An Olive Branch

[Jay Honeck]

Now that it appears that George Bush has been re-elected with a true
majority of the popular vote (the first president to do so in 16 years), let
me be the first to extend an olive branch to those here who may be
disappointed in the results.

What has made America strong, and allowed our democracy to thrive for over
200 years, is our ability to embrace the loyal opposition on election day.
We, as pilots, may be just as divided politically as the rest of the
country, but where we differ from the common electorate is in our shared
love of aviation.

This bond, in my opinion, transcends any fleeting election disagreements,
and I, for one, will be more than happy to see all this animosity evaporate,
so that we can get back to the fun of talking about flying!

Blue skies, all!
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[John Kirksey]

> This bond, in my opinion, transcends any fleeting election disagreements,
> and I, for one, will be more than happy to see all this animosity
evaporate,
> so that we can get back to the fun of talking about flying!
>
> Blue skies, all!


Agreed! Four more years of Bush, like it or love it, that's the way it is.
Now back to our regularly scheduled program, "The Daily Grind".

Now, hopefully he won't get us all killed in that time...ooops, did I say
that ;)

John K.
Student Pilot
Past, Present, and Future

[Cecil Chapman]

Yeah,, okay. Gracefully accept the things one cannot change :0). I do want
to point out (despite the political 'clap-trap' you will hear) that the
United States is a Republic and NOT a democracy - the president (through
concerns by our founding fathers that the general populace wasn't bright
enough to make an informed vote ((they could still be right on this one
<grin>)) and also a concern by the less populous states that they would not
have an adequate voice ((even though more populous states get more
electors - go figure)) is determined by the members of the electoral
college, not by popular vote (which would make us a democracy).

Nothing to do about it now,,, you're right hopefully the fatherland,,, oops
I mean homeland security doesn't get any more out of hand... So, onward
and upward!

--
--
=-----
Good Flights!

Cecil
PP-ASEL-IA
Student - CP-ASEL

Check out my personal flying adventures from my first flight to the
checkride AND the continuing adventures beyond!
Complete with pictures and text at: www.bayareapilot.com

"I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things."
- Antoine de Saint-Exupery -

"We who fly, do so for the love of flying. We are alive in the air with
this miracle that lies in our hands and beneath our feet"
- Cecil Day Lewis -

[Icebound]

"Cecil Chapman" > wrote in message
. com...
> Yeah,, okay. Gracefully accept the things one cannot change :0)....
> snip....
>
> Nothing to do about it now,,, you're right hopefully... (...snip...)
> ...homeland security doesn't get any more out of hand... So, onward and
> upward!
>
> --

On the security front, I found it interesting that the people most likely to
be affected by terrorism (the big cities)... especially New York City, and
in spite of Guiliani's. popularity... still voted overwhelmingly AGAINST
the incumbent???? (like 70%plus ... 80% in the case of The Bronx)

[Bob Chilcoat]

Jay,

!#%$ you!

Oops, sorry, it just slipped out. Must use less left rudder. :-)

W, the one who was supposed to be great at consensus building and bringing
us all together, but who managed to polarize us more than ever, gets a
second chance it would seem. I'm willing to listen, but I suspect he will
now feel that he has a mandate to ram a lot of Christian Right crap down our
throats. Just my expectation. I will reserve final judgement while I wait
to see some sign of compromise on his part.

--
Bob (Chief Pilot, White Knuckle Airways)

I don't have to like Bush and Cheney (Or Kerry, for that matter) to love
America

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:ke7id.350687$MQ5.178085@attbi_s52...
> Now that it appears that George Bush has been re-elected with a true
> majority of the popular vote (the first president to do so in 16 years),
let
> me be the first to extend an olive branch to those here who may be
> disappointed in the results.
>
> What has made America strong, and allowed our democracy to thrive for over
> 200 years, is our ability to embrace the loyal opposition on election day.
> We, as pilots, may be just as divided politically as the rest of the
> country, but where we differ from the common electorate is in our shared
> love of aviation.
>
> This bond, in my opinion, transcends any fleeting election disagreements,
> and I, for one, will be more than happy to see all this animosity
evaporate,
> so that we can get back to the fun of talking about flying!
>
> Blue skies, all!
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"
>
>

[Newps]

Jay Honeck wrote:
> Now that it appears that George Bush has been re-elected with a true
> majority of the popular vote (the first president to do so in 16 years),

Jimmuh Carter was the last one to get more than 50%.

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"Newps" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> Jay Honeck wrote:
>>
>> Now that it appears that George Bush has been re-elected with a true
>> majority of the popular vote (the first president to do so in 16 years),
>>
>
> Jimmuh Carter was the last one to get more than 50%.
>

George H. W. Bush received 53.4% of the popular vote in 1988. Jimmy Carter
received 50.1% of the popular vote in 1976.

[Corky Scott]

On Wed, 3 Nov 2004 12:38:11 -0500, "Icebound"
> wrote:

>On the security front, I found it interesting that the people most likely to
>be affected by terrorism (the big cities)... especially New York City, and
>in spite of Guiliani's. popularity... still voted overwhelmingly AGAINST
>the incumbent???? (like 70%plus ... 80% in the case of The Bronx)

I saw an interesting political tidbit the other day, it stated that
Bush supporters apparently did not believe the conclusions of the 9/11
Commission. Perhaps the folks in the Bronx did?

Corky Scott

[Peter Duniho]

"Icebound" > wrote in message
...
> On the security front, I found it interesting that the people most likely
> to > be affected by terrorism (the big cities)... especially New York
> City, and in spite of Guiliani's. popularity... still voted
> overwhelmingly AGAINST the incumbent???? (like 70%plus ... 80% in the
> case of The Bronx)

That's because, as cities most likely to be affected by terrorism (and in
the case of NYC, to *have* been most affected by terrorism), the populace
actually understands the real risk versus benefit issues, and see how they
are a) not really much safer than they were before, b) not really in all
that much danger in the first place, and c) subject to additional
restrictions and scrutiny that are unwarranted.

The "selling fear to the voters" works best on people far enough removed
from the situation to not be able to sift fact from fiction.

Another factor is the move of the Republican party from being true
conservatives (which they used to be) to being basically front man for the
evangelical or fundamentilist Christians. Again, this demographic group is
not well-suited to high-density urban areas where there's a great amount of
diversity and open-mindedness.

Pete

[Peter Duniho]

"Peter Duniho" > wrote in message
...
> Another factor is the move of the Republican party from being true
> conservatives (which they used to be) to being basically front man for the
> evangelical or fundamentilist Christians.

And yes, I know that's "fundamentalist". How embarassing...

[Cecil Chapman]

The 'security' stuff gets even more absurd when you listen to some people.
I've heard more than a few people tell me that the reason they were voting
for Bush was that the 'terrorists were afraid of him and that was why we
haven't had another 911'.

I always offer to these individuals the observation that our first terrorist
attack (of this magnitude) took place with G.W. in-office. Now, for the
previous 200 years we never had such a thing happen - did that mean that the
terrorists were really afraid of our previous presidents and less afraid of
G.W???. .... Jeesh...... Wasn't it R.W. Emerson who said " A foolish
consistency, is the hobgoblin of little minds". :)

--
--
=-----
Good Flights!

Cecil
PP-ASEL-IA
Student - CP-ASEL

Check out my personal flying adventures from my first flight to the
checkride AND the continuing adventures beyond!
Complete with pictures and text at: www.bayareapilot.com

"I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things."
- Antoine de Saint-Exupery -

"We who fly, do so for the love of flying. We are alive in the air with
this miracle that lies in our hands and beneath our feet"
- Cecil Day Lewis -

[kontiki]

Well stated sir! Personally, I'm glad its over and that Kerry
didn't drag this thing out like Gore did 4 years ago. The stock
market apparently agrees as well.

[David Brooks]

Jay - I do appreciate your kind words, and I have valued your insights and
your personal messages to me. But - see my other post.

-- David Brooks

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:ke7id.350687$MQ5.178085@attbi_s52...
> Now that it appears that George Bush has been re-elected with a true
> majority of the popular vote (the first president to do so in 16 years),
let
> me be the first to extend an olive branch to those here who may be
> disappointed in the results.
>
> What has made America strong, and allowed our democracy to thrive for over
> 200 years, is our ability to embrace the loyal opposition on election day.
> We, as pilots, may be just as divided politically as the rest of the
> country, but where we differ from the common electorate is in our shared
> love of aviation.
>
> This bond, in my opinion, transcends any fleeting election disagreements,
> and I, for one, will be more than happy to see all this animosity
evaporate,
> so that we can get back to the fun of talking about flying!
>
> Blue skies, all!
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"
>
>

[rls]

Cecil Chapman wrote:
> I always offer to these individuals the observation that our first terrorist
> attack (of this magnitude) took place with G.W. in-office. Now, for the
> previous 200 years we never had such a thing happen - did that mean that the
> terrorists were really afraid of our previous presidents and less afraid of
> G.W???. .... Jeesh...... Wasn't it R.W. Emerson who said " A foolish
> consistency, is the hobgoblin of little minds". :)


Actually, the first attack was in '93, with the first bombing of the WTC.
The only reason the deathtoll was not higher was that they did it wrong.
Had the attack reached its goal of bringing down on of the towers, it would
have dwarfed 9/11, since it took place in mid-day, and there would not have
been an hour to escape the building.

So, did Emerson have a quote about "accuracy"? :)

[Newps]

> Cecil Chapman wrote:
>
>> I always offer to these individuals the observation that our first
>> terrorist attack (of this magnitude) took place with G.W. in-office.

Ah, no. Oklahoma City. Your beloved Clinton. And we killed the
*******. NEXT!


>> " A foolish consistency, is the hobgoblin of little
>> minds". :)

Perhaps, but us little minded people are right.

[C Kingsbury]

"Newps" > wrote in message
...
>
> > Cecil Chapman wrote:
> >
> >> I always offer to these individuals the observation that our first
> >> terrorist attack (of this magnitude) took place with G.W. in-office.
>
> Ah, no. Oklahoma City. Your beloved Clinton. And we killed the
> *******. NEXT!

Yeah, but all of this really begins (and will likely end) with the Iranian
revolution. Thank you, Jimmy Carter.

-cwk.

[Icebound]

"kontiki" > wrote in message
...
> .... snip... The stock
> market apparently agrees as well.
>

Well, if voters were serious about stock market returns, they might have
read this before going into the booth:

http://www.personal.anderson.ucla.edu/pedro.santa-clara/Politics.pdf

It shows that historically since 1927, the market has done about 9% better
when Democrats were in power when compared to the periods Republicans were
in power.

On a similar note about stocks and presidents, there is this:

http://www.financialadvisormagazine.com/articles/march_2004_was.html

[Jay Honeck]

> Jay - I do appreciate your kind words, and I have valued your insights and
> your personal messages to me. But - see my other post.

You don't yet understand democracy, do you David?

Now is the time for the loyal opposition to come together -- so that they
may start making plans on how best to throw ball bearings in front of the
winner's parade!

:-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[alexy]

Newps > wrote:

>
>
>Jay Honeck wrote:
>> Now that it appears that George Bush has been re-elected with a true
>> majority of the popular vote (the first president to do so in 16 years),
>
>Jimmuh Carter was the last one to get more than 50%.
Nope, GHW Bush.

--
Alex -- Replace "nospam" with "mail" to reply by email. Checked infrequently.

[alexy]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote:

>Now that it appears that George Bush has been re-elected with a true
>majority of the popular vote (the first president to do so in 16 years), let
>me be the first to extend an olive branch to those here who may be
>disappointed in the results.
>
>What has made America strong, and allowed our democracy to thrive for over
>200 years, is our ability to embrace the loyal opposition on election day.
>We, as pilots, may be just as divided politically as the rest of the
>country, but where we differ from the common electorate is in our shared
>love of aviation.
>
>This bond, in my opinion, transcends any fleeting election disagreements,
>and I, for one, will be more than happy to see all this animosity evaporate,
>so that we can get back to the fun of talking about flying!
>
>Blue skies, all!

Well, that spirit lasted all of two or three posts! Nice try, though;
I commend your attitude.
--
Alex -- Replace "nospam" with "mail" to reply by email. Checked infrequently.

[kontiki]

Well I don't know about all the way back to 1927 but in recent history
(aka Bill Clinton) the market did well with a republican congress that
could basically nix all his grand spending plans.

GW's lack of vetoing any spending bills in 4 years was frustrating to
me and I will not be alone in makeing sure he knows I expect him to do
that in the next 4. The market doesn't like big spenders.... but it
it is more distasteful of John Kerry's promises to not only spend more
but tax more.


Icebound wrote:

> "kontiki" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>.... snip... The stock
>>market apparently agrees as well.
>>
>
>
> Well, if voters were serious about stock market returns, they might have
> read this before going into the booth:
>
> http://www.personal.anderson.ucla.edu/pedro.santa-clara/Politics.pdf
>
> It shows that historically since 1927, the market has done about 9% better
> when Democrats were in power when compared to the periods Republicans were
> in power.
>
> On a similar note about stocks and presidents, there is this:
>
> http://www.financialadvisormagazine.com/articles/march_2004_was.html
>
>
>

[Bob Clough]

Well, based on responses so far, it appears that an honorable off-topic
gesture to reduce and soften off-topic animosity has resulted in more
off-topic discussions and one public departure to other topic destinations.
Oh well. Based on politicos' jabber today, our little group lasted about as
long as the larger politic in seeking common ground.

As long as we can keep the current topic/off-topic ratio to current volume
and tenor, this crowd is still a huge net plus for me and my flying.

No hard feelings ... at least until the Rehnquist replacement is announced
.... :)

Bob Clough


"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:ke7id.350687$MQ5.178085@attbi_s52...
> Now that it appears that George Bush has been re-elected with a true
> majority of the popular vote (the first president to do so in 16 years),
let
> me be the first to extend an olive branch to those here who may be
> disappointed in the results.
>
> What has made America strong, and allowed our democracy to thrive for over
> 200 years, is our ability to embrace the loyal opposition on election day.
> We, as pilots, may be just as divided politically as the rest of the
> country, but where we differ from the common electorate is in our shared
> love of aviation.
>
> This bond, in my opinion, transcends any fleeting election disagreements,
> and I, for one, will be more than happy to see all this animosity
evaporate,
> so that we can get back to the fun of talking about flying!
>
> Blue skies, all!
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"
>
>

[Jay Honeck]

> Oh well. Based on politicos' jabber today, our little group lasted about
> as
> long as the larger politic in seeking common ground.

Ah, well. T'was ever thus. The same thing is going on over on the
Cherokee Chat.

According to CNN, the 1964 Goldwater vs Johnson election campaign made this
election look like some sort of a grade-school spat. Yet, somehow, the
country overcame the divisiveness and bitter enmity to grow and prosper.
(Of course, it "grew" into the 60s, which is hardly something we'd like to
repeat...)

I suspect we'll do it again -- although if you take a peek at "alt.politics"
you would think otherwise! (Man, THOSE people are CRAZY on that newsgroup!)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Bob Clough]

Who wants to go start a high-wing / low-wing debate at alt.politics? Any
bets on how long it takes to morph into a right-wing / left-wing diatribe?
:)

Bob Clough


"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:Spdid.361694$D%.219002@attbi_s51...
> > Oh well. Based on politicos' jabber today, our little group lasted
about
> > as
> > long as the larger politic in seeking common ground.
>
> Ah, well. T'was ever thus. The same thing is going on over on the
> Cherokee Chat.
>
> According to CNN, the 1964 Goldwater vs Johnson election campaign made
this
> election look like some sort of a grade-school spat. Yet, somehow, the
> country overcame the divisiveness and bitter enmity to grow and prosper.
> (Of course, it "grew" into the 60s, which is hardly something we'd like to
> repeat...)
>
> I suspect we'll do it again -- although if you take a peek at
"alt.politics"
> you would think otherwise! (Man, THOSE people are CRAZY on that
newsgroup!)
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"
>
>

[Peter Duniho]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:Spdid.361694$D%.219002@attbi_s51...
> [...]
> According to CNN, the 1964 Goldwater vs Johnson election campaign made
> this election look like some sort of a grade-school spat. Yet, somehow,
> the country overcame the divisiveness and bitter enmity to grow and
> prosper.

It would happen a lot faster if you didn't insist on posting messages that
pretend to be conciliatory, even while you continue to post your anti-Kerry
rhetoric.

An olive branch before the election would have been suitable and meaningful.
Today, it's simply disingenuous, especially when not matched in other
actions.

[Jay Beckman]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:Spdid.361694$D%.219002@attbi_s51...
>> Oh well. Based on politicos' jabber today, our little group lasted about
>> as
>> long as the larger politic in seeking common ground.
>
> Ah, well. T'was ever thus. The same thing is going on over on the
> Cherokee Chat.
>
> According to CNN, the 1964 Goldwater vs Johnson election campaign made
> this election look like some sort of a grade-school spat. Yet, somehow,
> the country overcame the divisiveness and bitter enmity to grow and
> prosper. (Of course, it "grew" into the 60s, which is hardly something
> we'd like to repeat...)
>

IIRC,

The capper to that campaign season was an add by Johnson which showed a
little girl serenely picking flowers who gets imolated by a nuclear
detonation. It was/is quite jarring.

The idea being (if it isn't already obvious...) that voting for Goldwater
would bring about the end of the world.

I've seen this referred to in some circles as the dirtiest political add
ever produced.

Jay Beckman
Chandler, AZ
PP-ASEL

(Somwhere I still have a tie pin I got from my dad which featured the
letters "Au/H2O" ...a Goldwater campaign give away.)

[Wdtabor]

>
>No hard feelings ... at least until the Rehnquist replacement is announced
>... :)

Clarence Thomas will be elevated to Chief Justice and a new Associate Justice
will be appointed, probably Judge Jackson of the CA Supreme Court.

--
Wm. Donald (Don) Tabor Jr., DDS
PP-ASEL
Chesapeake, VA - CPK, PVG

[Jim Weir]

It grew into the ... uhhh ... what was that?? ... um ... oh, yeah the '60
something... or other ... where was I ... drat this short term memory loss ...
anybody got any pepperoni and peanut butter ... the ... um ... '60s ... yeah,
no repeat of a repeat of a pat or something like that ... oh, wow, did you see
that one go by...


Jim (child of the '60s) Weir



"Jay Honeck" >


->(Of course, it "grew" into the 60s, which is hardly something we'd like to
->repeat...)



Jim Weir (A&P/IA, CFI, & other good alphabet soup)
VP Eng RST Pres. Cyberchapter EAA Tech. Counselor
http://www.rst-engr.com

[Jay Masino]

Well, atleast the rest of the country's airspace can go back to normal,
after several months of roving 30nm TFRs. According to the AOPA Airspace
Alert I just got, President Moron is going back to his old habit of
taking 3 day weekends (almost every weekend) at Camp David (when he's not
in Crawford). AOPA said to expect an expanded TFR around Camp David
(NW of DC) from THURSDAY through Sunday this weekend. Most of the last
several years, since 9/11, we get one of these alerts almost every
weekend. Afterall, he needs his rest from all the reading he does. :)

--- Jay


--
__!__
Jay and Teresa Masino ___(_)___
http://www2.ari.net/jmasino ! ! !
http://www.oceancityairport.com
http://www.oc-adolfos.com

[Dan Luke]

"Jay Honeck" wrote:
> Now that it appears that George Bush has been re-elected with a true
> majority of the popular vote (the first president to do so in 16
> years), let me be the first to extend an olive branch to those here
> who may be disappointed in the results.

