
Al, Lemon Grove
- lwoolley
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9780
- Joined: Mon Mar 27, 2006 12:32 pm
Re: Vast Write Wing - June 2009
by lwoolley on Mon Jun 01, 2009 3:00 pm
Lynn, don't know if I heard it on radio/TV, or perhaps it's my imagination, but I heard that "GM" is changing it name to "BM". I'm not really sure yet what BM means....
MIKE LICAVOLI
Harker Hts, TX
MIKE LICAVOLI
Harker Hts, TX
- lwoolley
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9780
- Joined: Mon Mar 27, 2006 12:32 pm
Re: Vast Write Wing - June 2009
by lwoolley on Tue Jun 02, 2009 7:16 am
[HB 4294 is a backdoor way for unscrutinized, digitized textbooks to be placed in front of our children's eyes. HB 4294 creates a separate Commissioner's List with no public hearings and no SBOE authority over the content of the digitized textbooks. Any publisher with any kind of agenda could reach every public school student in this state, and parents would have absolutely no recourse to stop it. -- Donna Garner]
Sent: Tuesday, June 02, 2009 12:35 AM
Subject: RE: HB 4294 - lap-top, no SBOE authority bill
For those who have been following our work to defeat HB 4294 in the Texas Legislature we have an urgent request! Please go to this website http://www.petitiononline.com/veto4294/petition.html to sign our letter asking the Governor to veto this legislation which undermines our elected State Board of Education (SBOE). We are using this new form to expedite the ability to get as many signatures as quickly as possible! Please pass this around to your email lists as soon as possible. We have no idea at this time how quickly this bill could get to the Governor's desk for his signature.
Please feel free to email me if you have any questions!
Please sign the online petition if at all possible instead of sending me a return email!!! That way we are sure to have everyone's name in one place!
Jason Moore
SD 31
Sent: Tuesday, June 02, 2009 12:35 AM
Subject: RE: HB 4294 - lap-top, no SBOE authority bill
For those who have been following our work to defeat HB 4294 in the Texas Legislature we have an urgent request! Please go to this website http://www.petitiononline.com/veto4294/petition.html to sign our letter asking the Governor to veto this legislation which undermines our elected State Board of Education (SBOE). We are using this new form to expedite the ability to get as many signatures as quickly as possible! Please pass this around to your email lists as soon as possible. We have no idea at this time how quickly this bill could get to the Governor's desk for his signature.
Please feel free to email me if you have any questions!
Please sign the online petition if at all possible instead of sending me a return email!!! That way we are sure to have everyone's name in one place!
Jason Moore
SD 31
- lwoolley
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9780
- Joined: Mon Mar 27, 2006 12:32 pm
Re: Vast Write Wing - June 2009
by lwoolley on Tue Jun 02, 2009 9:00 am
Okay, let’s see --- “Scared the nation half to death.” “Bork.” “Lying.” You have to stretch back 22 years, but that doesn’t stop you.
All the vicious right wing words are there.
Oh, yeah. You kept calling Dr. George Till a baby killer. He’s dead now. Wonder if the killer ever heard or read any of your commentaries?
Words move people to do things. Vicious and irresponsible words can lead to deranged people doing vicious and irresponsible things.
Be Logical? You might think about being less vicious and less irresponsible. Quit snarling, pull your lips down over your bared vampire-like teeth. Settle down. Be more aware of what vicious words can lead to.
Is Tiller’s death YOUR fault? Not directly. But there are some deranged people out there that read and hear your commentaries. Would you yell “FIRE” in a crowded meeting of right wing zealots? Well, forget that example. You probably would.
LS
All the vicious right wing words are there.
Oh, yeah. You kept calling Dr. George Till a baby killer. He’s dead now. Wonder if the killer ever heard or read any of your commentaries?
Words move people to do things. Vicious and irresponsible words can lead to deranged people doing vicious and irresponsible things.
