For some time now I’ve been sharing my posts to Facebook. I know there are some folks from Facebook who follow my link to my blog. I can see them in my log files although I don’t have any detailed information other than coming from Facebook.
I’m wondering just how many of those Facebook readers read more than the first paragraph? From some of the comments, I doubt they’re read or even skimmed the entire post. On the other hand I do write looong posts.
So, as a favour to me, Facebook readers, would you leave a comment and just let me know…did you read or skim the entire post or just the first few paragraphs?
Thank you.
***
A Kansas City Chiefs football player murdered his live-in girlfriend in front of his mother and 3-month old child, then drove to the KC Chief training area and committed suicide in front of other players and coaches. Everyone in the media, it seems, is blaming everyone and everything for the murder/suicide except the murderer.
From the news accounts, this murderer had a history of violence, alcohol and drug use that had been kept out of public view for some time. The murderer had gotten away with his previous criminal acts until he committed one that couldn’t be swept under the rug.
Instead of blaming the murderer for his acts, the media is blaming guns, football, football violence and everything except the spoiled criminal who was never made to account for his actions. We’re already hearing false statements—“he was a good boy!”
He wasn’t a “good boy.” He was a drugged-up criminal who should have never been playing football. He should have been booted from the NFL the first time he punched out his girlfriend.
***
Your education dollars at work. From California: the state education department says that while you have a right to education, you don’t have a right to one that’s worth a hill ‘o beans.
By: Melissa Griffin | 11/30/12 6:19 PM, Special to The SF Examiner
Straight from the “careful how you defend yourself” file is this insight from the California Department of Education, which recently defended itself from allegations that our kids are receiving a substandard education by arguing that, “There is no constitutional right to a ‘meaningful’ education.”
In May, lawyers representing eight children sued the state of California, the California Department of Education and several school districts. The plaintiffs in Vergara v. State of California claim grossly unfit teachers persist in our schools because state law gives tenured teachers extraordinary job protections, and districts have to make decisions about whether to award tenure when teachers have spent less than 18 months on the job. Having these teachers, according to the plaintiffs, deprives certain students of their constitutional right to an education.
The constitutional right to an education requires more than a brick-and-mortar schoolhouse, plaintiffs say.
Students have a right to a “meaningful education” that allows them “basic tools necessary to compete in the economic marketplace or to participate as a citizen in our democracy.” Severely restricting the ability to discipline or terminate ineffective teachers violates this right.
In response, the state tried to get the case thrown out for several reasons, including the grounds that a “meaningful education” is too vague to define. But instead of stopping there or saying all our kids do receive a meaningful education, it made this depressing claim in a public document: “the constitution guarantees only ‘equality of educational opportunity, but no minimum level.’” As long as it’s equally bad, there’s no problem.
There’s more in the rest of the column. The judge did not dimiss the suit as requested by the State of California. It’ll be interesting to follow this case. It does give you insight into the opinions and agendas of the education leadership.
***
At least some of the National Republicans have some inkling to the failures of the last election. They’ve started one push to correct one of those faults.
Source: http://www.pr.com/press-release/410950
Due to an alleged violation of the national GOP’s Rule # 11 (bans favoritism of one candidate while more than one candidate exists), an Executive Committee member within the GOP calls for the resignation of RNC Chairman Reince Priebus.
Washington, DC, May 07, 2012 –(PR.com)– Jeffrey Bales, a Member-at-Large of the Pima County GOP Executive Committee (Tucson, Arizona), says:
“Due to violation of the RNC’s Rule #11, I call for Chairman Reince Priebus to resign immediately. It is un-American and beneath the standards established by the Republican Party to violate this rule. It is unethical to support a single Republican Presidential candidate (Mitt Romney) while other Republican candidates remain in the race.
I admit this is another Ron Paul kool-aid drinker who can’t get over the fact that Ron Paul never pulled double-digit support in the elections. But—he does have a point. The complaint applies equally to Rick Santorum, Newt Gingrich, Herman Cain, Michele Bachmann and Rick Perry. OK, Ron Paul as well.
The national party has no right picking winners prior to the convention. Support, financial and organizational, should—must be available equally to all candidates…or to no candidate. Reince Preibus handed the MO Senatorial race to Claire McCaskill. McCaskill may have won anyway…or, if Akin had been supported like dems support their candidates who make a gaff, Akin may have won!
Yes, it’s all Monday morning quarterbacking. However, like football and other endeavors, we must not keep a losing coach who will only continue to lose.
Like this:
Like Loading...