"Appalled" would better describe it.

> What has made America strong, and allowed our democracy to thrive for
> over 200 years, is our ability to embrace the loyal opposition on
> election day. We, as pilots, may be just as divided politically as the
> rest of the country, but where we differ from the common electorate is
> in our shared love of aviation.

> This bond, in my opinion, transcends any fleeting election
> disagreements, and I, for one, will be more than happy to see all this
> animosity evaporate, so that we can get back to the fun of talking
> about flying!
>
> Blue skies, all!

Same to ya' Jay. But if you think this means I'm letting up on Shrub,
forget it! :)
--
Dan

"There ought to be limits to freedom."
- George W. Bush

[Bob Fry]

(Wdtabor) writes:

> Clarence Thomas will be elevated to Chief Justice and a new Associate Justice
> will be appointed, probably Judge Jackson of the CA Supreme Court.

Why not Judge Judy? At least their decisions would be entertaining.

[Cecil Chapman]

But that was done by one of 'our own' within our own borders,,,,, 911 was
carried out by foreigners...

--
--
=-----
Good Flights!

Cecil
PP-ASEL-IA
Student - CP-ASEL

Check out my personal flying adventures from my first flight to the
checkride AND the continuing adventures beyond!
Complete with pictures and text at: www.bayareapilot.com

"I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things."
- Antoine de Saint-Exupery -

"We who fly, do so for the love of flying. We are alive in the air with
this miracle that lies in our hands and beneath our feet"
- Cecil Day Lewis -

[Cecil Chapman]

see above.... I wasn't referring to internal wackos. 911 was the first time
we were attacked (in the continental US) by a foreign 'power'.

>Your beloved Clinton. And we killed the *******. NEXT!

Yikes, a confession/threat of a former president for the secret service,,,,
better look out HOMELAND will get you.....

--
--
=-----
Good Flights!

Cecil
PP-ASEL-IA
Student - CP-ASEL

Check out my personal flying adventures from my first flight to the
checkride AND the continuing adventures beyond!
Complete with pictures and text at: www.bayareapilot.com

"I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things."
- Antoine de Saint-Exupery -

"We who fly, do so for the love of flying. We are alive in the air with
this miracle that lies in our hands and beneath our feet"
- Cecil Day Lewis -

[G.R. Patterson III]

Bob Fry wrote:
>
> (Wdtabor) writes:
>
> > Clarence Thomas will be elevated to Chief Justice and a new Associate Justice
> > will be appointed, probably Judge Jackson of the CA Supreme Court.
>
> Why not Judge Judy? At least their decisions would be entertaining.

NPR has occasionally read transcripts of some of the Supreme Court discussions. I
think televising them would be pretty entertaining as it is.

George Patterson
If a man gets into a fight 3,000 miles away from home, he *had* to have
been looking for it.

[Philip Sondericker]

in article ke7id.350687$MQ5.178085@attbi_s52, Jay Honeck at
wrote on 11/3/04 7:58 AM:

> Now that it appears that George Bush has been re-elected with a true
> majority of the popular vote (the first president to do so in 16 years), let
> me be the first to extend an olive branch to those here who may be
> disappointed in the results.
>
> What has made America strong, and allowed our democracy to thrive for over
> 200 years, is our ability to embrace the loyal opposition on election day.
> We, as pilots, may be just as divided politically as the rest of the
> country, but where we differ from the common electorate is in our shared
> love of aviation.
>
> This bond, in my opinion, transcends any fleeting election disagreements,
> and I, for one, will be more than happy to see all this animosity evaporate,
> so that we can get back to the fun of talking about flying!
>
> Blue skies, all!

Thanks for those words, Jay. And even though the election didn't turn out as
I might have wished, I'm not only prepared to live with the results, I find
myself actually hopeful for the future. With Republicans enjoying an
unprecedented mandate, controlling the White House, having substantial
majorities in both Houses of Congress, and even an advantage in
Governorships and state legislatures, I'm looking forward to the following:

1. Fiscal responsibility
2. Balanced budgets
3. Smaller and less intrusive government
4. Greater personal liberties
5. A strong and all-volunteer military
6. Strong alliances and respect around the world

All of the above are, of course, the bedrock philosophy of the Republican
party. Or so I've been told my whole life. I can hardly wait for all of it
to happen.

[Bob Fry]

Sure, whatever. Actually, it reminds me of this joke a friend sent
the other day about how War was averted between Ireland and France.
Seems that Paddy down at the Harp Pub in County Sligo, Ireland, called
Jacques Chirac, The French Prime Minister, and

Oh the heck with it. I have no heart for the partisan crap at the
moment.

Actually I've been thinking about a two-week trip we just got back
from visiting New England. Saw an old friend, made 3 new friends
including a new-found "aunt" in Gloucester, learned how the natives
pronounce Newburyport, got up to Montreal....fantastic trip. Great
Autumn colors and local characters. Wanted to rent a plane for a bit
but weather and time did not permit. God (oops, can I use his name in
this context) I really want to fly around New England. I'm gonna make
a true cross-country trip out there in a year or two in my Aircoupe.
Yep, gotta do it.

Anyway I got back to North California and to warm up the oil flew from
the Central Valley (Davis) to Truckee in the Sierra Nevadas. Great
California fall day...snow in the mountains, visibility well over 100
miles. I could see the far distant Coast Range from over Truckee.

And I was thinking, what a great time and place to live. To be a
pilot--me, Joe Schmuck--to be able to hop into my personal little
Pudhopper, and fly when and where I want. To dream, realistically,
about flying across this country. To personally know a pilot who flew
his Coupe from Barrow Alaska to Key West Florida, and another who flew
his Coupe to the four farthest airports in the continental US corners.

To live in a country where, by design, our leaders come and go,
instead of sticking around and really doing damage. What a privilege
eh? I'll bet there are millions of people around the world who would
literally give their left arm to take my place, or anybody's place in
this group.

So good on ya mate. Next week I'll bitch about Dubya's latest
screwup, but not today. Today I ordered East and West full sectional
coverage from Howie Keefe so I can start figuring out places to go and
things to see. Today, I turn off the talking heads, and think and
dream.

[Judah]

Well said...


"Peter Duniho" > wrote in
:

> "Icebound" > wrote in message
> ...
>> On the security front, I found it interesting that the people most
>> likely to > be affected by terrorism (the big cities)... especially
>> New York City, and in spite of Guiliani's. popularity... still voted
>> overwhelmingly AGAINST the incumbent???? (like 70%plus ... 80% in the
>> case of The Bronx)
>
> That's because, as cities most likely to be affected by terrorism (and
> in the case of NYC, to *have* been most affected by terrorism), the
> populace actually understands the real risk versus benefit issues, and
> see how they are a) not really much safer than they were before, b) not
> really in all that much danger in the first place, and c) subject to
> additional restrictions and scrutiny that are unwarranted.
>
> The "selling fear to the voters" works best on people far enough
> removed from the situation to not be able to sift fact from fiction.
>
> Another factor is the move of the Republican party from being true
> conservatives (which they used to be) to being basically front man for
> the evangelical or fundamentilist Christians. Again, this demographic
> group is not well-suited to high-density urban areas where there's a
> great amount of diversity and open-mindedness.
>
> Pete
>
>

[Judah]

Does the WTC bombing in 93 not count?


"Cecil Chapman" > wrote in
m:

> But that was done by one of 'our own' within our own borders,,,,, 911
> was carried out by foreigners...
>

[Judah]

And look at what a great President Carter was!

"Steven P. McNicoll" > wrote in
nk.net:

>
> "Newps" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>>
>> Jay Honeck wrote:
>>>
>>> Now that it appears that George Bush has been re-elected with a true
>>> majority of the popular vote (the first president to do so in 16
>>> years),
>>>
>>
>> Jimmuh Carter was the last one to get more than 50%.
>>
>
> George H. W. Bush received 53.4% of the popular vote in 1988. Jimmy
> Carter received 50.1% of the popular vote in 1976.
>
>

[SR]

On Wed, 03 Nov 2004 17:18:35 GMT, "Cecil Chapman"
> wrote:
is determined by the members of the electoral
>college, not by popular vote (which would make us a democracy).
>

That would still make us a republic. A democracy would mean we did
not have elected representatives (such as the president) and each
issue would be decided by popular vote.

[John Theune]

(Jay Masino) wrote in news:41898173$0$27325
@dingus.crosslink.net:

>
> Well, atleast the rest of the country's airspace can go back to normal,
> after several months of roving 30nm TFRs. According to the AOPA Airspace
> Alert I just got, President Moron is going back to his old habit of
> taking 3 day weekends (almost every weekend) at Camp David (when he's not
> in Crawford). AOPA said to expect an expanded TFR around Camp David
> (NW of DC) from THURSDAY through Sunday this weekend. Most of the last
> several years, since 9/11, we get one of these alerts almost every
> weekend. Afterall, he needs his rest from all the reading he does. :)
>
> --- Jay
>
>

What little respect I might have had for you evaporated when I read this
post. The election is over, Kerry lost now get over it. Refering to the
president of the United States as President Moron show your total lack of
respect for the country we live in. If your so upset then get the hell
out.

John

[alexy]

John Theune > wrote:

(Jay Masino) wrote in news:41898173$0$27325
:
>
>>
>> Well, atleast the rest of the country's airspace can go back to normal,
>> after several months of roving 30nm TFRs. According to the AOPA Airspace
>> Alert I just got, President Moron is going back to his old habit of
>> taking 3 day weekends (almost every weekend) at Camp David (when he's not
>> in Crawford). AOPA said to expect an expanded TFR around Camp David
>> (NW of DC) from THURSDAY through Sunday this weekend. Most of the last
>> several years, since 9/11, we get one of these alerts almost every
>> weekend. Afterall, he needs his rest from all the reading he does. :)
>>
>> --- Jay
>>
>>
>
>What little respect I might have had for you evaporated when I read this
>post. The election is over, Kerry lost now get over it. Refering to the
>president of the United States as President Moron show your total lack of
>respect for the country we live in. If your so upset then get the hell
>out.

John, IMHO, you were "spot on" up until that last sentence. But by
telling him to get the hell out of the country if he is upset, you are
getting down on the same level.
--
Alex -- Replace "nospam" with "mail" to reply by email. Checked infrequently.

[Andrew Sarangan]

Speaking purely as an aviator, I am happy to see an end to all the TFR's
that have been ravaging my home town (Dayton, Ohio). Every time Bush came,
several dozen airports were shutdown, often with little advance notice. We
have an airport every 20 miles, so the impact was significant. It really
felt like a police state. You have to give it to Kerry that he declined
TFRs. That is a very aviation-relevant point in favor of Kerry.




"Jay Honeck" > wrote in
news:ke7id.350687$MQ5.178085@attbi_s52:

> Now that it appears that George Bush has been re-elected with a true
> majority of the popular vote (the first president to do so in 16
> years), let me be the first to extend an olive branch to those here
> who may be disappointed in the results.
>
> What has made America strong, and allowed our democracy to thrive for
> over 200 years, is our ability to embrace the loyal opposition on
> election day. We, as pilots, may be just as divided politically as the
> rest of the country, but where we differ from the common electorate is
> in our shared love of aviation.
>
> This bond, in my opinion, transcends any fleeting election
> disagreements, and I, for one, will be more than happy to see all this
> animosity evaporate, so that we can get back to the fun of talking
> about flying!
>
> Blue skies, all!

[Jay Honeck]

> It would happen a lot faster if you didn't insist on posting messages that
> pretend to be conciliatory, even while you continue to post your
> anti-Kerry rhetoric.

??

Where, in this thread, have I said anything anti-Kerry?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Richard Hertz]

"Cecil Chapman" > wrote in message
. com...
> Yeah,, okay. Gracefully accept the things one cannot change :0). I do
> want to point out (despite the political 'clap-trap' you will hear) that
> the United States is a Republic and NOT a democracy - the president
> (through concerns by our founding fathers that the general populace wasn't
> bright enough to make an informed vote ((they could still be right on this
> one <grin>)) and also a concern by the less populous states that they
> would not have an adequate voice ((even though more populous states get
> more electors - go figure)) is determined by the members of the electoral
> college, not by popular vote (which would make us a democracy).


Unless you know something most if us don't, they did not leave a definitive
reason why the electoral vote system was put in place. There are a a few
reasons it could have been done.

I wonder if your opinion on that would be different if the last two
elections had gone the other way but with the same electoral/popular vote
margin...

I can't believe that the existing government (and by this I mean the huge
size of the federal government, not whom is in power) would be tolerated by
the "founding fathers." I suspect they would be revoled by it and by the
idealogies of the two main parties - for example the governments
interference in our daily lives, the huge pillaging of paychecks, the social
programs, the interference of poeple's choice to control their bodies, "War
on drugs", gun control, etc.

the only sane government is one that is "libertarian" with a small 'L.'



>
> Nothing to do about it now,,, you're right hopefully the fatherland,,,
> oops I mean homeland security doesn't get any more out of hand... So,
> onward and upward!
>
> --
> --
> =-----
> Good Flights!
>
> Cecil
> PP-ASEL-IA
> Student - CP-ASEL
>
> Check out my personal flying adventures from my first flight to the
> checkride AND the continuing adventures beyond!
> Complete with pictures and text at: www.bayareapilot.com
>
> "I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things."
> - Antoine de Saint-Exupery -
>
> "We who fly, do so for the love of flying. We are alive in the air with
> this miracle that lies in our hands and beneath our feet"
> - Cecil Day Lewis -
>

[Jay Honeck]

> To live in a country where, by design, our leaders come and go,
> instead of sticking around and really doing damage. What a privilege
> eh? I'll bet there are millions of people around the world who would
> literally give their left arm to take my place, or anybody's place in
> this group.

Well put, Bob!

We do, indeed, live in wondrous times, and in a wonderful country.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Peter Duniho]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:vNhid.294359$wV.45098@attbi_s54...
> Where, in this thread, have I said anything anti-Kerry?

It really doesn't matter whether it was in this thread or not.

[Richard Hertz]

"Dan Luke" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Jay Honeck" wrote:
>> Now that it appears that George Bush has been re-elected with a true
>> majority of the popular vote (the first president to do so in 16 years),
>> let me be the first to extend an olive branch to those here who may be
>> disappointed in the results.
>
> "Appalled" would better describe it.

You don't know "appalled" unless you were in NY when we voted in a carpet
bagger of the worst sort to the Senate.

>
>> What has made America strong, and allowed our democracy to thrive for
>> over 200 years, is our ability to embrace the loyal opposition on
>> election day. We, as pilots, may be just as divided politically as the
>> rest of the country, but where we differ from the common electorate is in
>> our shared love of aviation.
>
>> This bond, in my opinion, transcends any fleeting election disagreements,
>> and I, for one, will be more than happy to see all this animosity
>> evaporate, so that we can get back to the fun of talking about flying!
>>
>> Blue skies, all!
>
> Same to ya' Jay. But if you think this means I'm letting up on Shrub,
> forget it! :)
> --
> Dan
>
> "There ought to be limits to freedom."
> - George W. Bush
>

[Morgans]

> >Your beloved Clinton. And we killed the *******. NEXT!
>
> Yikes, a confession/threat of a former president for the secret
service,,,,
> better look out HOMELAND will get you.....
>

You do know that he was talking about killing Mcveay(sp?)


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.788 / Virus Database: 533 - Release Date: 11/2/2004

[Morgans]

> > It would happen a lot faster if you didn't insist on posting messages
that
> > pretend to be conciliatory, even while you continue to post your
> > anti-Kerry rhetoric.
>
> ??
>
> Where, in this thread, have I said anything anti-Kerry?
> --
> Jay Honeck

What nutcase wrote that one, Jay? I can't see it, so I must have already
plonked him/her.
--
Jim in NC


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.788 / Virus Database: 533 - Release Date: 11/2/2004

[Morgans]

"Jay Masino" > wrote in message
...
>
> Well, atleast the rest of the country's airspace can go back to normal,
> after several months of roving 30nm TFRs. According to the AOPA Airspace
> Alert I just got, President Moron

> __!__
> Jay and Teresa Masino ___(_)___

Com'on, tone it down, how about? The election is over. He is your prez,
like it or not.
--
Jim in NC


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.788 / Virus Database: 533 - Release Date: 11/2/2004

[Dave Stadt]

"Richard Hertz" <no one@no one.com> wrote in message
et...
>
> "Cecil Chapman" > wrote in message
> . com...
> > Yeah,, okay. Gracefully accept the things one cannot change :0). I do
> > want to point out (despite the political 'clap-trap' you will hear) that
> > the United States is a Republic and NOT a democracy - the president
> > (through concerns by our founding fathers that the general populace
wasn't
> > bright enough to make an informed vote ((they could still be right on
this
> > one <grin>)) and also a concern by the less populous states that they
> > would not have an adequate voice ((even though more populous states get
> > more electors - go figure)) is determined by the members of the
electoral
> > college, not by popular vote (which would make us a democracy).
>
>
> Unless you know something most if us don't, they did not leave a
definitive
> reason why the electoral vote system was put in place. There are a a few
> reasons it could have been done.
>
> I wonder if your opinion on that would be different if the last two
> elections had gone the other way but with the same electoral/popular vote
> margin...
>
> I can't believe that the existing government (and by this I mean the huge
> size of the federal government, not whom is in power) would be tolerated
by
> the "founding fathers." I suspect they would be revoled by it and by the
> idealogies of the two main parties - for example the governments
> interference in our daily lives, the huge pillaging of paychecks, the
social
> programs, the interference of poeple's choice to control their bodies,
"War
> on drugs", gun control, etc.

Actually some of the founding fathers were for big government and having the
public play almost no part in government decisions.

Jefferson would have been a staunch libertarian.

[Brien K. Meehan]

Jay Honeck wrote:
> Now that it appears that George Bush has been re-elected with a true
> majority of the popular vote (the first president to do so in 16
years), let
> me be the first to extend an olive branch to those here who may be
> disappointed in the results.

.... and in true form, the disappointed have taken your olive branch and
tried to beat you with it.

[Cub Driver]

>Now that it appears that George Bush has been re-elected with a true
>majority of the popular vote (the first president to do so in 16 years),

And the highest popular vote in history, surpassing even Reagan's the
second time around (that was the last time we had a president who got
more than 50 percent).