Be Logical? You might think about being less vicious and less irresponsible. Quit snarling, pull your lips down over your bared vampire-like teeth. Settle down. Be more aware of what vicious words can lead to.
Is Tiller’s death YOUR fault? Not directly. But there are some deranged people out there that read and hear your commentaries. Would you yell “FIRE” in a crowded meeting of right wing zealots? Well, forget that example. You probably would.
LS
- lwoolley
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9780
- Joined: Mon Mar 27, 2006 12:32 pm
Re: Vast Write Wing - June 2009
by lwoolley on Tue Jun 02, 2009 11:04 am
Larry's letter is typical of progressies - tells you to tone down your rhetoric and be more civil while comparing you to a vampire, calling people he disagrees with zealots, and other ad-hominem attacks.
Those are the good people, though, the enlightened people, the open-minded tolerant people dedicated to a high level of civic discourse.
So it's ok when they do it.
--
In the first and in the final analysis, so-called multiculturalists are simply Western radicals, in the Western radical tradition, with the most imperial, dogmatic, and absolutist aspirations of all.
- Alan Charles Kors
Those are the good people, though, the enlightened people, the open-minded tolerant people dedicated to a high level of civic discourse.
So it's ok when they do it.
--
In the first and in the final analysis, so-called multiculturalists are simply Western radicals, in the Western radical tradition, with the most imperial, dogmatic, and absolutist aspirations of all.
- Alan Charles Kors
- lwoolley
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9780
- Joined: Mon Mar 27, 2006 12:32 pm
Re: Vast Write Wing - June 2009
by lwoolley on Tue Jun 02, 2009 11:20 am
Lynn, I caught part of your show today on the way to work.
In reference to blaming conservatives or the "right" for the abortion
murderer murder, I would like your opinion about whether or not this
makes sense or even applicable:
Situation: deflecting responsibility.
On one hand, liberals (libs in the classical sense) excuse ones actions
based on based on outside influence as triggers such as family,
religion, ideology, rap music, movies, tv, etc., and etc.
In this case on the flip side, they are not excusing away this guys
actions based on outside influences (religion, ideology, radio, fox
news, etc) but rather, blaming him and outside influences such as Fox
and Bill O'Riley.
Logically, it seems inconsistent to me. Is this guy a victim or a
murderer? If he is a victim of outside influences, then why are they
not coming to his aid? If he is a murderer, then why is he any different
than any other murderer?
Wow... 35 years of killing 60,000 babies! People on the radio and
television are saying that the system should have been allowed to take
its course. They said he would have been convicted eventually BUT at
what cost? Were they going to wait until he retires from killing
babies? What's the point then? IMO, it's like waiting until a guy is 80
or 90 years old and finally convicting him on Nazi war crimes. At that
point, it just becomes a symbolic victory instead of a practical
victory. Dr. Death was justly stopped from euthanizing more people and
causing more harm. Why have Kansas legislators allowed this killer to
continue for 35 freakin years?!
On another note... I got an email that I think you would like to go a
long way towards solving the economic problems in the spirit of
redistribution of wealth... hahaha
There are about 40 million people over 50 in the work force. - Pay them
$1 million apiece severance for early retirement with the following
stipulations:
1) They MUST retire. Forty million job openings - Unemployment fixed.
2) They MUST buy a new American CAR. Forty million cars ordered - Auto
Industry fixed.
3) They MUST either buy a house or pay off their mortgage Housing Crisis
fixed.
It can't get any easier than that!
P.S. If more money is needed, have all members in Congress and their
constituents pay their taxes...
Vote me King and you will become a millionaire! LOL
Keep up the good work,
Kerley
Killeen
In reference to blaming conservatives or the "right" for the abortion
murderer murder, I would like your opinion about whether or not this
makes sense or even applicable:
Situation: deflecting responsibility.