I hold no grudges. My daughter voted for the other guys, and she's
still welcome here. (She'd better be, since we have *her* daughters!)


all the best -- Dan Ford
email: (put Cubdriver in subject line)

Warbird's Forum www.warbirdforum.com
Piper Cub Forum www.pipercubforum.com
the blog www.danford.net

[Cub Driver]

>80% in the case of The Bronx

Yes, we should all model our political opinions on those of the
Bronx.

Sigh.

all the best -- Dan Ford
email: (put Cubdriver in subject line)

Warbird's Forum www.warbirdforum.com
Piper Cub Forum www.pipercubforum.com
the blog www.danford.net

[Cub Driver]

>Student - CP-ASEL

And, next to the Bronx, we should take our political opinions from
students.

all the best -- Dan Ford
email: (put Cubdriver in subject line)

Warbird's Forum www.warbirdforum.com
Piper Cub Forum www.pipercubforum.com
the blog www.danford.net

[Jay Masino]

John Theune > wrote:
> What little respect I might have had for you evaporated when I read this
> post. The election is over, Kerry lost now get over it. Refering to the
> president of the United States as President Moron show your total lack of
> respect for the country we live in. If your so upset then get the hell
> out.

Big deal. Atleast I capitalized "President Moron". Actually, I wasn't
all that excited about Kerry. I just can't stand having an idiot in the
White House.

--- Jay


--
__!__
Jay and Teresa Masino ___(_)___
http://www2.ari.net/jmasino ! ! !
http://www.oceancityairport.com
http://www.oc-adolfos.com

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"Cub Driver" > wrote in message
...
>>
>>Now that it appears that George Bush has been re-elected with a true
>>majority of the popular vote (the first president to do so in 16 years),
>>
>
> And the highest popular vote in history,
>

Yes, but only because more people voted than ever before. The second
highest popular vote in history went to John Kerry.


>
> surpassing even Reagan's the
> second time around (that was the last time we had a president who got
> more than 50 percent).
>

The last time we had a president who got more than 50 percent was 1988,
George H. W. Bush.

[alexy]

Cub Driver > wrote:

>
>>Now that it appears that George Bush has been re-elected with a true
>>majority of the popular vote (the first president to do so in 16 years),
>
>And the highest popular vote in history, surpassing even Reagan's the
>second time around (that was the last time we had a president who got
>more than 50 percent).

Nope. GHW Bush got majority.
>
>I hold no grudges. My daughter voted for the other guys, and she's
>still welcome here. (She'd better be, since we have *her* daughters!)
>
>
>all the best -- Dan Ford
>email: (put Cubdriver in subject line)
>
>Warbird's Forum www.warbirdforum.com
>Piper Cub Forum www.pipercubforum.com
>the blog www.danford.net

--
Alex -- Replace "nospam" with "mail" to reply by email. Checked infrequently.

[Jay Honeck]

>> Where, in this thread, have I said anything anti-Kerry?
>
> It really doesn't matter whether it was in this thread or not.

Sure it does. If you're referring to my response to someone eviscerating
our president in another thread as being "anti-Kerry", well, that's your
problem.

I was -- and am -- ready to put the whole issue aside for another four
years -- but I'm not going to sit idly by while someone calls everyone who
voted for Bush "stupid"...
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Markus Voget]

"Allen" > wrote:

> http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/vote2004/countymap.htm
>
> This is why the electoral college is in place. If it were not for the
> electoral college the U.S. would be governed by the residents of large
> cities and the rural population (who tend to be more conservative)
> would have no say in the law-making process.

Indeed, the current elector counts in U.S. presidential elections provide a
bias towards the more rural, low-population states. Given the political
preferences you described, the existing voting system unfortunately (or
fortunately, depending on opinion) always appears to favor Republican
candidates and puts an artificial drag on Democratic candidates.

Greetings,
Markus

[Allen]

> Unless you know something most if us don't, they did not leave a
definitive
> reason why the electoral vote system was put in place. There are a a few
> reasons it could have been done.
>
> I wonder if your opinion on that would be different if the last two
> elections had gone the other way but with the same electoral/popular vote
> margin...
>

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/vote2004/countymap.htm

This is why the electoral college is in place. If it were not for the
electoral college the U.S. would be governed by the residents of large
cities and the rural population (who tend to be more conservative) would
have no say in the law-making process.

Allen

[Jay Honeck]

> Big deal. Atleast I capitalized "President Moron". Actually, I wasn't
> all that excited about Kerry. I just can't stand having an idiot in the
> White House.

From Webster's Dictionary:

Idiocy:
1 usually offensive : extreme mental retardation

If this is what you really think of our president, what does that say for
our country?

If he's dumb, it's like a fox.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Dan Luke]

"Richard Hertz" wrote:
> > "Jay Honeck" wrote:
> >> Now that it appears that George Bush has been re-elected with a true
> >> majority of the popular vote (the first president to do so in 16
years),
> >> let me be the first to extend an olive branch to those here who may be
> >> disappointed in the results.
> >
> > "Appalled" would better describe it.
>
> You don't know "appalled" unless you were in NY when we voted in a carpet
> bagger of the worst sort to the Senate.

Ya' know, if I lived in NY I bet I *would* have been appalled: Hillary gives
me the creeps.

--
"There ought to be limits to freedom."
- George W. Bush

[Jay Masino]

I guess one of the problems I have with him is that he obviously can't
think QUICKLY. Even if you put asside the 7 minutes he sat, after the
2nd plane hit (screw the damn school kids. they'll get over it), anyone
who's watched him stumble over his words, continuously, over the last 4
years (heck, he can't even read off of a damn'ed teleprompter) has to come
to the conclusion that he is NOT a very quick thinker. If he was running
for City Council, I'd say "no big deal", but I expect more from my
President.

The second thing that bothers me is that he's a religious zealot. In
fact, you could almost argue that his religious convictions are as
extreme as the Islamic extremists that we're fighting.

--- Jay


--
__!__
Jay and Teresa Masino ___(_)___
http://www2.ari.net/jmasino ! ! !
http://www.oceancityairport.com
http://www.oc-adolfos.com

[Markus Voget]

alexy > wrote:

> Markus Voget > wrote:
>
>>Indeed, the current elector counts in U.S. presidential elections
>>provide a bias towards the more rural, low-population states.
> If by "current", you mean "since the founding of the United States",
> then I agree. If you mean to imply that it is some kind of recent
> phenomenon, you might want to check your facts.

To my knowledge, the U.S. constitution was never changed on this point.
I can even see the logic in it: If, in the legislative branch, you have
proportional representation of the people in one chamber and equal
representation of the states in the other chamber, why shouldn't the
executive branch, in the name of balance of power, be elected in a
similar way (that is, using a middle ground between the House and Senate
election systems)?

At the same time, political preferences in rural vs. metropolitan areas
tend to be very persistent. They *could* change at any given moment, for
sure, but in reality this does not happen often. At least this is the
experience in my home country (Germany) but it also seems to hold true
for the United States (any counter examples are welcome). My personal
impression is that big cities and the countryside tend to attract
different lifestyles, which tend to go hand in hand with different
political affiliations.

So it still seems to be the case that a Republican generally stands a
better chance of becoming U.S. president than a Democrat. The obvious
case in point would be the 2000 election and not so much the current one.

PS: In spite of these considerations, I see no realistic chance
whatsoever that the U.S. presidential election system gets changed any
time soon. For better or worse...


Greetings,
Markus

[alexy]

Markus Voget > wrote:

>"Allen" > wrote:
>
>> http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/vote2004/countymap.htm
>>
>> This is why the electoral college is in place. If it were not for the
>> electoral college the U.S. would be governed by the residents of large
>> cities and the rural population (who tend to be more conservative)
>> would have no say in the law-making process.
>
>Indeed, the current elector counts in U.S. presidential elections provide a
>bias towards the more rural, low-population states.
If by "current", you mean "since the founding of the United States",
then I agree. If you mean to imply that it is some kind of recent
phenomenon, you might want to check your facts.

> Given the political
>preferences you described, the existing voting system unfortunately (or
>fortunately, depending on opinion) always appears to favor Republican
>candidates and puts an artificial drag on Democratic candidates.
Only if Republicans better meet the needs (or wants) of rural America,
and Democrats better meet the needs (or wants) of major population
centers.
Either can change that "preference" at any time by their policies.

--
Alex -- Replace "nospam" with "mail" to reply by email. Checked infrequently.

[Journeyman]

In article >, Bob Fry wrote:

> screwup, but not today. Today I ordered East and West full sectional
> coverage from Howie Keefe so I can start figuring out places to go and
> things to see. Today, I turn off the talking heads, and think and
> dream.


I used the Howie Keefe charts on a trip from Long Island Sound to
Puget sound (and back) this past summer. They're good for in-flight
finger-on-the-map. They're not so good for for strategic planning.

As a supplement, I had a map from (ach, ptth) Sporty's that covered
the entire U.S. We knew roughly how many inches per day we could
do, looked for likely places in range, and angled norther or souther
depending on what the weather was doing.

It really helped to have the Big Picture on one chart.

Good luck. It's an incredible trip.


Morris (dissatified Sporty's customer)

[AES/newspost]

In article >,
Philip Sondericker > wrote:

> myself actually hopeful for the future. With Republicans enjoying an
> unprecedented mandate, controlling the White House, having substantial
> majorities in both Houses of Congress, and even an advantage in
> Governorships and state legislatures, I'm looking forward to the following:
>
> 1. Fiscal responsibility
> 2. Balanced budgets
> 3. Smaller and less intrusive government
> 4. Greater personal liberties
> 5. A strong and all-volunteer military
> 6. Strong alliances and respect around the world
>
> All of the above are, of course, the bedrock philosophy of the Republican
> party. Or so I've been told my whole life. I can hardly wait for all of it
> to happen.

Re-read this post 3 times, and I still, seriously, can't decide if it's
really intended to be serious or sarcasm -- particular items 3 and 4
(with the Religious Right in the ascendancy).

Scary either way, I guess.

[Corky Scott]

On 04 Nov 2004 15:25:51 GMT, (Jay Masino)
wrote:

>
>I guess one of the problems I have with him is that he obviously can't
>think QUICKLY. Even if you put asside the 7 minutes he sat, after the
>2nd plane hit (screw the damn school kids. they'll get over it), anyone
>who's watched him stumble over his words, continuously, over the last 4
>years (heck, he can't even read off of a damn'ed teleprompter) has to come
>to the conclusion that he is NOT a very quick thinker. If he was running
>for City Council, I'd say "no big deal", but I expect more from my
>President.

Gail Sheehy wrote an article about Bush for Vanity Fair during his
first run to the presidency. In the article (among several other
things) she explored the possibility that Bush was dyslexic. She did
not call him dyslexic, she just interviewed people who were expert
with the symptoms and were willing to look at his malapropisms and
tortured english and comment, in their capacity as experts in the
field.

One of the things that was observed, which is a fact and not subject
to spin, is that dyslexia tends to run in families and Bush's brother
was a diagnosed dyslexic. The other thing that was observed was that
every symptom of Bush's speech and reading that was held up for
observation by the interviewed experts was labeled as being commonly
associated with diagnosed dyslexics.

Bush and his aides have categorically denied that he is dyslexic but
in fact he claims he has never been tested for it, so they literally
cannot know if he is or is not. The problem is, if he is not
dyslexic, as he and his aides claim, then what is causing the speech
and reading difficulties? Because no one is denying that he has
speech and reading difficulties.

Being dyslexic does NOT mean being stupid although it's possible Bush
or Bush's people think that it would be a political liability to admit
such. It is claimed that Winston Churchill, whom Bush is said to
admire, was dyslexic. They are other great thinkers who were
dyslexic, or at least showed the symptoms of dyslexia so it's not like
it should be considered a fault, and obviously, Bush has overcome
whatever is afflicting him in monumental fashion. The electorate
obviously doesn't care, they elected him twice without knowing why he
frequently mangles english.

In my opinion being dyslexic goes a LONG way towards explaining his
lack of reading ability and difficulty with the english language. For
dyslexics, reading is especially difficult, it's "hard work" ;-).
Another datapoint: Bush depends mostly on spoken briefings as opposed
to reading reports. (Aside: had Bush been a voracious reader, would he
have thoroughly read the fated Presidential Daily Briefing that
outlined the danger of el Qaida prior to 9/11 which he admits he did
not do? We'll never know). For this reason, Bush is especially
dependent on his advisors and their ability/interpretation of what's
important. But that's what they're there for.

>The second thing that bothers me is that he's a religious zealot. In
>fact, you could almost argue that his religious convictions are as
>extreme as the Islamic extremists that we're fighting.

Bothers me too.

Corky Scott

[Terry Bolands]

kontiki > wrote in message >...

> GW's lack of vetoing any spending bills in 4 years was frustrating to
> me and I will not be alone in makeing sure he knows I expect him to do
> that in the next 4.

Why would he listen now?


> The market doesn't like big spenders.... but it
> it is more distasteful of John Kerry's promises to not only spend more
> but tax more.

So you are saying you prefer a borrow and spend policy to a tax and
spend policy? I thought fiscal responsibilty was a conservative
ideal?

tb

[Allen]

> "Allen" > wrote:
>
> > If it were not for the
> > electoral college the U.S. would be governed by the residents of large
> > cities and the rural population (who tend to be more conservative) would
> > have no say in the law-making process.
>
"Martin Hotze" > wrote in message

>
> that's dictatorship of the majority.


Dictatorship by the majority. I'm not sure what that means. Here in the
U.S. we have a legislative process to create new laws. (Although lately we
have had some judicial benches trying to create new laws).

Allen

[Richard Russell]

On Wed, 3 Nov 2004 17:10:41 -0700, "Jay Beckman" >
wrote:

>"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
>news:Spdid.361694$D%.219002@attbi_s51...
>>> Oh well. Based on politicos' jabber today, our little group lasted about
>>> as
>>> long as the larger politic in seeking common ground.
>>
>> Ah, well. T'was ever thus. The same thing is going on over on the
>> Cherokee Chat.
>>
>> According to CNN, the 1964 Goldwater vs Johnson election campaign made
>> this election look like some sort of a grade-school spat. Yet, somehow,
>> the country overcame the divisiveness and bitter enmity to grow and
>> prosper. (Of course, it "grew" into the 60s, which is hardly something
>> we'd like to repeat...)
>>
>
>IIRC,
>
>The capper to that campaign season was an add by Johnson which showed a
>little girl serenely picking flowers who gets imolated by a nuclear
>detonation. It was/is quite jarring.
>
>The idea being (if it isn't already obvious...) that voting for Goldwater
>would bring about the end of the world.
>
>I've seen this referred to in some circles as the dirtiest political add
>ever produced.
Jay, I remember that ad. I don't want to continue to fuel this
partisan discussion because, as an American, I respect the right for
both sides to have their views and not be considered idiots for not
agreeing with the other side. That being said, I haven't experienced
anything remotely similar to that ad until Cheyney said (or at least
strongly implied) that if Kerry were elected we would be attacked
again. Granted, that's not exactly the same as the end of the world,
but it does show that the same kind of "anything goes" politics still
exists.
Rich Russell

[Allen]

> In article >,
> Philip Sondericker > wrote:
>
> > myself actually hopeful for the future. With Republicans enjoying an
> > unprecedented mandate, controlling the White House, having substantial
> > majorities in both Houses of Congress, and even an advantage in
> > Governorships and state legislatures, I'm looking forward to the
following:
> >
> > 1. Fiscal responsibility
> > 2. Balanced budgets
> > 3. Smaller and less intrusive government
> > 4. Greater personal liberties
> > 5. A strong and all-volunteer military
> > 6. Strong alliances and respect around the world
> >
> > All of the above are, of course, the bedrock philosophy of the
Republican
> > party. Or so I've been told my whole life. I can hardly wait for all of
it
> > to happen.

"AES/newspost" > wrote in message
...
>
> Re-read this post 3 times, and I still, seriously, can't decide if it's
> really intended to be serious or sarcasm -- particular items 3 and 4
> (with the Religious Right in the ascendancy).
>
> Scary either way, I guess.

"Religious Right in the ascendancy" did you get that from your Tarot cards
or your astrologer?

LOL

Allen

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"Martin Hotze" > wrote in message
...
>>
>> If it were not for the
>> electoral college the U.S. would be governed by the residents of large
>> cities and the rural population (who tend to be more conservative) would
>> have no say in the law-making process.
>>
>
> that's dictatorship of the majority.
>

Democracy is a dictatorship by the majority.

[Allen]

"Martin Hotze" > wrote in message
...
> "Allen" > wrote:
>
> > Dictatorship by the majority. I'm not sure what that means.
>
>
> maybe democracy?
>
> > Here in the
> > U.S. we have a legislative process to create new laws. (Although lately
we
> > have had some judicial benches trying to create new laws).
>
>
> and you decide for new laws with a game of scrabble or what?
> na, you (congress, whoever) vote and the majority wins.
>

So you are calling the U.S. a dictatorship?

[Jay Honeck]

> "Religious Right in the ascendancy" did you get that from your Tarot
> cards
> or your astrologer?

Yeah, I was wondering about myself.

I'm a "conservative" and mostly "Republican" -- but I'm no church-goer, and
I don't see any evidence of the "Religious Right" in the Republican Party --
at least not in these parts.

I think the "Religious Right" is a creation of the media. They find some
idiot standing on a soap box, spouting off about "God's will," stick a
camera and a microphone in his face, and proclaim him to be the "new face of
the Republican Party!"

Are there religious people in the Republican Party? Sure! And there's a
whole bunch of 'em in the Democratic Party, too.

America is a religious place...
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Jay Honeck]

> In my opinion being dyslexic goes a LONG way towards explaining his
> lack of reading ability and difficulty with the english language. For
> dyslexics, reading is especially difficult, it's "hard work" ;-).

As always, Corky, your observations are refreshing and spot on. This DOES
make sense.

And some of the smartest people I've met have been dyslexic -- which has
always been a hard thing for this old English major to understand.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"Martin Hotze" > wrote in message
...
>>
>> So you are calling the U.S. a dictatorship?
>>
>
> huu? neither the way you might interpret my statement nor otherwise. isn't
> the
> US a republic (and not a democracy)?
>

Yes.


>
> (hm, it is a democratic republic, isn't it?)
>

What's a "democratic republic"?

[G.R. Patterson III]

Corky Scott wrote:
>
> Gail Sheehy wrote an article about Bush for Vanity Fair during his
> first run to the presidency. In the article (among several other
> things) she explored the possibility that Bush was dyslexic.

The Atlantic ran an article by James Fallows in the July/August issue. In it he
compared the debating styles of Bush and Kerry. As research, he watched hours of
videos of old debates. He was amazed at the debate between Bush and Ann Richards.

"This Bush was eloquent. He spoke quickly and easily. He rattled off complicated
sentences and brought them to the correct grammatical conclusions. ... More striking,
he did not pause before forcing out big words, as he so often does now, or invent
mangled new ones."

He continues later -- "I have read and listened to speculations that there must be
some organic basis for the President's peculiar mode of speech - a learning
disability, a reading problem, dyslexia or some other disorder that makes him so
uncomfortable when speaking off the cuff. The main problem with these theories is
that through his forties Bush was perfectly articulate."