On one hand, liberals (libs in the classical sense) excuse ones actions
based on based on outside influence as triggers such as family,
religion, ideology, rap music, movies, tv, etc., and etc.
In this case on the flip side, they are not excusing away this guys
actions based on outside influences (religion, ideology, radio, fox
news, etc) but rather, blaming him and outside influences such as Fox
and Bill O'Riley.
Logically, it seems inconsistent to me. Is this guy a victim or a
murderer? If he is a victim of outside influences, then why are they
not coming to his aid? If he is a murderer, then why is he any different
than any other murderer?
Wow... 35 years of killing 60,000 babies! People on the radio and
television are saying that the system should have been allowed to take
its course. They said he would have been convicted eventually BUT at
what cost? Were they going to wait until he retires from killing
babies? What's the point then? IMO, it's like waiting until a guy is 80
or 90 years old and finally convicting him on Nazi war crimes. At that
point, it just becomes a symbolic victory instead of a practical
victory. Dr. Death was justly stopped from euthanizing more people and
causing more harm. Why have Kansas legislators allowed this killer to
continue for 35 freakin years?!
On another note... I got an email that I think you would like to go a
long way towards solving the economic problems in the spirit of
redistribution of wealth... hahaha
There are about 40 million people over 50 in the work force. - Pay them
$1 million apiece severance for early retirement with the following
stipulations:
1) They MUST retire. Forty million job openings - Unemployment fixed.
2) They MUST buy a new American CAR. Forty million cars ordered - Auto
Industry fixed.
3) They MUST either buy a house or pay off their mortgage Housing Crisis
fixed.
It can't get any easier than that!
P.S. If more money is needed, have all members in Congress and their
constituents pay their taxes...
Vote me King and you will become a millionaire! LOL
Keep up the good work,
Kerley
Killeen
- lwoolley
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9780
- Joined: Mon Mar 27, 2006 12:32 pm
Re: Vast Write Wing - June 2009
by lwoolley on Tue Jun 02, 2009 1:21 pm
Lynn,
Enjoy your show. Just moved to Midland last month and found you on KCRS. I wanted to direct your attention to my blog, most specifically my column about Dr. Killer. You can find it at htttp://centstwo.blogspot.com. Enjoy!
Jim Chitty
Enjoy your show. Just moved to Midland last month and found you on KCRS. I wanted to direct your attention to my blog, most specifically my column about Dr. Killer. You can find it at htttp://centstwo.blogspot.com. Enjoy!
Jim Chitty
- lwoolley
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9780
- Joined: Mon Mar 27, 2006 12:32 pm
Re: Vast Write Wing - June 2009
by lwoolley on Tue Jun 02, 2009 2:39 pm
Open Letter to Governor Rick Perry
P. O. Box 12428
Austin, TX 78711-2428
Re: Please veto HB 4294 -- taxpayer-bought student laptops and digitized textbooks on Commissioner's List
Right now, for a publisher to sell a textbook to a school, the publisher must also provide a digitized form of the book. However, that textbook and the accompanying digitized version have all gone through the public hearings and the careful scrutiny of the present textbook adoption process in which the elected members of the SBOE ultimately decide whether to adopt the "instructional materials."
HB 4294 inserts a completely separate digitized textbook adoption process over which the elected members of the Texas State Board of Education have no oversight or authority. (They can only make a comment that carries no legal weight whatsoever.)
The digitized textbooks will be submitted to the unelected Commissioner of Education (a.k.a., Texas Education Agency) who will choose a group of experts. The experts will obviously not have the time to pour over every single sentence in the digitized textbooks as is done now in the lengthy textbook adoption process. The digitized textbooks that are approved will be placed on a Commissioner's List.
In our present textbook adoption process, the public is able to get hard copies of the textbooks that are up for adoption and can then present their findings in public hearings.
Neal Frey of Educational Research Analysts told the Senate Education Committee last week that he had found 744 factual errors in the social studies textbooks he had brought to the hearing. (I believe there were four of them in the stack.) Frey said, "These were factual errors that even Rush Limbaugh and Obama could agree upon." It took Neal Frey six months of laborious reading to locate those errors.
Because textbook companies are charged a fee for every factual error that they leave in their books after these have been submitted to them, the publishers try very hard to correct their books.
It is because of our well-established textbook adoption process that many states set their textbook adoption process a year behind that of ours here in Texas. Other states know most of the factual errors will be caught during our process.
HB 4294 now changes the playing field because there will basically be two separate adoption processes (1) one with tight scrutiny, public input, and SBOE approval and (2) one with very little scrutiny and no public input. Which route will most publishers choose, particularly those with something to hide? Obviously, with less scrutiny, the chances of harmful and misleading information being placed in the digitized textbooks will increase exponentially.
Sen. Shapiro has kept assuring parents that everything will be fine under HB 4294 because all of the instructional materials will have to follow the SBOE-adopted standards (TEKS). However, look at the visual aids that Neal Frey brought to make his point at Shapiro's Senate Education Committee! Those social studies textbooks had followed the TEKS content also, yet they were replete with errors -- 744 of them. It was only because of the thoroughness of the present textbook adoption process and Neal Frey's hard work that those 744 factual errors were discovered and then changed. The SBOE-adopted content (TEKS) was not the problem; the factual errors were.
Rep. Branch and Sen. Shapiro keep trying to alleviate parents' displeasure over HB 4294 by saying, "A class set of hardcover textbooks will be in each teacher's classroom." Big deal. One set of 30 books will be useless when a teacher has 135 - 150 students. If the teacher even chooses to use the hardcover class set, then he cannot assign students any homework in which the textbooks would have to be used; 30 textbooks for 135-140 students simply will not work!
Here is what Rep. Dan Branch, author of HB 4294, told the Dallas Morning News that is supposed to placate the parents ("Educaton Bills Pass in Legislature's Final Days, 5.29.09):
Another education bill [HB 4294] on its way to the governor would let school districts speed up their shift to electronic textbooks. Dallas Republican Rep. Dan Branch, the bill's sponsor, assured social conservatives in the House that the bill wouldn't diminish the powers of the State Board of Education because each classroom still would have at least one set of board-approved textbooks.
I guess Rep. Branch thinks conservatives are stupid. That class set of SBOE-approved, hardcover textbooks would gather dust if students were all supplied with taxpayer-purchased student laptops loaded with the digitized textbooks that have been adopted under the Commissioner's list and that have circumvented the close scrutiny of the SBOE.
As I have stated many times before, I really respect our present Commissioner of Education Robert Scott; but he will not be the Commissioner forever. What kind of "experts" would another Commissioner choose to evaluate the digitized textbooks to be placed on the Commissioner's List? When legislation is passed, we must consider the future ramifications for a bill.
I stand by my testimony that I delivered to the Senate Education Committee on 5.19.09:
[To view my testimony, please go to http://www.senate.state.tx.us/avarchive/?yr=2009. Click on May 19 -- Senate Committee on Education (Part 1). Then ooch your mouse a little bit ahead of the time marker slide bar until you get to 23:17 - 29:53. Neal Frey did a fabulous job right before I spoke, and MerryLynn Gerstenschlager added some excellent points after my testimony. -- Donna Garner]
P. O. Box 12428
Austin, TX 78711-2428
Re: Please veto HB 4294 -- taxpayer-bought student laptops and digitized textbooks on Commissioner's List
Right now, for a publisher to sell a textbook to a school, the publisher must also provide a digitized form of the book. However, that textbook and the accompanying digitized version have all gone through the public hearings and the careful scrutiny of the present textbook adoption process in which the elected members of the SBOE ultimately decide whether to adopt the "instructional materials."
HB 4294 inserts a completely separate digitized textbook adoption process over which the elected members of the Texas State Board of Education have no oversight or authority. (They can only make a comment that carries no legal weight whatsoever.)