Two theories quoted in the article were that 1) this is a facade that Bush has
adopted and 2) that the run for the presidency has simply overwhelmed him. Between
those two, I would tend to believe the first. The problem I have with the second
theory is that Bush's confidence should have been restored after years in the White
House.

During the following months, one physician wrote in to the Atlantic to point out that
the only organic condition that would cause this sort of change of which he was aware
is pre-senile dementia.

George Patterson
If a man gets into a fight 3,000 miles away from home, he *had* to have
been looking for it.

[Corky Scott]

On Thu, 04 Nov 2004 17:31:50 GMT, "Jay Honeck"
> wrote:

>I don't see any evidence of the "Religious Right" in the Republican Party --
>at least not in these parts.

You can't see our president? <HUGE grin>

More seriously, you didn't hear about his support of faith based
initiatives?

Corky Scott

[Jay Masino]

Jay Honeck > wrote:
>> In my opinion being dyslexic goes a LONG way towards explaining his
>> lack of reading ability and difficulty with the english language. For
>> dyslexics, reading is especially difficult, it's "hard work" ;-).
> As always, Corky, your observations are refreshing and spot on. This DOES
> make sense.

Of course, that would only explain his problems with the teleprompter.
He also stumbles, and often looks confused, when he's being asked a
question off the cuff. He may be intelligent enough, when given enough
time to think about things, but a President should be able to speak
intelligently about subjects, with little or no preparation, without
stumbling like an idiot. There's still the 7 minutes he waited after the
2nd plane hit the towers. What if it had been the beginning of a nuclear
attack?

And one other thing I thought of (un-related)... Doesn't it bother anyone
that the Bush campaign REQUIRED people to sign an oath of allegiance
before allowing them into his rallies. Actually, that one issue would
have prevented me from voting for him. That was absolutely deplorable.

--- Jay


--
__!__
Jay and Teresa Masino ___(_)___
http://www2.ari.net/jmasino ! ! !
http://www.oceancityairport.com
http://www.oc-adolfos.com

[Peter Duniho]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:%Qqid.54866$R05.31197@attbi_s53...
>> It really doesn't matter whether it was in this thread or not.
>
> Sure it does. If you're referring to my response to someone eviscerating
> our president in another thread as being "anti-Kerry", well, that's your
> problem.

I'm not referring to your "response to someone eviscerating our president".
Nor would the thread matter even in that case.

> I was -- and am -- ready to put the whole issue aside for another four
> years --

So you say.

> but I'm not going to sit idly by while someone calls everyone who voted
> for Bush "stupid"...

Oops...apparently you're not ready to put the whole issue aside.

True diplomacy requires a bit more than just *saying* you'll hold your
tongue. You need to actually do it.

Pete

[Peter Duniho]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:aItid.296104$wV.217316@attbi_s54...
> I'm a "conservative" and mostly "Republican" -- but I'm no church-goer,
> and I don't see any evidence of the "Religious Right" in the Republican
> Party

The facts are not on your side. The Republican party has made a huge effort
to woo the "religious right", especially over the last two decades. There's
a reason that the strong push to encourage evangelical Christians to come
out and vote was backed by the Republican party. Exit polls from this
election (and any other recent elections) clearly show a strong correlation
between degree of religious conviction and voting Republican.

> [...]
> Are there religious people in the Republican Party? Sure! And there's a
> whole bunch of 'em in the Democratic Party, too.

A true statement. But one that ignores who the evangelicals and
fundamentalists generally vote for. Not all people who consider themselves
"religious" actually share the same beliefs, but there is definitely one
core group of people who consider themselves "religious" that the
Republicans go out of their way to appeal to. And, contrary to the supposed
"conservative" nature of the Republican party, that core group would very
much have all of their religious tenets codified into law.

Pete

[Corky Scott]

On Thu, 04 Nov 2004 17:59:29 GMT, "G.R. Patterson III"
> wrote:

>Two theories quoted in the article were that 1) this is a facade that Bush has
>adopted and 2) that the run for the presidency has simply overwhelmed him. Between
>those two, I would tend to believe the first. The problem I have with the second
>theory is that Bush's confidence should have been restored after years in the White
>House.

Not sure. People who have dyslexia learn to deal with it. It never
goes away, but they learn how to work around it (A wonderful way to
deal with it would be to avoid reading and have people verbally brief
you, this is in fact one method of teaching dyslexics in classrooms).
Problem is, for dyslexics it's hard work to decypher each word and
sentence and say what you want to say correctly, and in a flowing
coherent fashion. People who aren't dyslexic simply cannot understand
how hard this is for them. EVERY sentence could trip you up so you
have to be on guard all the time, which is tiring in and of itself.
Bush was younger when he debated with Richards, and perhaps more
resitant to fatigue. That's just a guess.

Naturally, when you get tired, errors in speech happen. That happens
with people who are not dyslexic let alone dyslexics, or at least
that's how things work with me... ;-)

Bush said and has repeated frequently that being the president is hard
work. I believe him. I once saw closeup pictures of Kennedy,
comparing his youthful appearance at his inauguration and three years
later. He had aged dramatically. The crush of the responsibility of
leading the nation was and is intense.

Confidence should have no effect on a dyslexic. It's like saying that
confidence will help a person who has bad eyesight see better. It
won't. Fatigue, on the other hand, would have a profound effect on a
dyslexic.

I should also mention again that Bush's brother was diagnosed as being
dyslexic and dyslexia does run in families.

Corky Scott

PS, I should also mention that there are widely varying degrees of
dyslexia. Some see whole words backwards, some have trouble
differentiating between certain letters like b, d, p, q and h. To a
dyslexic, they can all look the same. Others have no problem reading,
but cannot remember what they just read, no short term memory. Still
others displace words and say: "I will there go" instead of "I will go
there". Very commonly, similar words will be mistaken, like cole slaw
for callous, or nuculer for nuclear. During one speech, Bush
repeatedly said nuculer, when he obviously meant to say nuclear. Or
at least I hope so because "nuculer" isn't a word. It doesn't make
him stupid, or slow, but it's an indicator of a language problem.

I mean honestly, why would anyone develop a facade of a language
problem? Did THAT get him elected? I sure hope not.

[OtisWinslow]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:ke7id.350687$MQ5.178085@attbi_s52...
> Now that it appears that George Bush has been re-elected with a true
> majority of the popular vote (the first president to do so in 16 years),
> let me be the first to extend an olive branch to those here who may be
> disappointed in the results.
>
>> Jay Honeck

Olive branch? I don't think so. They wanted us Socialist on Monday .. and
they
also still wanted us Socialist today. They're attitude hasn't changed .. why
should ours. The Socialists are the most dangerous thing we face. They wish
to confiscate our earnings and give them to those who won't earn their own,
they want to take our guns so we can't stop them. They wish to control every
aspect of our lives with an ever increasing government. We're in a civil
war with the Left (minus the shooting .. yet) and we can't stop fighting for
a second. You can bet they're already plotting for 2008.

[Peter Duniho]

"Corky Scott" > wrote in message
...
> [...] Very commonly, similar words will be mistaken, like cole slaw
> for callous, or nuculer for nuclear. During one speech, Bush
> repeatedly said nuculer, when he obviously meant to say nuclear. Or
> at least I hope so because "nuculer" isn't a word.

How then, is that an example of "similar words" being mistaken for each
other?

> It doesn't make
> him stupid, or slow, but it's an indicator of a language problem.

He may have a language problem, but his mispronounciation of "nuclear" is no
indication of one. It's a dialect difference, one that I find incredibly
annoying, but which is quite common, especially in the south.

Some cynics would say that when Bush was in Yale, he didn't have a southern
accent, but I don't know that to be true, nor would I waste much time
arguing about it.

> I mean honestly, why would anyone develop a facade of a language
> problem? Did THAT get him elected? I sure hope not.

Much of his stumbling seems genuine. However, it certainly doesn't pay to
appear too smart. To many people, especially the half of those who have IQs
below 100, people who are simply speaking in what is a natural way for them,
but who have large vocabularies and tend to try to incorporate nuances of
issues in their statements wind up coming across as arrogant, or at least
not "warm".

Inasmuch as Bush may be intelligent, I don't think it's unreasonable to
think that he may be "dumbing down" his image simply to gain more voters.

Pete

[Richard Hertz]

"Peter Duniho" > wrote in message
...
> "Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
> news:%Qqid.54866$R05.31197@attbi_s53...
>>> It really doesn't matter whether it was in this thread or not.
>>
>> Sure it does. If you're referring to my response to someone eviscerating
>> our president in another thread as being "anti-Kerry", well, that's your
>> problem.
>
> I'm not referring to your "response to someone eviscerating our
> president". Nor would the thread matter even in that case.
>
>> I was -- and am -- ready to put the whole issue aside for another four
>> years --
>
> So you say.
>
>> but I'm not going to sit idly by while someone calls everyone who voted
>> for Bush "stupid"...
>
> Oops...apparently you're not ready to put the whole issue aside.
>
> True diplomacy requires a bit more than just *saying* you'll hold your
> tongue. You need to actually do it.

Well, with taunts from you like this, I suppose he would not. The post was
not very well timed given the rawness of the subject, but don't beat him up
for it. Jay does n ot seem one to vote and it was an (ill-advised) attempt
I think to nudge the posts back to flying...



>
> Pete
>

[Icebound]

"Cub Driver" > wrote in message
...
>
>>80% in the case of The Bronx
>
> Yes, we should all model our political opinions on those of the
> Bronx.
>


Well, maybe you would prefer the Financial District then... How about the
83% against Bush in Manhattan... maybe that's more your style?

--
*** A great civilization is not conquered from without until it
has destroyed itself from within. ***
- Ariel Durant 1898-1981

[Richard Hertz]

"Dan Luke" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Richard Hertz" wrote:
>> > "Jay Honeck" wrote:
>> >> Now that it appears that George Bush has been re-elected with a true
>> >> majority of the popular vote (the first president to do so in 16
> years),
>> >> let me be the first to extend an olive branch to those here who may be
>> >> disappointed in the results.
>> >
>> > "Appalled" would better describe it.
>>
>> You don't know "appalled" unless you were in NY when we voted in a carpet
>> bagger of the worst sort to the Senate.
>
> Ya' know, if I lived in NY I bet I *would* have been appalled: Hillary
> gives
> me the creeps.

Amen

>
> --
> "There ought to be limits to freedom."
> - George W. Bush

That is a scary thought...

Neither party has got it right - I can't imagine a truly competent person
thinking otherwise. To me, the lesser of the two evils is to go with the
'publicans on this one, rather than the socialists...


>
>

[Peter Duniho]

"Richard Hertz" <no one@no one.com> wrote in message
et...
> Well, with taunts from you like this

What taunt? Taunts like what?

> [...] Jay does n ot seem one to vote and it was an (ill-advised) attempt I
> think to nudge the posts back to flying...

If he wants to do that, he needs to stick to posts about flying.
Conversely, as long as he refuses to stick to posts about flying, it's hard
to take him seriously when he claims to want to stick to posts about flying.
No one's forcing him off-topic.

Pete

[JimBob]

This reminds me of an old Paul Simon 's song:
One man's genius is another man's idiot?

Anyway, give him some credit. He is no dumbya. He fooled sixty millions
gun toting, bible thumping, evangelical right wing nuts, twice.

[Philip Sondericker]

in article , AES/newspost at
wrote on 11/4/04 8:15 AM:

> In article >,
> Philip Sondericker > wrote:
>
>> myself actually hopeful for the future. With Republicans enjoying an
>> unprecedented mandate, controlling the White House, having substantial
>> majorities in both Houses of Congress, and even an advantage in
>> Governorships and state legislatures, I'm looking forward to the following:
>>
>> 1. Fiscal responsibility
>> 2. Balanced budgets
>> 3. Smaller and less intrusive government
>> 4. Greater personal liberties
>> 5. A strong and all-volunteer military
>> 6. Strong alliances and respect around the world
>>
>> All of the above are, of course, the bedrock philosophy of the Republican
>> party. Or so I've been told my whole life. I can hardly wait for all of it
>> to happen.
>
> Re-read this post 3 times, and I still, seriously, can't decide if it's
> really intended to be serious or sarcasm -- particular items 3 and 4
> (with the Religious Right in the ascendancy).
>
> Scary either way, I guess.

Whether or not the post is sarcastic is really not the point. The GOP has an
almost unprecedented opportunity to advance its agenda, and I will be quite
curious over the next four years to see how many of its supposedly core
beliefs are put into practice.

What say the Republicans in here? Can we look forward to smaller government
and a balanced budget?

[Jay Honeck]

> And one other thing I thought of (un-related)... Doesn't it bother anyone
> that the Bush campaign REQUIRED people to sign an oath of allegiance
> before allowing them into his rallies. Actually, that one issue would
> have prevented me from voting for him. That was absolutely deplorable.

That bothered me a lot, too, until I spoke with a guy I know who was
involved with security for the presidential visits to Iowa.

He explained that the security issues surrounding the president -- and the
untold number of threats against him -- meant that the Secret Service
required that he be kept away from impromptu, unknown crowds as much as
possible.

Sadly, with the country at war, there are more nutcases than usual who have
pronounced their willingness to assassinate the president. Recording the
names and phone numbers of everyone admitted to a rally (and running
security checks on them) was just the most visible way they kept Bush safe
throughout the campaign -- and the Democrats played that up big politically.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Jay Honeck]

> What say the Republicans in here? Can we look forward to smaller
> government
> and a balanced budget?

I wish -- but now is not the time.

Maybe after the war?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Orval Fairbairn]

In article <iWCid.365126$D%.160998@attbi_s51>,
"Jay Honeck" > wrote:

> > And one other thing I thought of (un-related)... Doesn't it bother anyone
> > that the Bush campaign REQUIRED people to sign an oath of allegiance
> > before allowing them into his rallies. Actually, that one issue would
> > have prevented me from voting for him. That was absolutely deplorable.
>
> That bothered me a lot, too, until I spoke with a guy I know who was
> involved with security for the presidential visits to Iowa.
>
> He explained that the security issues surrounding the president -- and the
> untold number of threats against him -- meant that the Secret Service
> required that he be kept away from impromptu, unknown crowds as much as
> possible.
>
> Sadly, with the country at war, there are more nutcases than usual who have
> pronounced their willingness to assassinate the president. Recording the
> names and phone numbers of everyone admitted to a rally (and running
> security checks on them) was just the most visible way they kept Bush safe
> throughout the campaign -- and the Democrats played that up big politically.


Just reading the subject lines in some of the newsgroups confirms Jay's
last paragraph. We see nutcases calling for assassination, impeachment,
all kinds of vicious names, etc.

Also, the recent campaign brought out the worst in both sides of the
election, with a lot of hard feelings to go around. It is enough to push
some unstable personalities over the edge.

[David Johnson]

I, for one, will be more than happy to see all this animosity evaporate,
> so that we can get back to the fun of talking about flying!
>
My regret is that we have to be subjected to this crap in the first place.
It is well known that religion and politics get the juices flowing like
nothing else (except perhaps aviation?). If it were up to me, I would
cause off-topic material to be deleted.

Is that censorship? I don't think so. I'm sure that there are other
forums where such discussions would be appropriate - and maybe even
welcomed. Those who wander off-topic should be encouraged to find
a more suitable place to express their opinions.

Having said that, let us remember that the beauty of discussion groups
is that the user has complete freedom of choice when it comes to
following (or not following) a thread. So if you find something
annoying or offensive - just ignore it and go on to something else.
A captive audience we are not!

David Johnson

[Dave Stadt]

"Martin Hotze" > wrote in message
...
> "Allen" > wrote:
>
> > If it were not for the
> > electoral college the U.S. would be governed by the residents of large
> > cities and the rural population (who tend to be more conservative) would
> > have no say in the law-making process.
>
>
>
> that's dictatorship of the majority.

No, that's democracy.

>
> #m
> --
> Buck Fush!

[Andrew Sarangan]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in news:nQhid.53372$R05.50592
@attbi_s53:

>> To live in a country where, by design, our leaders come and go,
>> instead of sticking around and really doing damage. What a privilege
>> eh? I'll bet there are millions of people around the world who would
>> literally give their left arm to take my place, or anybody's place in
>> this group.
>
> Well put, Bob!
>
> We do, indeed, live in wondrous times, and in a wonderful country.

Yes, but those wonderous times have a strong correlation with the economic
indicators. Ask almost anyone from India why they would like to move to the
U.S. It is not because of our democracy, religious tolerance. racial
tolerance, or social values. It is because of money. In almost every other
measure of an advanced society, we fall seriously behind countries like
Canada and western Europe. There are scholars who believe that our voting
system is worse than in some third world countries. Yes, we live in a great
country, but we need to understand why we are so great, and fix the areas
that are not so great. Despite all our greatness, we too can make mistakes.
What separates the men from the boys is the ability to admit when a mistake
is made, and take steps to fix it. Just blindly cheering that we are a
great country despite all the mistakes we continue to make is why the rest
of the world think we are so arrogant and ignorant.

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"Dave Stadt" > wrote in message
om...
>>
>> that's dictatorship of the majority.
>>
>
> No, that's democracy.
>

Same thing.

[Jay Masino]

Jay Honeck > wrote:
> That bothered me a lot, too, until I spoke with a guy I know who was
> involved with security for the presidential visits to Iowa.
>
> He explained that the security issues surrounding the president -- and the
> untold number of threats against him -- meant that the Secret Service
> required that he be kept away from impromptu, unknown crowds as much as
> possible.

That's no excuse. Having grown up in the Maryland suburbs of DC, I've
always been "aware" of Presidential security. They were feeding you a
lie. It was a disgusting tactic for a political rally.

--- Jay


--
__!__
Jay and Teresa Masino ___(_)___
http://www2.ari.net/jmasino ! ! !
http://www.oceancityairport.com
http://www.oc-adolfos.com

[Jay Honeck]

> That's no excuse. Having grown up in the Maryland suburbs of DC, I've
> always been "aware" of Presidential security. They were feeding you a
> lie. It was a disgusting tactic for a political rally.

Well, now, do I think that a political party is above using a "security
excuse" provided to them by the Secret Service to make sure that they have a
positive event?

Nope.

I'm shocked...SHOCKED, that there are politics going on here!

;-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Corky Scott]

On 4 Nov 2004 23:57:47 -0600, Andrew Sarangan
> wrote:

>Despite all our greatness, we too can make mistakes.
>What separates the men from the boys is the ability to admit when a mistake
>is made, and take steps to fix it.

Mistakes? The current government makes mistakes? Like what? They
have not admitted any, have they?