The digitized textbooks will be submitted to the unelected Commissioner of Education (a.k.a., Texas Education Agency) who will choose a group of experts. The experts will obviously not have the time to pour over every single sentence in the digitized textbooks as is done now in the lengthy textbook adoption process. The digitized textbooks that are approved will be placed on a Commissioner's List.
In our present textbook adoption process, the public is able to get hard copies of the textbooks that are up for adoption and can then present their findings in public hearings.
Neal Frey of Educational Research Analysts told the Senate Education Committee last week that he had found 744 factual errors in the social studies textbooks he had brought to the hearing. (I believe there were four of them in the stack.) Frey said, "These were factual errors that even Rush Limbaugh and Obama could agree upon." It took Neal Frey six months of laborious reading to locate those errors.
Because textbook companies are charged a fee for every factual error that they leave in their books after these have been submitted to them, the publishers try very hard to correct their books.
It is because of our well-established textbook adoption process that many states set their textbook adoption process a year behind that of ours here in Texas. Other states know most of the factual errors will be caught during our process.
HB 4294 now changes the playing field because there will basically be two separate adoption processes (1) one with tight scrutiny, public input, and SBOE approval and (2) one with very little scrutiny and no public input. Which route will most publishers choose, particularly those with something to hide? Obviously, with less scrutiny, the chances of harmful and misleading information being placed in the digitized textbooks will increase exponentially.
Sen. Shapiro has kept assuring parents that everything will be fine under HB 4294 because all of the instructional materials will have to follow the SBOE-adopted standards (TEKS). However, look at the visual aids that Neal Frey brought to make his point at Shapiro's Senate Education Committee! Those social studies textbooks had followed the TEKS content also, yet they were replete with errors -- 744 of them. It was only because of the thoroughness of the present textbook adoption process and Neal Frey's hard work that those 744 factual errors were discovered and then changed. The SBOE-adopted content (TEKS) was not the problem; the factual errors were.
Rep. Branch and Sen. Shapiro keep trying to alleviate parents' displeasure over HB 4294 by saying, "A class set of hardcover textbooks will be in each teacher's classroom." Big deal. One set of 30 books will be useless when a teacher has 135 - 150 students. If the teacher even chooses to use the hardcover class set, then he cannot assign students any homework in which the textbooks would have to be used; 30 textbooks for 135-140 students simply will not work!
Here is what Rep. Dan Branch, author of HB 4294, told the Dallas Morning News that is supposed to placate the parents ("Educaton Bills Pass in Legislature's Final Days, 5.29.09):
Another education bill [HB 4294] on its way to the governor would let school districts speed up their shift to electronic textbooks. Dallas Republican Rep. Dan Branch, the bill's sponsor, assured social conservatives in the House that the bill wouldn't diminish the powers of the State Board of Education because each classroom still would have at least one set of board-approved textbooks.
I guess Rep. Branch thinks conservatives are stupid. That class set of SBOE-approved, hardcover textbooks would gather dust if students were all supplied with taxpayer-purchased student laptops loaded with the digitized textbooks that have been adopted under the Commissioner's list and that have circumvented the close scrutiny of the SBOE.
As I have stated many times before, I really respect our present Commissioner of Education Robert Scott; but he will not be the Commissioner forever. What kind of "experts" would another Commissioner choose to evaluate the digitized textbooks to be placed on the Commissioner's List? When legislation is passed, we must consider the future ramifications for a bill.