Corky Scott

[Jay Masino]

Jay Honeck > wrote:
> Well, now, do I think that a political party is above using a "security
> excuse" provided to them by the Secret Service to make sure that they have a
> positive event?
> Nope.
> I'm shocked...SHOCKED, that there are politics going on here!
> ;-)

Thank you. :)


--
__!__
Jay and Teresa Masino ___(_)___
http://www2.ari.net/jmasino ! ! !
http://www.oceancityairport.com
http://www.oc-adolfos.com

[alexy]

Corky Scott > wrote:

>On 4 Nov 2004 23:57:47 -0600, Andrew Sarangan
> wrote:
>
>>Despite all our greatness, we too can make mistakes.
>>What separates the men from the boys is the ability to admit when a mistake
>>is made, and take steps to fix it.
>
>Mistakes? The current government makes mistakes? Like what? They
>have not admitted any, have they?
>
>Corky Scott

Three letters: W M D
--
Alex -- Replace "nospam" with "mail" to reply by email. Checked infrequently.

[Matt Barrow]

"Jay Masino" > wrote in message
...
> Jay Honeck > wrote:
> > That bothered me a lot, too, until I spoke with a guy I know who was
> > involved with security for the presidential visits to Iowa.
> >
> > He explained that the security issues surrounding the president -- and
the
> > untold number of threats against him -- meant that the Secret Service
> > required that he be kept away from impromptu, unknown crowds as much as
> > possible.
>
> That's no excuse. Having grown up in the Maryland suburbs of DC, I've
> always been "aware" of Presidential security.

It was a very different situation then. After the two attacks on Ford,
Reagan in 1981 and the occurances during Clinton's term (the airplane and
the guy with the SKS) they HAVE to be more careful.

> They were feeding you a
> lie. It was a disgusting tactic for a political rally.

And you're full of ****.

[Jay Masino]

Matt Barrow > wrote:
>> They were feeding you a
>> lie. It was a disgusting tactic for a political rally.
>
> And you're full of ****.

Nice come back. :)



--
__!__
Jay and Teresa Masino ___(_)___
http://www2.ari.net/jmasino ! ! !
http://www.oceancityairport.com
http://www.oc-adolfos.com

[John Galban]

(David Johnson) wrote in message >...
> I, for one, will be more than happy to see all this animosity evaporate,
> > so that we can get back to the fun of talking about flying!
> >
> My regret is that we have to be subjected to this crap in the first place.
> It is well known that religion and politics get the juices flowing like
> nothing else (except perhaps aviation?). If it were up to me, I would
> cause off-topic material to be deleted.

<snip rest of off-topic post>

And yet, you posted this. Ironic, to say the least :-)

John Galban=====>N4BQ (PA28-180)

[Corky Scott]

On Fri, 05 Nov 2004 09:05:05 -0500, alexy > wrote:

>>On 4 Nov 2004 23:57:47 -0600, Andrew Sarangan
> wrote:
>>
>>>Despite all our greatness, we too can make mistakes.
>>>What separates the men from the boys is the ability to admit when a mistake
>>>is made, and take steps to fix it.
>>
>>Mistakes? The current government makes mistakes? Like what? They
>>have not admitted any, have they?
>>
>>Corky Scott
>
>Three letters: W M D

Ok, you and I know that, but has Bush said the intelligence regarding
the existence of WMD's was mistaken? Out loud or in print?

After all, we invaded a country and lots of people are dead...

Corky (he has to say it) Scott

[alexy]

Corky Scott > wrote:

>On Fri, 05 Nov 2004 09:05:05 -0500, alexy > wrote:
>
>>>On 4 Nov 2004 23:57:47 -0600, Andrew Sarangan
> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Despite all our greatness, we too can make mistakes.
>>>>What separates the men from the boys is the ability to admit when a mistake
>>>>is made, and take steps to fix it.
>>>
>>>Mistakes? The current government makes mistakes? Like what? They
>>>have not admitted any, have they?
>>>
>>>Corky Scott
>>
>>Three letters: W M D
>
>Ok, you and I know that, but has Bush said the intelligence regarding
>the existence of WMD's was mistaken? Out loud or in print?

does supporting (under duress) the formation of a bipartisan
commission to look into intelligence failures count?

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/extra/features/jan-june04/weapons_2-02.html


>
>After all, we invaded a country and lots of people are dead...
>
>Corky (he has to say it) Scott

--
Alex -- Replace "nospam" with "mail" to reply by email. Checked infrequently.

[Icebound]

"Steven P. McNicoll" > wrote in message
ink.net...
>
> "Martin Hotze" > wrote in message
> ...
>>>
>>> If it were not for the
>>> electoral college the U.S. would be governed by the residents of large
>>> cities and the rural population (who tend to be more conservative) would
>>> have no say in the law-making process.
>>>
>>
>> that's dictatorship of the majority.
>>
>
> Democracy is a dictatorship by the majority.
>

Well, no, it isn't supposed to be, because in order to work, a part of the
definition of democracy says:
"the representatives that hold the decision power are moderated by a
constitution that emphasizes protecting individual liberties and the rights
of minorities in society, such as freedom of speech and assembly, freedom of
religion, the right to private property and privacy, as well as equality
before the law and due process under the rule of law, and many more."
:unquote.

This was called "liberal democracy"... The USA is listed as having a
"somewhat" liberal democracy ... maybe it is becoming out of fashion, but I
digress.


An interesting perspective on post-vote democracy comes from
http://democracy2.blogspot.com/
titled "A Tip to the Politically Defeated: Democracy Doesn't End on Election
Day"

Even if you don't wade through the whole thing, the following paragraphs are
interesting:

quote:
Going from local political activity to the global, we are now also
witnessing the growth of a movement some are calling the Second Superpower.
No matter what you think of America's superpower position, there's no
question that many in the world see American hegemony as, at best, a
point-of-view that requires some counteracting or rebuttal, or at worst, a
cancer that requires strong opposition. This new global public power base,
as it were, may hope to achieve what no other nation in the world could
imagine achieving—that is, providing the same degree of political
counterbalance that was “enjoyed” during the Cold War. For better or worse,
anti-U.S. political power is growing, and this power will indeed be exerted
against any U.S. policies deemed to be too extreme.

World citizens didn't vote in the 2004 U.S. election, but don't think for a
minute that this prevents them from influencing U.S. politics in a major
way. Denouncing this new “outside influence” will do nothing to diminish it

:unquote.

[Alexis Carlson]

Peter Duniho wrote:

> "Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
> news:aItid.296104$wV.217316@attbi_s54...
> > I'm a "conservative" and mostly "Republican" -- but I'm no church-goer,
> > and I don't see any evidence of the "Religious Right" in the Republican
> > Party
>
> The facts are not on your side. The Republican party has made a huge effort
> to woo the "religious right", especially over the last two decades. There's
> a reason that the strong push to encourage evangelical Christians to come
> out and vote was backed by the Republican party. Exit polls from this
> election (and any other recent elections) clearly show a strong correlation
> between degree of religious conviction and voting Republican.
>
> > [...]
> > Are there religious people in the Republican Party? Sure! And there's a
> > whole bunch of 'em in the Democratic Party, too.
>
> A true statement. But one that ignores who the evangelicals and
> fundamentalists generally vote for. Not all people who consider themselves
> "religious" actually share the same beliefs, but there is definitely one
> core group of people who consider themselves "religious" that the
> Republicans go out of their way to appeal to. And, contrary to the supposed
> "conservative" nature of the Republican party, that core group would very
> much have all of their religious tenets codified into law.

Oh please. The Democrats have been working hard to woo the Religous Left vote
for decades. More recently, how many did Kerry attend protestant church
services in very liberal areas and/or predominantly black churches? "If it's
Sunday, it's Kerry in the AME." Or Kerry expounding on the important lessons of
St Paul and James or preaching about the Good Samaritan and God's high calling
to an Ohio Congregation, or talking about how you reach the kingdom of Heaven.
Was that part of Kerry's own (Catholic) faith, or was he using to church to
pander for votes, or what? The cheerleading Boston Globe even ran stories about
Kerry (re)discovering his Jewish roots---Jews in the US tend to vote Democrat.
Kerry claim to base his policy on his religous beliefs, including his political
objections to the death penalty.

"Through many dangers, toils and snares I have already come. . . Tis grace that
brought me safe thus far, and grace will lead me home." - John Kerry speaking at
Mt. Olivet Baptist Church in Ohio.

"My faith affects everything that I do, in truth" - John Kerry in the
Presidential Debate (Tempe, AZ)

-=-Alexis

[Peter Duniho]

"Alexis Carlson" > wrote in message
...
> Oh please. The Democrats have been working hard to woo the
> Religous Left vote for decades.

So what? First, they haven't done a very effective job (or the "religious
left" is very tiny), since those who state a religious preference of any
sort of Christianity are strongly in the Bush camp (again based on
polls...I'm not interested in any more crap about "well the polls are
wrong"...they are almost always quite close to the truth).

But regardless of what the Democrats have tried, the fact remains that the
Republicans continue to enjoy strong support from the evangelicals and
fundamentalists.

So, did you have a point, or what?

Pete

[Jim Weir]

You do understand that bottom posting after several dozen quoted lines gets you
first-class into the dumper, don't you?

Jim



Alexis Carlson >
shared these priceless pearls of wisdom:

->Peter Duniho wrote:
->
->> "Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
->> news:aItid.296104$wV.217316@attbi_s54...
->> > I'm a "conservative" and mostly "Republican" -- but I'm no church-goer,
->> > and I don't see any evidence of the "Religious Right" in the Republican
->> > Party


Jim Weir (A&P/IA, CFI, & other good alphabet soup)
VP Eng RST Pres. Cyberchapter EAA Tech. Counselor
http://www.rst-engr.com

[Cecil Chapman]

Ah,,, and a little child shall lead them........ ;)

>"Cub Driver"

That IS an engine that's in front of that thing and not from a weed wacker
or power tool, right? <<<GRIN>>>> ;)

--
--
=-----
Good Flights!

Cecil
PP-ASEL-IA
Student - CP-ASEL

Check out my personal flying adventures from my first flight to the
checkride AND the continuing adventures beyond!
Complete with pictures and text at: www.bayareapilot.com

"I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things."
- Antoine de Saint-Exupery -

"We who fly, do so for the love of flying. We are alive in the air with
this miracle that lies in our hands and beneath our feet"
- Cecil Day Lewis -

[Cecil Chapman]

> That would still make us a republic. A democracy would mean we did
> not have elected representatives (such as the president) and each
> issue would be decided by popular vote.


THAT's what I was saying,,,, we are clearly a republic,,,,, placement
directly by the people would be a democracy

--
--
=-----
Good Flights!

Cecil
PP-ASEL-IA
Student - CP-ASEL

Check out my personal flying adventures from my first flight to the
checkride AND the continuing adventures beyond!
Complete with pictures and text at: www.bayareapilot.com

"I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things."
- Antoine de Saint-Exupery -

"We who fly, do so for the love of flying. We are alive in the air with
this miracle that lies in our hands and beneath our feet"
- Cecil Day Lewis -
"SR" > wrote in message
...
> On Wed, 03 Nov 2004 17:18:35 GMT, "Cecil Chapman"
> > wrote:
> is determined by the members of the electoral
>>college, not by popular vote (which would make us a democracy).
>>
>

[Cecil Chapman]

>Unless you know something most if us don't, they did not leave a definitive
>reason why the electoral vote system was put in place. There are a a few
>reasons it could have been done

Read, Thomas Jefferson and I think one of the reasons will become clear.

--
--
=-----
Good Flights!

Cecil
PP-ASEL-IA
Student - CP-ASEL

Check out my personal flying adventures from my first flight to the
checkride AND the continuing adventures beyond!
Complete with pictures and text at: www.bayareapilot.com

"I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things."
- Antoine de Saint-Exupery -

"We who fly, do so for the love of flying. We are alive in the air with
this miracle that lies in our hands and beneath our feet"
- Cecil Day Lewis -

[Cecil Chapman]

> Jefferson would have been a staunch libertarian

Read his opinions regarding the potential electorate of the people/comman
man,,,, VERY interesting.

I would guess that he was probably right about the people of his time
(education level - rather lack thereof among the 'common folk').

--
--
=-----
Good Flights!

Cecil
PP-ASEL-IA
Student - CP-ASEL

Check out my personal flying adventures from my first flight to the
checkride AND the continuing adventures beyond!
Complete with pictures and text at: www.bayareapilot.com

"I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things."
- Antoine de Saint-Exupery -

"We who fly, do so for the love of flying. We are alive in the air with
this miracle that lies in our hands and beneath our feet"
- Cecil Day Lewis -

[Cecil Chapman]

Ya know! That's a good point,,, an assassin would NEVER lie with his/her
signature on an oath of allegiance just to get closer to the president. JAY
do you read what you write,,,,, are you saying that some idiot who wanted to
get close to the president to do him harm wouldn't LIE on the allegiance
'form'? That's probably why criminals 'never' rob people on Christmas,
they wouldn't want to rob people on a Christian holiday, because it would be
wrong..... (of course, I'm being facetious here, Jay).
--
--
=-----
Good Flights!

Cecil
PP-ASEL-IA
Student - CP-ASEL

Check out my personal flying adventures from my first flight to the
checkride AND the continuing adventures beyond!
Complete with pictures and text at: www.bayareapilot.com

"I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things."
- Antoine de Saint-Exupery -

"We who fly, do so for the love of flying. We are alive in the air with
this miracle that lies in our hands and beneath our feet"
- Cecil Day Lewis -

[Wdtabor]

>
>I should also mention again that Bush's brother was diagnosed as being
>dyslexic and dyslexia does run in families.
>

OK, all the dyslexic fighter pilots here, raise your hands.

--
Wm. Donald (Don) Tabor Jr., DDS
PP-ASEL
Chesapeake, VA - CPK, PVG

[Peter Duniho]

"Cecil Chapman" > wrote in message
. com...
>> Jefferson would have been a staunch libertarian
>
> Read his opinions regarding the potential electorate of the people/comman
> man,,,, VERY interesting.
>
> I would guess that he was probably right about the people of his time
> (education level - rather lack thereof among the 'common folk').

People may be more literate today, but frankly I don't see how they are
significantly better educated. Most people view school as a chore to get
through (and thus retain very little of whatever they "learn"), and our
educational system doesn't really teach very much in the way of useful
critical thinking skills anyway.

Other than being able to read and write, and perhaps knowing a few more
facts about historical dates, how to conjugate a verb, and how to calculate
a tip, I don't really see how the current "common folk" are much different
from those that were around 200+ years ago.

Pete

[Jay Honeck]

> Other than being able to read and write, and perhaps knowing a few more
> facts about historical dates, how to conjugate a verb, and how to
> calculate a tip, I don't really see how the current "common folk" are much
> different from those that were around 200+ years ago.

The differences you imply to be insignificant are quite what differentiates
the ignorant from the educated.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Peter Duniho]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:Edfjd.559$V41.308@attbi_s52...
> The differences you imply to be insignificant are quite what
> differentiates the ignorant from the educated.

They do not, however, help a person to make an intelligent decision. Not
about politics, nor anything else. Nor are today's "common folk" any better
at doing that sort of thing than the "common folk" of 200+ years ago, IMHO.

It is in that respect that those differences are insignificant...for you to
infer that I meant anything else makes no sense.

[David Johnson]

(John Galban) wrote in message >...
> (David Johnson) wrote in message >...
> > I, for one, will be more than happy to see all this animosity evaporate,
> > > so that we can get back to the fun of talking about flying!
> > >
> > My regret is that we have to be subjected to this crap in the first place.
> > It is well known that religion and politics get the juices flowing like
> > nothing else (except perhaps aviation?). If it were up to me, I would
> > cause off-topic material to be deleted.
>
> <snip rest of off-topic post>
>
> And yet, you posted this. Ironic, to say the least :-)
>
> John Galban=====>N4BQ (PA28-180)

I don't agree. IMHO a discussion of what appears here is very much
On Topic (as opposed to the perhaps questionable content itself).

A good question, though, is who decides what goes and what stays.
Opinions are like asses - everybody has one. Like I said, nobody
makes you read (what is to you) offensive material. I think that a
good personal policy is to ignore rather than react.

David Johnson

David Johnson

[Andrew Sarangan]

The number of degrees granted can mislead one to assume that we have a
better educated public today. In fact, our standards of achievement in
higher education is considerably lower. Many decades ago, a doctorate
degree meant that you spent a great deal of time thinking about critical
issues and fundamentally new ideas. That is no longer true. A doctorate
means you took several courses and completed a project. As a result we
have a large number of people with higher degres. The fraction of
population that spends time on critical thinking is probably the same as
it was a century ago.



"Peter Duniho" > wrote in
:

> "Cecil Chapman" > wrote in message
> . com...
>>> Jefferson would have been a staunch libertarian
>>
>> Read his opinions regarding the potential electorate of the
>> people/comman man,,,, VERY interesting.
>>
>> I would guess that he was probably right about the people of his time
>> (education level - rather lack thereof among the 'common folk').
>
> People may be more literate today, but frankly I don't see how they
> are significantly better educated. Most people view school as a chore
> to get through (and thus retain very little of whatever they "learn"),
> and our educational system doesn't really teach very much in the way
> of useful critical thinking skills anyway.
>
> Other than being able to read and write, and perhaps knowing a few
> more facts about historical dates, how to conjugate a verb, and how to
> calculate a tip, I don't really see how the current "common folk" are
> much different from those that were around 200+ years ago.
>
> Pete
>
>


Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com

[Darrell S]

I guess you heard about the agnostic, dyslexic, insomniac pilot? He tossed
and turned all night pondering if there really is a Dog!

--

Darrell R. Schmidt
B-58 Hustler History: http://members.cox.net/dschmidt1/
-

"Wdtabor" > wrote in message
...
> >
>>I should also mention again that Bush's brother was diagnosed as being
>>dyslexic and dyslexia does run in families.
>>
>
> OK, all the dyslexic fighter pilots here, raise your hands.
>
> --
> Wm. Donald (Don) Tabor Jr., DDS
> PP-ASEL
> Chesapeake, VA - CPK, PVG

[Jim Weir]

That's a doG.

Jim


"Darrell S" >
shared these priceless pearls of wisdom:

->I guess you heard about the agnostic, dyslexic, insomniac pilot? He tossed
->and turned all night pondering if there really is a Dog!



Jim Weir (A&P/IA, CFI, & other good alphabet soup)
VP Eng RST Pres. Cyberchapter EAA Tech. Counselor
http://www.rst-engr.com

[Jim Weir]

Andrew...

I'm not trying to start a flame war, just seeing exactly your frame of
reference. Do you have a PhD? or PhD-ABD? MS? MA? BS/BA?

Jim




Andrew Sarangan >
shared these priceless pearls of wisdom:

Many decades ago, a doctorate
->degree meant that you spent a great deal of time thinking about critical
->issues and fundamentally new ideas. That is no longer true. A doctorate
->means you took several courses and completed a project.


Jim Weir (A&P/IA, CFI, & other good alphabet soup)
VP Eng RST Pres. Cyberchapter EAA Tech. Counselor
http://www.rst-engr.com

[Andrew Sarangan]

Yes, I have a PhD (in EE), and I am actively involved in graduate education
& research at the MS and PhD levels.



Jim Weir > wrote in
:

> Andrew...
>
> I'm not trying to start a flame war, just seeing exactly your frame of
> reference. Do you have a PhD? or PhD-ABD? MS? MA? BS/BA?
>
> Jim
>
>
>
>
> Andrew Sarangan >
> shared these priceless pearls of wisdom:
>
> Many decades ago, a doctorate
> ->degree meant that you spent a great deal of time thinking about
> critical ->issues and fundamentally new ideas. That is no longer true.
> A doctorate ->means you took several courses and completed a project.
>
>
> Jim Weir (A&P/IA, CFI, & other good alphabet soup)
> VP Eng RST Pres. Cyberchapter EAA Tech. Counselor
> http://www.rst-engr.com
>


Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com

[bryan chaisone]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message news:<nQhid.53372$R05.50592@attbi_s53>...
> > To live in a country where, by design, our leaders come and go,
> > instead of sticking around and really doing damage. What a privilege
> > eh? I'll bet there are millions of people around the world who would
> > literally give their left arm to take my place, or anybody's place in
> > this group.
>
> Well put, Bob!
>
> We do, indeed, live in wondrous times, and in a wonderful country.

here here. or is that hear hear?

Bryan

[Jay Honeck]

>> The differences you imply to be insignificant are quite what
>> differentiates the ignorant from the educated.
>
> They do not, however, help a person to make an intelligent decision. Not
> about politics, nor anything else. Nor are today's "common folk" any
> better at doing that sort of thing than the "common folk" of 200+ years
> ago, IMHO.

The ability to read and write doesn't "help a person to make an intelligent
decision"?

That is, quite possibly, the single most absurd conclusion I've *ever* read
on Usenet.

Congratulations!

;-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[mike regish]

I have one adamant Bushie at work who thinks the friggin' war is in Iran!

mike regish

"Corky Scott" > wrote in message
...
> On Wed, 3 Nov 2004 12:38:11 -0500, "Icebound"
> > wrote:
>
>>On the security front, I found it interesting that the people most likely
>>to
>>be affected by terrorism (the big cities)... especially New York City, and
>>in spite of Guiliani's. popularity... still voted overwhelmingly AGAINST
>>the incumbent???? (like 70%plus ... 80% in the case of The Bronx)
>
> I saw an interesting political tidbit the other day, it stated that
> Bush supporters apparently did not believe the conclusions of the 9/11
> Commission. Perhaps the folks in the Bronx did?
>
> Corky Scott

[mike regish]

Not by a long shot.

mike regish

"Newps" > wrote in message
...
>
> Perhaps, but us little minded people are right.

[Jay Honeck]

>I have one adamant Bushie at work who thinks the friggin' war is in Iran!

A premonition?

If the Ayatollahs don't abandon their nuclear program, that's where this
road leads.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[leslie]

mike regish ) wrote:
: I have one adamant Bushie at work who thinks the friggin' war is in Iran!
:

No, no, that's the next war:

http://www.theorator.com/bills108/s2681.html
Iran Freedom and Support Act of 2004

"...SEC. 3. SENSE OF CONGRESS ON UNITED STATES POLICY TOWARD IRAN.

It is the sense of Congress that it should be the policy of the United
States to support regime change for the Islamic Republic of Iran
and to promote the transition to a democratic government to
replace that regime..."

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c108:S.2681.IS:
Iran Freedom and Support Act of 2004 (Introduced in Senate)


--Jerry Leslie
Note: is invalid for email

[Peter Duniho]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:uIAjd.71234$R05.48473@attbi_s53...
> The ability to read and write doesn't "help a person to make an
> intelligent decision"?

No, of course it doesn't. Plenty of illiterate people around the world make
perfectly reasonable decisions every day.

> That is, quite possibly, the single most absurd conclusion I've *ever*
> read on Usenet.

Not even close.

> Congratulations!

Your praise is unwarranted.

[Corky Scott]

On Sat, 6 Nov 2004 10:19:34 -0800, "Peter Duniho"
> wrote:

>People may be more literate today, but frankly I don't see how they are
>significantly better educated. Most people view school as a chore to get
>through (and thus retain very little of whatever they "learn"), and our
>educational system doesn't really teach very much in the way of useful
>critical thinking skills anyway.

What courses in school would teach critical thinking skills?

Corky Scott

[Cecil Chapman]

Oh yes Jay! and THEN what about North Korea and THEN...... geez, where
does it stop? Better get the mothers in the U.S. to crank out a LOT more
babies, 'cause we're going to be needing soldiers for awhile.... :(

While Iran is the last that I'd want to have Nuclear weapons, still,,, in
terms of an objective evaluation of fairness, let me get this right..... WE
are entitled to having nuclear weapons as a deterrent to attack,,,, but
certain OTHERS can't have them for the same reason? For the reason of;
"Because the U.S. , said so?" Even though the U.S. is the only one to have
EVER used nuclear weapons in a war?

While I'm NO friend of Iran (although the U.S. used to be friends with them,
until the leader of the time, made the mistake of not doing what we told him
to do), don't you think,,, if you were in THEIR shoes and watching a major
power blast your neighbors into the sand that YOU might be thinking of
having one of those nuclear deterrent 'thingies' too?

While I'd rather not see more nukes around the world, I've never understood
how we could argue how only we and a choice few others were allowed to have
them.

Don't others (countries) have the 'right to bear arms' (even if those arms
'glow')?

--
--
=-----
Good Flights!

Cecil
PP-ASEL-IA
Student - CP-ASEL

Check out my personal flying adventures from my first flight to the
checkride AND the continuing adventures beyond!
Complete with pictures and text at: www.bayareapilot.com

"I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things."
- Antoine de Saint-Exupery -

"We who fly, do so for the love of flying. We are alive in the air with
this miracle that lies in our hands and beneath our feet"
- Cecil Day Lewis -
"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:UpBjd.380460$D%.240560@attbi_s51...

[Peter Duniho]

"Corky Scott" > wrote in message
...
> What courses in school would teach critical thinking skills?

Any course can. That's one of the beautiful things about critical
thinking...it's relatively independent of the subject in question.

But when schools simply teach you that you have to memorize facts, but don't
need to know how to put facts together to create new knowledge and insights,
there's no real education going on. Unfortunately, that appears to be the
norm in education of all levels.

[Richard Hertz]

"Cecil Chapman" > wrote in message
m...
> Oh yes Jay! and THEN what about North Korea and THEN...... geez, where
> does it stop? Better get the mothers in the U.S. to crank out a LOT more
> babies, 'cause we're going to be needing soldiers for awhile.... :(

The countries we have been discussing (and the one you mentioned) is not
exactly one that has shown good judgement. To take your example of N
Korea... if you really need lessons on the political nature of the
communists in Korea, China, Cuba, then you are beyond all reason.
>
> While Iran is the last that I'd want to have Nuclear weapons,

Ah, a rational thought has come forth from your keyboard, finally.

>still,,, in terms of an objective evaluation of fairness, let me get this
>right..... WE are entitled to having nuclear weapons as a deterrent to
>attack,,,, but certain OTHERS can't have them for the same reason?

Since you brought up objective evaluation of fairness let's do so. The
country you mention has attacked others. Clearly not a good thing. We do
not have faith in the leaderships ability to restrain itself from using
nuclear weapons as offensive weapons.

> For the reason of; "Because the U.S. , said so?" Even though the U.S. is
> the only one to have EVER used nuclear weapons in a war?

Yes, in a war. We were attacked first. We used them to save lives. Far
more people died in the Dresden firebombing than from the nuclear bombs we
dropped. If you are really that ignorant of history and why we chose to
shorten the war and save Japanese and American lives you are truly in your
own little world.

>
> While I'm NO friend of Iran (although the U.S. used to be friends with
> them, until the leader of the time, made the mistake of not doing what we
> told him to do),

Um, I think it was due to some hostages, and other such nonsense. France
does not do what we tell them and we do not attack them. It takes a lot of
naughty things to happen to be on our dirty list. Do you really think of
all the countries below that the US is the bad guy? Come on, be real.

(N Korea, Libya, Iran Iraq, Cuba, China, etc)

>don't you think,,, if you were in THEIR shoes and watching a major power
>blast your neighbors into the sand that YOU might be thinking of having one
>of those nuclear deterrent 'thingies' too?

Given the brainwashing and religious fanaticism and equating the "west" with
eveil, sure, they want one. However, they would most likely choose to use
them as offensive weapons. The US did not start this war.

>
> While I'd rather not see more nukes around the world, I've never
> understood how we could argue how only we and a choice few others were
> allowed to have them.
>
> Don't others (countries) have the 'right to bear arms' (even if those arms
> 'glow')?


It is in ouor interest to protect ourselves from the bad guys. If we
thought that they would use it only as a deterrent than you would be
correct. It is doubtful that that is the reason though. Countries have a
right to defend themselves. They do not have the right to attack another.

It is mind boggling though that a country would not want to become a
defeated nation of the US. It seems to have worked out well for others in
the past.



>
> --
> --
> =-----
> Good Flights!
>
> Cecil
> PP-ASEL-IA
> Student - CP-ASEL
>
> Check out my personal flying adventures from my first flight to the
> checkride AND the continuing adventures beyond!
> Complete with pictures and text at: www.bayareapilot.com
>
> "I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things."
> - Antoine de Saint-Exupery -
>
> "We who fly, do so for the love of flying. We are alive in the air with
> this miracle that lies in our hands and beneath our feet"
> - Cecil Day Lewis -
> "Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
> news:UpBjd.380460$D%.240560@attbi_s51...
>

[Alexis Carlson]

Peter Duniho wrote:

> "Alexis Carlson" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Oh please. The Democrats have been working hard to woo the
> > Religous Left vote for decades.
>
> So what? First, they haven't done a very effective job (or the "religious
> left" is very tiny), since those who state a religious preference of any
> sort of Christianity are strongly in the Bush camp (again based on
> polls...I'm not interested in any more crap about "well the polls are
> wrong"...they are almost always quite close to the truth).
>
> But regardless of what the Democrats have tried, the fact remains that the
> Republicans continue to enjoy strong support from the evangelicals and
> fundamentalists.
>
> So, did you have a point, or what?

The point is you're wrong with respect to Democrats. As was pointed out in
the Wall St Journal today, Senator Kerry won nearly half of the Catholic votes
and more than three fourths of Jewish votes. If the Democrats could not
appeal to the moral values of people, that fact must have been lost on the 48%
of the voters who supported Sen. Kerry.

[Peter Duniho]

"Alexis Carlson" > wrote in message
...
> The point is you're wrong with respect to Democrats.

Please quote my incorrect statement.

All I said is that the *REPUBLICANS* have shifted to being a very
pro-evangelical / fundamentalist party over the last couple of decades. I
don't see how you can sit there as write "you're wrong with respect to
Democrats" since my entire contribution to this section of the thread has
been about Republicans.

[Corky Scott]

On Mon, 8 Nov 2004 14:51:25 -0800, "Peter Duniho"
> wrote:

>"Corky Scott" > wrote in message
...
>> What courses in school would teach critical thinking skills?
>
>Any course can. That's one of the beautiful things about critical
>thinking...it's relatively independent of the subject in question.

Can you give me an example of what you mean by critical thinking? How
would you see it being taught in, say, math class? Reading?

>But when schools simply teach you that you have to memorize facts, but don't
>need to know how to put facts together to create new knowledge and insights,
>there's no real education going on. Unfortunately, that appears to be the
>norm in education of all levels.

Well like it or not, there are some things kids just have to memorize.
The alphabet, spelling rules, vowel sounds, vocabulary, addition and
multiplication tables, and so on. These are building blocks for
further education.

Bush is a great believer in accountability in schools. How does he
assess accountability? By making schools give their students
standardized tests and telling them that if their students don't show
improvement, the school will loose funding. It's very important for
the schools that their students show improvement in these tests so the
inevitable result of "No child left behind" is rote memorization of
facts...

Corky Scott

[Jay Honeck]

> Bush is a great believer in accountability in schools. How does he
> assess accountability? By making schools give their students
> standardized tests and telling them that if their students don't show
> improvement, the school will loose funding. It's very important for
> the schools that their students show improvement in these tests so the
> inevitable result of "No child left behind" is rote memorization of
> facts...

It's not "inevitable" -- but it might be a side benefit. It would be nice
if at least *some* of our students knew a few of the important dates in
history, or memorized a soliloquy.

"No child left behind" isn't perfect, but it's the first program in my
lifetime that holds out any hope for fixing the utterly broken inner city
schools -- which is what the program is really targeted at.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Corky Scott]

On Tue, 09 Nov 2004 14:09:07 GMT, "Jay Honeck"
> wrote:

>"No child left behind" isn't perfect, but it's the first program in my
>lifetime that holds out any hope for fixing the utterly broken inner city
>schools -- which is what the program is really targeted at.

Unfortunately, here in Vermont the smallish size of many of our
schools causes them to be the "collateral damage", so to speak, of
this program aimed at inner city schools.

With small schools and small classes, students with learning
disabilities have a disproportionately large affect on the test
results. And guess what, they aren't going to improve much regardless
how effective the teacher is, so the test results won't go up from
test to test. Vermont is studded with small schools and pretty much
all of them have learning disabled students. No dodging this one, the
Feds say all students must be tested regardless their actual ability
to learn.

These schools are getting warnings that they are not in compliance
with the standardized testing and there's little they can do to
improve things, other than convince the parents of the learning
disabled kids to move away from their district.

So far the Feds are not aknowledging the impossibility of the
situation or indicating understanding: do the testing, show
improvement or loose funding.

Corky Scott

[alexy]

Corky Scott > wrote:
I'll be interested in seeing Peter's responses, but here are some of
my thoughts.

>On Mon, 8 Nov 2004 14:51:25 -0800, "Peter Duniho"
> wrote:
>
>>"Corky Scott" > wrote in message
...
>>> What courses in school would teach critical thinking skills?
>>
>>Any course can. That's one of the beautiful things about critical
>>thinking...it's relatively independent of the subject in question.
>
>Can you give me an example of what you mean by critical thinking?
That's a tough one. It's about like saying "define a liberal arts
education. But you should see it all around you. My son went to a
school in the same league as the one with which you are associated,
and found lots of students with degrees in history or literature
getting good jobs, not in literary analysis or historical research,
but in unrelated fields because of the critical thinking abilities
they had learned and demonstrated.

> How would you see it being taught in, say, math class?
The very nature of mathematical proof is critical thinking. Proof by
induction or by assuming the negative and showing a contradiction are
very generalized critical thinking skills.

>Reading?
Literary analysis is an example of critical thinking in practice, and
the literature itself can expose the reader to the critical thinking

>>But when schools simply teach you that you have to memorize facts, but don't
>>need to know how to put facts together to create new knowledge and insights,
>>there's no real education going on. Unfortunately, that appears to be the
>>norm in education of all levels.
>
>Well like it or not, there are some things kids just have to memorize.
>The alphabet, spelling rules, vowel sounds, vocabulary, addition and
>multiplication tables, and so on. These are building blocks for
>further education.
>
>Bush is a great believer in accountability in schools. How does he
>assess accountability? By making schools give their students
>standardized tests and telling them that if their students don't show
>improvement, the school will loose funding. It's very important for
>the schools that their students show improvement in these tests so the
>inevitable result of "No child left behind" is rote memorization of
>facts...
I think that is a very great danger, and what can be scary about
testing. But testing that is not of facts, but rather of skills, is
much harder to "prep" for without actually getting educated.

--
Alex -- Replace "nospam" with "mail" to reply by email. Checked infrequently.

[alexy]

Corky Scott > wrote:

>On Tue, 09 Nov 2004 14:09:07 GMT, "Jay Honeck"
> wrote:
>
>>"No child left behind" isn't perfect, but it's the first program in my
>>lifetime that holds out any hope for fixing the utterly broken inner city
>>schools -- which is what the program is really targeted at.
>
>Unfortunately, here in Vermont the smallish size of many of our
>schools causes them to be the "collateral damage", so to speak, of
>this program aimed at inner city schools.
>
>With small schools and small classes, students with learning
>disabilities have a disproportionately large affect on the test
>results.
I don't understand this one. Why is that? Fresh air leads to learning
disabilities, or is it too much maple sugar?

> And guess what, they aren't going to improve much regardless
>how effective the teacher is, so the test results won't go up from
>test to test. Vermont is studded with small schools and pretty much
>all of them have learning disabled students. No dodging this one, the
>Feds say all students must be tested regardless their actual ability
>to learn.
>
>These schools are getting warnings that they are not in compliance
>with the standardized testing and there's little they can do to
>improve things, other than convince the parents of the learning
>disabled kids to move away from their district.
>
>So far the Feds are not aknowledging the impossibility of the
>situation or indicating understanding: do the testing, show
>improvement or loose funding.
>
>Corky Scott

--
Alex -- Replace "nospam" with "mail" to reply by email. Checked infrequently.

[alexy]

alexy > wrote:

Sorry. Itchy "send finger".

>> How would you see it being taught in, say, math class?
>The very nature of mathematical proof is critical thinking. Proof by
>induction or by assuming the negative and showing a contradiction are
>very generalized critical thinking skills.
>
>>Reading?
>Literary analysis is an example of critical thinking in practice, and
>the literature itself can expose the reader to the critical thinking
of some of the great minds of history. When my kids were reading Kafka
in high school, the old man had to renew his critical thinking skills
to be able to discuss it with them.
>>>But when schools simply teach you that you have to memorize facts, but don't
>>>need to know how to put facts together to create new knowledge and insights,
>>>there's no real education going on. Unfortunately, that appears to be the
>>>norm in education of all levels.
>>
>>Well like it or not, there are some things kids just have to memorize.
>>The alphabet, spelling rules, vowel sounds, vocabulary, addition and
>>multiplication tables, and so on. These are building blocks for
>>further education.
>>
>>Bush is a great believer in accountability in schools. How does he
>>assess accountability? By making schools give their students
>>standardized tests and telling them that if their students don't show
>>improvement, the school will loose funding. It's very important for
>>the schools that their students show improvement in these tests so the
>>inevitable result of "No child left behind" is rote memorization of
>>facts...
>I think that is a very great danger, and what can be scary about
>testing. But testing that is not of facts, but rather of skills, is
>much harder to "prep" for without actually getting educated.

--
Alex -- Replace "nospam" with "mail" to reply by email. Checked infrequently.

[G.R. Patterson III]

alexy wrote:
>
> Corky Scott > wrote:
>
> >With small schools and small classes, students with learning
> >disabilities have a disproportionately large affect on the test
> >results.
>
> I don't understand this one. Why is that? Fresh air leads to learning
> disabilities, or is it too much maple sugar?

If you have one disabled child in a school that has 500 students, it doesn't affect
the average performance of the school. If you have one disabled child in 500
students, but these students are spread out over 10 schools, the performance of the
one school that kid is in will show up as disproportionately poor.

George Patterson
If a man gets into a fight 3,000 miles away from home, he *had* to have
been looking for it.

[alexy]

"G.R. Patterson III" > wrote:

>
>
>alexy wrote:
>>
>> Corky Scott > wrote:
>>
>> >With small schools and small classes, students with learning
>> >disabilities have a disproportionately large affect on the test
>> >results.
>>
>> I don't understand this one. Why is that? Fresh air leads to learning
>> disabilities, or is it too much maple sugar?
>
>If you have one disabled child in a school that has 500 students, it doesn't affect
>the average performance of the school. If you have one disabled child in 500
>students, but these students are spread out over 10 schools, the performance of the
>one school that kid is in will show up as disproportionately poor.

Oh, okay. I didn't realize that the incidence of learning disabilities
was so low. In that case, I agree that a few VT schools would have a
harder time meeting the requirements, while most VT schools would have
an easier time of it than would larger schools.
--
Alex -- Replace "nospam" with "mail" to reply by email. Checked infrequently.

[Peter Duniho]

"Corky Scott" > wrote in message
...
> Can you give me an example of what you mean by critical thinking?

Critical thinking would allow someone, for example, to read a statement like
"But when schools simply teach you that you have to memorize facts, but
don't
need to know how to put facts together to create new knowledge and insights,
there's no real education going on", and understand by implication what the
author means by "critical thinking", from the "compare and contrast"
construction of the statement.

> Well like it or not, there are some things kids just have to memorize.

I never said there weren't. The problem is when education is *limited to*
memorization.

> [...]
> Bush is a great believer in accountability in schools.

How did we turn this back into a thread about Bush? I don't particularly
agree with his methods, but the truth is that schools have been screwed up
for a LONG time since before Bush was around to help. "No child left
behind" is simply the natural progression for what's already been going on
for decades.

But in any case, just talking about the tests: it's harder, but by no means
impossible, to create tests that test critical thinking rather than rote
memorization. The real question is just how much effort educators want to
put into it.

Pete

[Peter Duniho]

"alexy" > wrote in message
...
> Oh, okay. I didn't realize that the incidence of learning disabilities
> was so low.

It's not. Nor are disabled students genuinely causing problems with
standardized test scores. "No child left behind" isn't helping inner city
children any more than it's helping rural children.

The thought that we can improve education by cutting funding to the
underperforming schools is just plain messed up. Many "underperforming
schools" are underperforming because their resources are already stretched
wafer thin.

Pete

[Corky Scott]

On Tue, 09 Nov 2004 11:27:41 -0500, alexy > wrote:

>>With small schools and small classes, students with learning
>>disabilities have a disproportionately large affect on the test
>>results.
>I don't understand this one. Why is that? Fresh air leads to learning
>disabilities, or is it too much maple sugar?

I'm not saying that Vermont has a disproportionetly higher incidence
of learning disabled students than other states. But they do have
lots of very small schools. If the school has just a few learning
disabled kids, they tend to drag down the scores because there are so
few other students in the class. NOTE: I'm not saying that all the
small schools have LD kids in each class. Things get much worse if one
of these small schools is unlucky enough to have several LD kids.
Larger schools get to bury their LD student's scores in a much much
larger student population.

As always at this point in a straying discussion, I regret my adding
to the drift. I will post no more on this subject.

My apologies.

Corky Scott

[Morgans]

"Corky Scott" > wrote

> Bush is a great believer in accountability in schools. How does he
> assess accountability? By making schools give their students
> standardized tests and telling them that if their students don't show
> improvement, the school will loose funding. It's very important for
> the schools that their students show improvement in these tests so the
> inevitable result of "No child left behind" is rote memorization of
> facts...
>
> Corky Scott

Not quite. The thrust of no child left behind, is that the ones that can't
read, or do math, or Write, get the help they need to function in society.
It also puts severely handicapped students normal classes, where they are
sure to do poorly, IMHO, unless the teacher gives them all kind of "special"
consideration, achievement wise.

That is a big failing, I think. The kid that can not read does not need to
try, and do poorly, at memorizing facts. They need to stay in reading and
writing class, all day long, if need be. Same goes with the kid that comes
to us from another country. Learn the language FIRST, then start on the
rest.

I have a kid from Mexico that speaks almost no English, yet I am trying to
teach him a technical trade like carpentry. Experts admit that technical
English is the last thing to be mastered. I don't understand this
situation.
--
Jim in NC


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.788 / Virus Database: 533 - Release Date: 11/1/2004

[Morgans]

"G.R. Patterson III" > wrote

> If you have one disabled child in a school that has 500 students, it
doesn't affect
> the average performance of the school. If you have one disabled child in
500
> students, but these students are spread out over 10 schools, the
performance of the
> one school that kid is in will show up as disproportionately poor.
>
> George Patterson

I hope that this 500 was a number pulled out of your hat, and not what you
believe is a close estimate. The number of kids passed along without being
able to read and write is a disaster, and telling of our biggest failure in
the schools of today and the past.

1 in 50 is still too low of a number. Wow.
--
Jim in NC


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.788 / Virus Database: 533 - Release Date: 11/1/2004

[Alexis Carlson]

Peter Duniho wrote:

> "Alexis Carlson" > wrote in message
> ...
> > The point is you're wrong with respect to Democrats.
>
> Please quote my incorrect statement.
>
> All I said is that the *REPUBLICANS* have shifted to being a very
> pro-evangelical / fundamentalist party over the last couple of decades. I
> don't see how you can sit there as write "you're wrong with respect to
> Democrats" since my entire contribution to this section of the thread has
> been about Republicans.

You said, "so what? First, they [DEMOCRATS] haven't done a very effective job
(or the "religious
left" is very tiny), since those who state a religious preference of any sort
of Christianity are strongly in the Bush camp (again based on polls...)"

Those remarks were about DEMOCRATS not Republicans, contrary to your claim
above. I pointed out that Sen Kerry won nearly half of Catholic votes. Last
time I checked, Catholicism is a sort of Christian religion, and a pretty big
one at that. And 3/4 of evangelical/fundamentalist Jews voted Kerry as well.

[Peter Duniho]

"Alexis Carlson" > wrote in message
...
> You said, "so what? First, they [DEMOCRATS] haven't done a very effective
> job
> (or the "religious
> left" is very tiny), since those who state a religious preference of any
> sort
> of Christianity are strongly in the Bush camp (again based on polls...)"

The majority of those stating a preference DID vote Republican. Catholicism
is not the only Christian religion in the US. Nor did even the majority of
Catholics vote for Kerry (as you yourself admit).

> Those remarks were about DEMOCRATS not Republicans, contrary to your claim
> above.

Actually, my claim was more about the people voting for Bush. But
whatever...if you think that proves your point, more power to you.

> I pointed out that Sen Kerry won nearly half of Catholic votes. Last
> time I checked, Catholicism is a sort of Christian religion, and a pretty
> big
> one at that. And 3/4 of evangelical/fundamentalist Jews voted Kerry as
> well.

"Evangelical/fundamentalist Jews"? What's that, six people in the entire
US? Anyway, regardless, those aren't the evangelicals or fundamentalists I
was talking about, and you should know that.

Pete

[Jay Honeck]

> It also puts severely handicapped students normal classes, where they are
> sure to do poorly, IMHO, unless the teacher gives them all kind of
> "special"
> consideration, achievement wise.
>
> That is a big failing, I think. The kid that can not read does not need
> to
> try, and do poorly, at memorizing facts. They need to stay in reading and
> writing class, all day long, if need be. Same goes with the kid that
> comes
> to us from another country. Learn the language FIRST, then start on the
> rest.

You have pointed out the many flaws in our current approach to education --
but, remember, those flaws existed long BEFORE "No Child Left Behind."

Crazy do-gooders were trying to "mainstream" developmentally disabled
(formerly known as "retarded") kids into regular schools long before Bush
came on the scene. One of the reasons my 52 year old sister retired early
from teaching (Spanish, English and French) was that her school district
began placing developmentally disabled -- some severely so -- kids in her
regular classes.

Of course, chaos ensued, and the other "normal" kids paid a severe price.

Worse, pointing this out to her superiors had no results -- in fact, she was
chastised for even bringing the issue up. So, she called it a career, and
is now working part-time tutoring Hispanic kids.

This "mainstreaming" practice is so obviously absurd as to defy
explanation -- yet it is now done routinely, both here in Iowa and in
Michigan, where my sister taught. One thing is certain: No learning is
going on in a class with students who are sitting in a corner bashing their
heads against the desk.

But this -- along with the equally crazy insertion of non-English speaking
kids -- is an ENTIRELY different problem than "No Child Left Behind."
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[G.R. Patterson III]

Morgans wrote:
>
> I hope that this 500 was a number pulled out of your hat, and not what you
> believe is a close estimate.

Absolutely. I was simply providing an example to Alex of what Corky was talking
about.

George Patterson
If a man gets into a fight 3,000 miles away from home, he *had* to have
been looking for it.

[Frank]

Corky Scott wrote:
> On Mon, 8 Nov 2004 14:51:25 -0800, "Peter Duniho"
> > wrote:
>>"Corky Scott" > wrote in message
...
>>> What courses in school would teach critical thinking skills?
>>
>>Any course can. That's one of the beautiful things about critical
>>thinking...it's relatively independent of the subject in question.
>
> Can you give me an example of what you mean by critical thinking? How
> would you see it being taught in, say, math class? Reading?


Perhaps not a direct example but I'll never forget this one:

The context was engineers and their methodology. The discussion was along
the lines of a perfect engineer wouldn't need anything except a set of
specs to build whatever. Our prof pointed out that an engineers
responsibility goes further than that. "If they ask you to build an oven,
always ask what's going inside."



>>But when schools simply teach you that you have to memorize facts, but
>>don't need to know how to put facts together to create new knowledge and
>>insights,
>>there's no real education going on. Unfortunately, that appears to be the
>>norm in education of all levels.
>
> Well like it or not, there are some things kids just have to memorize.
> The alphabet, spelling rules, vowel sounds, vocabulary, addition and
> multiplication tables, and so on. These are building blocks for
> further education.


True enough, especially at early ages. But there are also some things that
better taught/learned without rote memorization. Unfortunately history
tests place more value on knowing what date something happened on rather
than why.


> Bush is a great believer in accountability in schools. How does he
> assess accountability? By making schools give their students
> standardized tests and telling them that if their students don't show
> improvement, the school will loose funding. It's very important for
> the schools that their students show improvement in these tests so the
> inevitable result of "No child left behind" is rote memorization of
> facts...


We want to be the best test takers in the world!


--
Frank....H

[Jay Honeck]

> We want to be the best test takers in the world!

You know, everyone makes fun of this -- but what other option is there?
How else can you measure the overall success of an educational system than
by using standardized tests?

Everyone hates 'em -- but no one has come up with a viable alternative for
measuring what someone has learned.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Peter Duniho]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:v8ykd.323917$wV.252939@attbi_s54...
> [...]
> Everyone hates 'em -- but no one has come up with a viable alternative for
> measuring what someone has learned.

There are tests, and then there are tests. No is suggesting that all tests
are useless. But emphasizing education to the point of focusing only on
what it takes to pass a standardized multiple-choice exam fails the student.

Think about aviation. You (ought to) know as well as anyone else that
there's studying for the written exams, and then there's really knowing how
to fly an airplane. I wouldn't do away with the written exam, but to think
that a person taught strictly to pass the written exam would make a good
pilot is silly.

Testing is actually quite a reasonably well-studied science. There's a
whole art to creating a proper multiple choice exam, and most people
understand that to really test non-rote skills, multiple-choice exams don't
do as well as a number of other testing methods.

Pete

[Trent Moorehead]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:KIqkd.390673$D%.241613@attbi_s51...
> But this -- along with the equally crazy insertion of non-English speaking
> kids -- is an ENTIRELY different problem than "No Child Left Behind."

Way back in junior high school, two Vietnamese girls were placed into our
science class. They could not speak a stitch of English. The teacher
assigned me to one of the girls and another classmate to the other. We were
to help them complete the classwork. I felt bad for them, but I was also mad
because I couldn't get my work done. I compained to the teacher, but she
said her hands were tied. They passed the class, but only because we
basically did their work for them (they copied our papers).

Hopefully this type of thing doesn't happen anymore.

-Trent
PP-ASEL

[Morgans]

"Trent Moorehead" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
> news:KIqkd.390673$D%.241613@attbi_s51...
> > But this -- along with the equally crazy insertion of non-English
speaking
> > kids -- is an ENTIRELY different problem than "No Child Left Behind."
>
> Way back in junior high school, two Vietnamese girls were placed into our
> science class. They could not speak a stitch of English. The teacher
> assigned me to one of the girls and another classmate to the other. We
were
> to help them complete the classwork. I felt bad for them, but I was also
mad
> because I couldn't get my work done. I compained to the teacher, but she
> said her hands were tied. They passed the class, but only because we
> basically did their work for them (they copied our papers).
>
> Hopefully this type of thing doesn't happen anymore.
>
> -Trent
> PP-ASEL

Oh, but it does. It is force on the schools, with little funding to do more
than small amounts of individual help.
--
Jim in NC


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.788 / Virus Database: 533 - Release Date: 11/1/2004

[Frank]

Jay Honeck wrote:

>> We want to be the best test takers in the world!
>
> You know, everyone makes fun of this -- but what other option is there?
> How else can you measure the overall success of an educational system than
> by using standardized tests?
>
> Everyone hates 'em -- but no one has come up with a viable alternative for
> measuring what someone has learned.

No easy answers that's for sure. What I really object to is the emphasis
placed on these standardized tests. It seems they are the sole determinant
and they are too unreliable to be given so much weight.


--
Frank....H

[Jay Honeck]

>>> We want to be the best test takers in the world!
>>
>> You know, everyone makes fun of this -- but what other option is there?
>> How else can you measure the overall success of an educational system
>> than
>> by using standardized tests?
>>
>> Everyone hates 'em -- but no one has come up with a viable alternative
>> for
>> measuring what someone has learned.
>
> No easy answers that's for sure. What I really object to is the emphasis
> placed on these standardized tests. It seems they are the sole determinant
> and they are too unreliable to be given so much weight.

Okay, so...what other options *are* there? We're talking about millions
of students here -- how can we assess our national educational system
without some sort of standardized testing?

There are no other ways to fairly do it. And, if people are dead-set
against standardized testing, the only other viable alternative is to tell
the Feds to stay out of education altogether, and leave it up to the states.
But then you end up with a national disgrace like the East St. Louis
district... (And hundreds of others like it.)

There are no easy answers. No Child Left Behind is, at least, an attempt to
fix the system. But it's going to need some significant modifications to
make it work.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[AJW]

>
>
>>>> We want to be the best test takers in the world!
>>>
>>> You know, everyone makes fun of this -- but what other option is there?
>>> How else can you measure the overall success of an educational system
>>> than
>>> by using standardized tests?
>>>
>>> Everyone hates 'em -- but no one has come up with a viable alternative
>>> for
>>> measuring what someone has learned.
>>
>> No easy answers that's for sure. What I really object to is the emphasis
>> placed on these standardized tests. It seems they are the sole determinant
>> and they are too unreliable to be given so much weight.
>
>Okay, so...what other options *are* there? We're talking about millions
>of students here -- how can we assess our national educational system
>without some sort of standardized testing?
>
>There are no other ways to fairly do it. And, if people are dead-set
>against standardized testing, the only other viable alternative is to tell
>the Feds to stay out of education altogether, and leave it up to the states.
>But then you end up with a national disgrace like the East St. Louis
>district... (And hundreds of others like it.)
>
>There are no easy answers. No Child Left Behind is, at least, an attempt to
>fix the system. But it's going to need some significant modifications to
>make it work.
>--
>Jay Honeck
>Iowa City, IA
>Pathfinder N56993
>www.AlexisParkInn.com
>"Your Aviation Destination"
>
For what it's worth, you may remember that piece of paper in your pocket that
grants you the right to fly had as one of its components a written test. Would
you want to flay as a passanger with someone as PIC who could NOT pass the
written? I'm talking about the general case, not some special case you might
use as an example.

The issue of testing, I think, has to do with test design, as opposed to
testing or not testing. A well designed test in fact measures what it's
supposed to, without too many false positives or false negatives. I would
rather have a panel of peer selected experts design a test to determine how
well for example a teacher's class is learning instead of hearing that
teacher's opinion, or even that teacher's supervisor's opinion.

Arm's length objective testing is pretty much like how the best musicans are
sometimes selected - they perform behind a screen for the review committee.

I know, I know, algebra should not be performed in public.

[Frank]

AJW wrote:

>>>>"Jay Honeck" > wrote
>>>>>"Frank....H" wrote


>>>>> We want to be the best test takers in the world!
>>>>
>>>> You know, everyone makes fun of this -- but what other option is there?
>>>> How else can you measure the overall success of an educational system
>>>> than
>>>> by using standardized tests?
>>>>

<snip>

>>>
>>> No easy answers that's for sure. What I really object to is the emphasis
>>> placed on these standardized tests. It seems they are the sole
>>> determinant and they are too unreliable to be given so much weight.
>>
>>Okay, so...what other options *are* there? We're talking about millions
>>of students here -- how can we assess our national educational system
>>without some sort of standardized testing?
>>
>>There are no other ways to fairly do it. And, if people are dead-set
>>against standardized testing, the only other viable alternative is to tell
>>the Feds to stay out of education altogether, and leave it up to the
>>states. But then you end up with a national disgrace like the East St.
>>Louis district... (And hundreds of others like it.)
>>
>>There are no easy answers. No Child Left Behind is, at least, an attempt
>>to
>>fix the system. But it's going to need some significant modifications to
>>make it work.
>>
> For what it's worth, you may remember that piece of paper in your pocket
> that grants you the right to fly had as one of its components a written
> test. Would you want to flay as a passanger with someone as PIC who could
> NOT pass the written? I'm talking about the general case, not some special
> case you might use as an example.
>
> The issue of testing, I think, has to do with test design, as opposed to
> testing or not testing. A well designed test in fact measures what it's
> supposed to, without too many false positives or false negatives. I would
> rather have a panel of peer selected experts design a test to determine
> how well for example a teacher's class is learning instead of hearing that
> teacher's opinion, or even that teacher's supervisor's opinion.


You said it Jay, there are no easy answers. I would add there are no cheap
ones either. AJW uses the analogy of our pilot certificates and the written
portion of obtaining them. He goes on to point out the flaws of
standardized tests. I would expand it however to include the whole process.

So to answer to you question 'what other option is there' might include a
provision to evaluate the students in an additional way so as to augment
the standardized tests. A 'practical' standards test as it were.

Again, I don't advocate eliminating the tests altogether. I'm just very
concerned that there is too much emphasis put on the results of one test.
Especially given what we know about the flaws of such a test. I do believe
the federal government has a role though.

Part of their role should be to set some minimum standards regarding
equipment, class size, etc. A large part of what is wrong with the current
system is that it attempts to equate the results of learning opportunities
afforded a student in a school with plenty of computers and 1:25 teacher
student ratio with one limited to hand me down text books who talks to a
teacher once a week.

It isn't right to punish schools that are deemed to be doing poorly in the
absence of a way to measure whether or not they have the resources required
to meet those standards.


--
Frank....H

[Jay Honeck]

> Part of their role should be to set some minimum standards regarding
> equipment, class size, etc. A large part of what is wrong with the current
> system is that it attempts to equate the results of learning opportunities
> afforded a student in a school with plenty of computers and 1:25 teacher
> student ratio with one limited to hand me down text books who talks to a
> teacher once a week.
>
> It isn't right to punish schools that are deemed to be doing poorly in the
> absence of a way to measure whether or not they have the resources
> required
> to meet those standards.

As I understand "No Child Left Behind", the ultimate goal is that the
failing schools are "punished" by being eliminated.

This, as everyone would probably agree, is a good thing. Schools with
hand-me-down textbooks and students who talk with teachers but once a week
really don't qualify as "schools" in today's world. This threat of
elimination mimics the free market system that keeps businesses efficient,
and should (in theory) act to keep the under-performing schools in line, as
the local school districts will have to either respond with more funding, or
close the school.

I'm no expert, but it appears that this radical approach is what it's going
to take to repair many of our long-broken school systems.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Frank]

Jay Honeck wrote:

>> Part of their role should be to set some minimum standards regarding
>> equipment, class size, etc. A large part of what is wrong with the
>> current system is that it attempts to equate the results of learning
>> opportunities afforded a student in a school with plenty of computers and
>> 1:25 teacher student ratio with one limited to hand me down text books
>> who talks to a teacher once a week.
>>
>> It isn't right to punish schools that are deemed to be doing poorly in
>> the absence of a way to measure whether or not they have the resources
>> required
>> to meet those standards.
>
> As I understand "No Child Left Behind", the ultimate goal is that the
> failing schools are "punished" by being eliminated.

That's the way I understand it too. And as I said, if they meet some minimum
standards to begin with then there is a basis for it.

> This, as everyone would probably agree, is a good thing. Schools with
> hand-me-down textbooks and students who talk with teachers but once a week
> really don't qualify as "schools" in today's world.

I wholeheartidly agree. But they do exist and are included in the test
results.

> This threat of
> elimination mimics the free market system that keeps businesses efficient,
> and should (in theory) act to keep the under-performing schools in line,
> as the local school districts will have to either respond with more
> funding, or close the school.

Indeed that is the stated theory. Sounds good but under further scrutiny
there are some flaws.

The obvious one is funding. Without minimum standards to judge by we may not
know if additional funds will be effective. What if the local community
doesn't have the funds?

And what happens if we do close the school. If they didn't have enough money
to to make the existing one work where does the money for the replacement
come from? Or is there no replacement?

The biggest drawbacks I see are that there is no provision for identifying
_why_ a school is failing and relying on the vagaries of local funding.

>
> I'm no expert, but it appears that this radical approach is what it's
> going to take to repair many of our long-broken school systems.

Repair or eliminate? Some see this initiative as a way to expand the voucher
program and drive more children towards private (religious) schools at
public expense. Given that the provisions seem to make failure an almost
self fulfilling prophecy in some cases and the remedies are underfunded
give credence to that notion.

We all seem to agree that the school system needs help. Bring all schools up
to a minimum level and we can begin to identify what's wrong and how to fix
it.
--
Frank....H

[Corky Scott]

On Wed, 17 Nov 2004 18:02:42 GMT, "Jay Honeck"
> wrote:

>As I understand "No Child Left Behind", the ultimate goal is that the
>failing schools are "punished" by being eliminated.
>
>This, as everyone would probably agree, is a good thing.

Well Jay, I guess I don't agree.

Before you eliminate a school, someone had better make darned sure
that there is another school nearby to take all the kids from the
failed school (school is mandatory, right?). Is there an alternative
school nearby? If so, can it take all these children from the failed
school? If not, what the heck you going to do with all those kids?

Perhaps it would be better to evaluate exactly what's wrong with that
particular school and see if you can fix the problem.

Corky Scott

[Newps]

Corky Scott wrote:


> Perhaps it would be better to evaluate exactly what's wrong with that
> particular school and see if you can fix the problem.

Which is what in reality is happening. Before, the taxpayers would be
asked to throw fistfuls of money at the school. Now, they're starting
to look at the teachers and the administrators, which is where the
problem has almost always been.

[Jay Honeck]

>> Perhaps it would be better to evaluate exactly what's wrong with that
>> particular school and see if you can fix the problem.
>
> Which is what in reality is happening. Before, the taxpayers would be
> asked to throw fistfuls of money at the school. Now, they're starting to
> look at the teachers and the administrators, which is where the problem
> has almost always been.

PRECISELY!

For too many years, teachers and administrators at bad schools were allowed
to just shuffle under-performing students along, getting them "out of their
hair" by promoting them.

Now, for the first time, they are being held accountable -- and screaming to
high heaven.

To which, as a parent with two kids in arguably the finest school system in
America, I say "good!"... Sometimes it takes a swift kick in the pants,
financially, to wake people up to a problem.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Margy Natalie]

Ok, I've been too busy to read the newsgroups but you guys are really nuts! No
Child Left Behind does NOTHING to improve student achievement. The schools
often have little to work with in the first place and I'm not talking $$. I
teach in one of the best schools in one of the best systems in the country. My
school has an upward of 98% pass rate on the science SOL (our standards test)
but some of our kids aren't passing and no matter what I do they won't. Do you
know if you have a borderline mentally retarded student taking science for
learning disabled kids they need to pass the test? Well, if the retarded kids
can pass, how good is the test?

I had one kid (smart, I liked him) who had to go home and do 3 hours of house
work and deal the mom's, boyfriend's 19 year old just released from prison, son
sharing a room with him. The 6 degree night he only walked the dog for half and
hour mom got ****ed, loaded him into the car and tried to have him locked up for
insubordination. Yeah, he was really worried about Newton's laws!

We've got kids who face safety issues everyday and no one worries about that.

No child left behind also mandates rather time consuming tests (6+ hours) for
many students. In my sister's school they tested on kid in a number of sessions
over a number of days to prove he was making progress. This child possesses
only a brain stem, nothing above it. What did that testing accomplish?

No child left behind is a great example of educational policy gone bad. High
stakes testing isn't good for anyone. Standarized tests are fine, but don't
tell kids they are failures over and over and over again when they can't help
that they have an IQ of 72.

Margy

Jay Honeck wrote:

> >> Perhaps it would be better to evaluate exactly what's wrong with that
> >> particular school and see if you can fix the problem.
> >
> > Which is what in reality is happening. Before, the taxpayers would be
> > asked to throw fistfuls of money at the school. Now, they're starting to
> > look at the teachers and the administrators, which is where the problem
> > has almost always been.
>
> PRECISELY!
>
> For too many years, teachers and administrators at bad schools were allowed
> to just shuffle under-performing students along, getting them "out of their
> hair" by promoting them.
>
> Now, for the first time, they are being held accountable -- and screaming to
> high heaven.
>
> To which, as a parent with two kids in arguably the finest school system in
> America, I say "good!"... Sometimes it takes a swift kick in the pants,
> financially, to wake people up to a problem.
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"

[Jay Honeck]

> No child left behind is a great example of educational policy gone bad.
> High
> stakes testing isn't good for anyone. Standarized tests are fine, but
> don't
> tell kids they are failures over and over and over again when they can't
> help
> that they have an IQ of 72.

It sounds like you've identified an absurd part of No Child Left Behind that
we talked about to some degree (that thread is months old). There is no
justification for requiring a retarded child to pass ANY kind of
standardized test, period.

But that doesn't mean No Child Left Behind is a bad program -- it merely
means it needs to be fine-tuned to not include kids with mental
disabilities.

Bottom line: For the first time schools nation-wide are having to prove that
they are actually educating the children in their care. This seemingly
innocuous requirement has stirred up a firestorm of resentment and
objections, which, IMHO, says volumes about what has really been going on in
our schools.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Don Tuite]

Jay, read Margie's post again.

You focused on the walking carrot and ignored the ****ed-up mother.

Which do you figure there are more of in underperforming schools.?

Don

[Jay Honeck]

> Jay, read Margie's post again.
>
> You focused on the walking carrot and ignored the ****ed-up mother.
>
> Which do you figure there are more of in underperforming schools.?

And your point is...what?

Surely it's not that we should abandon standardized testing as a means to
determine the functionality of our schools because some parents are morons?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Don Tuite]

On Thu, 16 Dec 2004 22:33:07 GMT, "Jay Honeck"
> wrote:

>> Jay, read Margie's post again.
>>
>> You focused on the walking carrot and ignored the ****ed-up mother.
>>
>> Which do you figure there are more of in underperforming schools.?
>
>And your point is...what?
>
>Surely it's not that we should abandon standardized testing as a means to
>determine the functionality of our schools because some parents are morons?

I'm with Bill Cosby. Don't blame teachers for what parents send to
school.

Don

[Jay Honeck]

> I'm with Bill Cosby. Don't blame teachers for what parents send to
> school.

I agree with you, Don -- but surely there has to be a way to hold
underperforming schools accountable.

We just can't continue to turn our backs and pass along (and graduate) kids
who can't read, write, or do multiplication. It's just not acceptable.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Don Tuite]

On Thu, 16 Dec 2004 22:37:47 GMT, "Jay Honeck"
> wrote:

>> I'm with Bill Cosby. Don't blame teachers for what parents send to
>> school.
>
>I agree with you, Don -- but surely there has to be a way to hold
>underperforming schools accountable.
>
>We just can't continue to turn our backs and pass along (and graduate) kids
>who can't read, write, or do multiplication. It's just not acceptable.

T'was ever thus. The parochial school I attended in the '50s dumped
the problem kids who didn't respond to corporal punishment back into
the public schools. In my parent's day, the problem was
biodegradable: mandatory schooling ended earlier. Dropouts filled the
niches occupied today by undocumented laborers.

Keeping the problem kids in school longer means there's a chance of
saving more of them. The down side is they're a bad influence and the
consume resources. The education establishment is burdened by some
really stupid ideas,but so is everything including aviation. The fact
is, a lot of it works despite the stupid ideas. On the other hand,
the most useless year my daughter ever spent was the one in the
charter high school.

I don't have an answer, but I do feel that NCLB is another feel-good
smoke screen with an agenda.

If you want to take this off rec.aviation, I don't use the email in my
header anymore. It's dtuite"symbol"penton"dot"com.

Don

[Roger]

On Thu, 16 Dec 2004 16:46:01 -0500, Margy Natalie >
wrote:

>Ok, I've been too busy to read the newsgroups but you guys are really nuts! No
>Child Left Behind does NOTHING to improve student achievement. The schools
>often have little to work with in the first place and I'm not talking $$. I
>teach in one of the best schools in one of the best systems in the country. My
>school has an upward of 98% pass rate on the science SOL (our standards test)
>but some of our kids aren't passing and no matter what I do they won't. Do you
>know if you have a borderline mentally retarded student taking science for
>learning disabled kids they need to pass the test? Well, if the retarded kids
>can pass, how good is the test?

This sounds like a modernized version of "outcome based education" and
most of us know how well that worked.

Passing a kid who does not have the capability of doing the work is
not doing them any favors. Passing a kid who won't do the work is not
doing them any favors either.

I feel sorry for the kids in situations that prevent them from doing
their work, but again that is not the schools, or teachers fault and
it is not doing the kind any favors by passing them.

Lowering the qualifications for passing the tests does everyone a
disservice.

Let's face it, If you or I, or any adult doesn't have the capabilities
to do a job we were hired to do, we are fired. If we don't do the
work, regardless of our capabilities we still get fired. What happens
to the kid who is passed through school without the ability to do the
work, or who doesn't do the work? At best they can hope for menial
labor and the odds are they won't do well there either.

Life is harsh. If we don't have the education we can not compete. If
we don't have the capability, we can't compete. There are many who
just do not have the capability to do so and the system has to
accommodate them, but it shouldn't drag the entire educational system
down in the process.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

[Wizard of Draws]

On 12/17/04 4:24 AM, in article ,
"Roger" > wrote:

> On Thu, 16 Dec 2004 16:46:01 -0500, Margy Natalie >
> wrote:
>
>> Ok, I've been too busy to read the newsgroups but you guys are really nuts!
>> No
>> Child Left Behind does NOTHING to improve student achievement. The schools
>> often have little to work with in the first place and I'm not talking $$. I
>> teach in one of the best schools in one of the best systems in the country.
>> My
>> school has an upward of 98% pass rate on the science SOL (our standards test)
>> but some of our kids aren't passing and no matter what I do they won't. Do
>> you
>> know if you have a borderline mentally retarded student taking science for
>> learning disabled kids they need to pass the test? Well, if the retarded
>> kids
>> can pass, how good is the test?
>
> This sounds like a modernized version of "outcome based education" and
> most of us know how well that worked.
>
> Passing a kid who does not have the capability of doing the work is
> not doing them any favors. Passing a kid who won't do the work is not
> doing them any favors either.
>
> I feel sorry for the kids in situations that prevent them from doing
> their work, but again that is not the schools, or teachers fault and
> it is not doing the kind any favors by passing them.
>
> Lowering the qualifications for passing the tests does everyone a
> disservice.
>

No Child Left Behind is gov-speak for No Child Allowed to Excel.
--
Jeff 'The Wizard of Draws' Bucchino
Cartoons with a Touch of Magic�
http://www.wizardofdraws.com
http://www.cartoonclipart.com

The Wizard's 2004 Christmas newsletter
http://www.wizardofdraws.com/main/xmas04.html

[Margy Natalie]

Roger wrote:

> On Thu, 16 Dec 2004 16:46:01 -0500, Margy Natalie >
> wrote:
>
> >Ok, I've been too busy to read the newsgroups but you guys are really nuts! No
> >Child Left Behind does NOTHING to improve student achievement. The schools
> >often have little to work with in the first place and I'm not talking $$. I
> >teach in one of the best schools in one of the best systems in the country. My
> >school has an upward of 98% pass rate on the science SOL (our standards test)
> >but some of our kids aren't passing and no matter what I do they won't. Do you
> >know if you have a borderline mentally retarded student taking science for
> >learning disabled kids they need to pass the test? Well, if the retarded kids
> >can pass, how good is the test?
>
> This sounds like a modernized version of "outcome based education" and
> most of us know how well that worked.
>
> Passing a kid who does not have the capability of doing the work is
> not doing them any favors. Passing a kid who won't do the work is not
> doing them any favors either.

Why do ALL students have to pass ALL tests? What's wrong with the kid that just
doesn't make it in Algebra II doing something else. Who says EVERYONE must pass
Algebra II to be ok? (I know the answer here, the State of Virginia says you must
pass Algebra II). I agree that MOST students should be able to pass MOST tests, but
NCLB demands high stakes testing of all students. I agree that standards can be
applied. NY used to have general diplomas and Regents diplomas. The Regents
diploma meant the student had passed a series of exams. Now states are required to
have exams for all diploma, so a struggling student who may be very qualified for a
number of professions can't manage to pass the tests and can't find employment due
to no high school diploma. This is good?

>
>
> I feel sorry for the kids in situations that prevent them from doing
> their work, but again that is not the schools, or teachers fault and
> it is not doing the kind any favors by passing them.
>
> Lowering the qualifications for passing the tests does everyone a
> disservice.
>
> Let's face it, If you or I, or any adult doesn't have the capabilities
> to do a job we were hired to do, we are fired. If we don't do the
> work, regardless of our capabilities we still get fired. What happens
> to the kid who is passed through school without the ability to do the
> work, or who doesn't do the work? At best they can hope for menial
> labor and the odds are they won't do well there either.
>
> Life is harsh. If we don't have the education we can not compete. If
> we don't have the capability, we can't compete. There are many who
> just do not have the capability to do so and the system has to
> accommodate them, but it shouldn't drag the entire educational system
> down in the process.
>
> Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
> (N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
> www.rogerhalstead.com

[Roger]

On Mon, 27 Dec 2004 11:01:54 -0500, Margy Natalie >
wrote:

>
<snip>
>
>Why do ALL students have to pass ALL tests? What's wrong with the kid that just
>doesn't make it in Algebra II doing something else. Who says EVERYONE must pass
>Algebra II to be ok?

People who don't realize that most of the population will never use
Algebra?

>(I know the answer here, the State of Virginia says you must
>pass Algebra II).

I was right<:-))

> I agree that MOST students should be able to pass MOST tests, but
>NCLB demands high stakes testing of all students. I agree that standards can be
>applied. NY used to have general diplomas and Regents diplomas. The Regents
>diploma meant the student had passed a series of exams. Now states are required to
>have exams for all diploma, so a struggling student who may be very qualified for a
>number of professions can't manage to pass the tests and can't find employment due
>to no high school diploma. This is good?

Nope and I see nothing wrong with the two, or even the three tiered
system.

Why make the kids seeking a technical education do the same work of
those going into college and science? By the same token, why make
those who are unable to pass those same tests if all they are ever
going to be qualified to do is unskilled labor. It may be an over
simplification, but to me these are entirely different tracks.

Of course some one is going to say that is class discrimination, but
we do not live in a classless society. Given the opportunity we each
reach our own level. Some times it takes a bit of prodding though.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

[Dave Stadt]

"Roger" > wrote in message
...
> On Mon, 27 Dec 2004 11:01:54 -0500, Margy Natalie >
> wrote:
>
> >
> <snip>
> >
> >Why do ALL students have to pass ALL tests? What's wrong with the kid
that just
> >doesn't make it in Algebra II doing something else. Who says EVERYONE
must pass
> >Algebra II to be ok?
>
> People who don't realize that most of the population will never use
> Algebra?
>
> >(I know the answer here, the State of Virginia says you must
> >pass Algebra II).
>
> I was right<:-))
>
> > I agree that MOST students should be able to pass MOST tests, but
> >NCLB demands high stakes testing of all students. I agree that standards
can be
> >applied. NY used to have general diplomas and Regents diplomas. The
Regents
> >diploma meant the student had passed a series of exams. Now states are
required to
> >have exams for all diploma, so a struggling student who may be very
qualified for a
> >number of professions can't manage to pass the tests and can't find
employment due
> >to no high school diploma. This is good?
>
> Nope and I see nothing wrong with the two, or even the three tiered
> system.
>
> Why make the kids seeking a technical education do the same work of
> those going into college and science? By the same token, why make
> those who are unable to pass those same tests if all they are ever
> going to be qualified to do is unskilled labor. It may be an over
> simplification, but to me these are entirely different tracks.
>
> Of course some one is going to say that is class discrimination, but
> we do not live in a classless society. Given the opportunity we each
> reach our own level. Some times it takes a bit of prodding though.
>
> Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
> (N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
> www.rogerhalstead.com

What really sucks is the kid that wants to go into a trade/technical job
won't get much in the way of training from high school. Schools now days
chop shop classes at the first opportunity. It's a shame as half the kids
leave high school having spent 4 years that will do little if anything to
ready them for the work place. Most can't even fill out an application.