I stand by my testimony that I delivered to the Senate Education Committee on 5.19.09:
[To view my testimony, please go to http://www.senate.state.tx.us/avarchive/?yr=2009. Click on May 19 -- Senate Committee on Education (Part 1). Then ooch your mouse a little bit ahead of the time marker slide bar until you get to 23:17 - 29:53. Neal Frey did a fabulous job right before I spoke, and MerryLynn Gerstenschlager added some excellent points after my testimony. -- Donna Garner]
- lwoolley
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9780
- Joined: Mon Mar 27, 2006 12:32 pm
Re: Vast Write Wing - June 2009
by lwoolley on Tue Jun 02, 2009 9:23 pm
I have been trying to work through the logic that government is applying to reestablish General Motors as a viable car manufacturer. What I have determined so far is this:
Government has repeatedly given money, that it doesn’t have, to the Obama labeled greedy automaker GM to keep them out of bankruptcy. GM is now in bankruptcy. The Chinese through the purchase of bonds, via the American taxpayer, now owns the largest portion of GM. (Will they have to rename it Chinese Motors?) Government doesn’t think that anyone at GM has any idea how to run it, but government doesn’t want to run it and to prove it we are willing to give GM an additional $30 billion of China’s money.
All of this done under the guise of retaining American jobs. I bet you would have a hard time convincing the workers at Ford of that.
May 5, 2008 – Obama blames automakers greed for high gas prices rejects fuel tax holiday
http://www.motorauthority.com/obama-dis ... -woes.html
July 18, 2008 – Obama/McCain sympathize with automakers, Bush rejects bailout saying it is not the role of gov’t.
http://www.motorauthority.com/obama-and ... plans.html
July 21, 2008 – Obama supports $4 billion in aid to auto manufacturers McCain rejects Obama plan
http://www.motorauthority.com/obama-end ... oit-3.html
Dec. 20th, 2008 – To keep GM out of bankruptcy and with the support of Obama and not having performed due diligence Bush loans GM $17.4 billion
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122969367595121563.html
March 30th, 2009 – GM CEO resigns at the behest of Obama. Obama determines that Wagoner with 30 years of experience doesn’t have what it takes to lead GM out of their situation
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0309/20625.html
May 31, 2009 – Rasmussen poll says 67% of Americans are against GM bail out
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2262139/posts
June 1st, 2009 – Obama guarantees an additional $30 billion to GM. GM heads toward bankruptcy.
http://money.cnn.com/2009/05/31/news/co ... /index.htm
June 1st, 2009 – Obama says he has no interest in running GM
http://www.egmcartech.com/tag/barack-obama/
Craig Bailey
Government has repeatedly given money, that it doesn’t have, to the Obama labeled greedy automaker GM to keep them out of bankruptcy. GM is now in bankruptcy. The Chinese through the purchase of bonds, via the American taxpayer, now owns the largest portion of GM. (Will they have to rename it Chinese Motors?) Government doesn’t think that anyone at GM has any idea how to run it, but government doesn’t want to run it and to prove it we are willing to give GM an additional $30 billion of China’s money.
All of this done under the guise of retaining American jobs. I bet you would have a hard time convincing the workers at Ford of that.
May 5, 2008 – Obama blames automakers greed for high gas prices rejects fuel tax holiday
http://www.motorauthority.com/obama-dis ... -woes.html
July 18, 2008 – Obama/McCain sympathize with automakers, Bush rejects bailout saying it is not the role of gov’t.
http://www.motorauthority.com/obama-and ... plans.html
July 21, 2008 – Obama supports $4 billion in aid to auto manufacturers McCain rejects Obama plan
http://www.motorauthority.com/obama-end ... oit-3.html
Dec. 20th, 2008 – To keep GM out of bankruptcy and with the support of Obama and not having performed due diligence Bush loans GM $17.4 billion
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122969367595121563.html
March 30th, 2009 – GM CEO resigns at the behest of Obama. Obama determines that Wagoner with 30 years of experience doesn’t have what it takes to lead GM out of their situation
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0309/20625.html
May 31, 2009 – Rasmussen poll says 67% of Americans are against GM bail out
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2262139/posts
June 1st, 2009 – Obama guarantees an additional $30 billion to GM. GM heads toward bankruptcy.
http://money.cnn.com/2009/05/31/news/co ... /index.htm
June 1st, 2009 – Obama says he has no interest in running GM
http://www.egmcartech.com/tag/barack-obama/
Craig Bailey
- lwoolley
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9780
- Joined: Mon Mar 27, 2006 12:32 pm
Re: Vast Write Wing - June 2009
by lwoolley on Wed Jun 03, 2009 9:02 am
Re: O'Reilly should sue Olbermann over charges that Fox News incited the murder of Dr. Tiller:
There you go again. Why don’t YOU file a class action suit on behalf of all the vicious right wing hacks and sue Olbermann? Go ahead. O’Reilly loves lawsuits. He bought his way out of one for sexual harassment from his assistant Andrea Macklis a few years back. He sure didn’t want THAT one to go to an open courtroom. The audio tapes would have destroyed O’Reilly.
Where were you when Andrea Macklis was filing her suit? What a double standard.
LS
There you go again. Why don’t YOU file a class action suit on behalf of all the vicious right wing hacks and sue Olbermann? Go ahead. O’Reilly loves lawsuits. He bought his way out of one for sexual harassment from his assistant Andrea Macklis a few years back. He sure didn’t want THAT one to go to an open courtroom. The audio tapes would have destroyed O’Reilly.
Where were you when Andrea Macklis was filing her suit? What a double standard.
LS
- lwoolley
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9780
- Joined: Mon Mar 27, 2006 12:32 pm
Re: Vast Write Wing - June 2009
by lwoolley on Wed Jun 03, 2009 11:01 am
i believe that book deal was signed 5 days before inauguration day, the book deal is a condensed version of obama's first book, "dreams of my father", and this condensed book will be sold to secondary public education, and I believe obama will get a percentage of sales after he leaves office as well.
BP
BP
- lwoolley
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9780
- Joined: Mon Mar 27, 2006 12:32 pm
Re: Vast Write Wing - June 2009
by lwoolley on Wed Jun 03, 2009 11:02 am
Lynn, do you realize that since the current administration took power that gasoline prices have risen from $1.699 per gallon to $2.399 per gallon. That is an increase of 70%!
I choose to hold the current occupant of the Oval Office responsible. Just like the Libs blamed George Bush for every concocted problem over the previous 8 years.
Russell Livingston
Midland, Texas
I choose to hold the current occupant of the Oval Office responsible. Just like the Libs blamed George Bush for every concocted problem over the previous 8 years.
Russell Livingston
Midland, Texas
- lwoolley
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9780
- Joined: Mon Mar 27, 2006 12:32 pm
Re: Vast Write Wing - June 2009
by lwoolley on Wed Jun 03, 2009 11:03 am
Last Fall the Community Development office who is financed by a federal block grant lanched a champaing to drive as many small business out of the city limits here in Odessa TX as possible. I was one of them. When I went to the Economic Developemnet office who also recieve federal fundig I was told that my company that at that time employed 6 to 10 full time employees was too small and that if I wish to stay in business I would just have to find funds to relocate on my own. SBA said they couldn't help because I was already an estiblished business.
All of this came about because the city had chossen to disregard what it had told me in 2000. Now they are seeing a large jump in unemployement and are wondering why.
I have cut back to one part time employee and an occasional day laborer to finish up the jobs I have started and have located to the county wich cost me over $10,000 which I did not have to spend on a move. Next step maybe bankruptcy if work does not pick up.
All of this came about because the city had chossen to disregard what it had told me in 2000. Now they are seeing a large jump in unemployement and are wondering why.
I have cut back to one part time employee and an occasional day laborer to finish up the jobs I have started and have located to the county wich cost me over $10,000 which I did not have to spend on a move. Next step maybe bankruptcy if work does not pick up.
- lwoolley
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9780
- Joined: Mon Mar 27, 2006 12:32 pm
Return to The Vast Write Wing - Emails and Discussions about The Lynn Woolley Show
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest