This was sent to me via a state worker and is posted in simple good humor. Thought you all might get a kick out of it.
New Chemical Element
The recent hurricanes and gasoline issues are proof of the existence of a new chemical element. A major research institution has recently announced the discovery of the heaviest element yet known to science.
The new element has been named *Governmentium*. Governmentium (Gv) has one neutron, 25 assistant neutrons, 88 deputy neutrons, and 198 assistant deputy neutrons, giving it an atomic mass of 312.
These 312 particles are held together by forces called morons, which are surrounded by vast quantities of lepton-like particles called peons.
Since Governmentium has no electrons, it is inert. However, it can be detected, because it impedes every reaction with which it comes into contact. A minute amount of Governmentium can cause a reaction that would normally take less than a second to take over four days to complete.
Governmentium does not decay, but instead undergoes a reorganization in which a portion of the assistant neutrons and deputy neutrons exchange places. In fact, Governmentium's mass will actually increase overtime, since each reorganization will cause more morons to become neutrons, forming isodopes.
This characteristic of moron promotion leads some scientists to believe that Governmentium is formed whenever morons reach a critical concentration! This hypothetical quantity is referred to as Critical Morass.
When catalyzed with money, Governmentium becomes Administratium- an element which radiates just as much energy as Governmentium since it has half as many peons but twice as many morons.
Monday, January 30, 2006
Will homosexual rights affect womens' rights?
Regardless of where you stand on the issue, with the passage of the bill last week including homosexuality in the state’s anti-discrimination law, this article from the San Francisco Chronicle is relevant.
A respected columnist for the San Francisco Chronicle says equating homosexual relationships to marriage could be "A Giant Step Backward for Women."
“When social conservatives argue that legalizing same-sex marriage could lead to legalized polygamy, same-sex marriage advocates either laugh or sneer. It's a scare tactic, they say. It'll never happen. Last year, however, as Canada legalized same-sex marriage, Prime Minister Paul Martin commissioned a $150,000 study to debunk the polygamy argument. Big mistake: The study confirmed the scare tactic by recommending that Canada repeal its anti-polygamy law.”
Sunday, January 29, 2006
Response to DV fear mongers: Mothers abuse children 2:1 over fathers.
Senator Regala is against shared parenting. There is no explanation, no excuse, nor reason. In a private meeting, she attempted to feign ignorance, but refused every offer to additional data or info supporting the fact that fathers are sold short in court as frequently as the sun rises and children suffer in every way as a result. Regala insisted she has access to any data she needs regarding the risks to women children but throughout the conversation went on with circular logic of why she didn’t know enough about the bill (which will die in her committee two years in a row).
Although she has accepted wholesale all claims (no matter how outrageous) from those funded by the Violence Against Women money train that the bill will harm women and children, she not only refused to accept data that children are statistically hurt more frequently by their mothers than their fathers, she described the assertion as partisan. Apparently to Senator Regala, “partisan data” means anything that might cut off the family court money supply.
The truth is that SB6270 has all the necessary safeguards to protect children from abusers on either side of the gender fence. To strip one class of citizens of their constitutional rights based on fear mongering is as absurd as eliminating black men from parenting their children because they make single women irrational with fear and anger. Remove the racial prefix and you have the agenda of those opposing this bill.
Although she has accepted wholesale all claims (no matter how outrageous) from those funded by the Violence Against Women money train that the bill will harm women and children, she not only refused to accept data that children are statistically hurt more frequently by their mothers than their fathers, she described the assertion as partisan. Apparently to Senator Regala, “partisan data” means anything that might cut off the family court money supply.
In 2003, 48.3 percent of child victims were male; 51.7 percent of victims were female. 83.9 percent of victims were abused by a parent. 40.8% of child victims were maltreated by their mothers acting alone; another 18.8 percent were maltreated by their fathers acting alone; 16.9 percent were abused by both parents
The truth is that SB6270 has all the necessary safeguards to protect children from abusers on either side of the gender fence. To strip one class of citizens of their constitutional rights based on fear mongering is as absurd as eliminating black men from parenting their children because they make single women irrational with fear and anger. Remove the racial prefix and you have the agenda of those opposing this bill.
Friday, January 27, 2006
Are 20 ft wide streets worth the risk to slow down drivers?
In light of this article about Olympia looking to limit new residential roads to 20 feet wide, I’ll ask this question: Do we as a community believe it is acceptable to increase the danger of driving in order to increase the safety of driving? By limiting new residential roads to 20 feet wide, I feel we may be doing just that.
I think narrow streets are more dangerous than wide streets for a number of reasons.
Narrow streets reduce visibility, increase congestion, and give less clearance for drivers, cyclists, and pedestrians to cohabitate a road.
Parents will think twice before letting their kids go outside and play. Say the proverbial child chases a ball into the street. With roads only 20 feet wide instead of 25, drivers have five feet less to see children and pedestrians coming out from behind parked cars, significantly increasing the risk of injury.
Narrow streets also increase danger for cyclists. Bike lanes are generally four to five feet wide on each side of a road. The danger from the reduced road width will reduce and may eliminate the option of cycling for some citizens.
Joggers and walkers will find use of the roads far less desirable because of the increased danger.
Again I’ll ask, is it acceptable to increase danger to increase safety?
I think narrow streets are more dangerous than wide streets for a number of reasons.
Narrow streets reduce visibility, increase congestion, and give less clearance for drivers, cyclists, and pedestrians to cohabitate a road.
Parents will think twice before letting their kids go outside and play. Say the proverbial child chases a ball into the street. With roads only 20 feet wide instead of 25, drivers have five feet less to see children and pedestrians coming out from behind parked cars, significantly increasing the risk of injury.
Narrow streets also increase danger for cyclists. Bike lanes are generally four to five feet wide on each side of a road. The danger from the reduced road width will reduce and may eliminate the option of cycling for some citizens.
Joggers and walkers will find use of the roads far less desirable because of the increased danger.
Again I’ll ask, is it acceptable to increase danger to increase safety?
A Welcome from Olympia
Regardless of where you stand on the issue of abortion, this account by Richard Roesler, a staff writer for The Spokesman-Review, of a woman cursing out pro-life ralliers here in Olympia is shameful. Civilized communities respect each other despite their differences.
Read the account here:
Read the account here:
Standing up for family- again
The shared parenting bill is getting the majority of my political attention this session. The bill was up for hearing on Thursday morning and it was quite a battle of good and evil. Thurston County’s most disgraceful bench sitting Mustela nivalis was first to testify against the bill. From what I could gather, his intent was to muddy the water such that only judges and commisioners are capable of determining what a parenting plan should entail.
Though our good friend to talk radio attempted to make it seem like a “complicated process”, it was pretty clear by the end of the hearing that what he REALLY meant to say was “It takes about a year of profiteering from lawyers to empty a man’s bank account. Then and only then, will I bang my gavel on reducing his parenting role to 2 weekends a month and a support check.” But we already knew that.
Senator Kastama has vetted this bill for nearly a decade with the opposition, yet each time they parade out the same sob story and irrelevant statistics. The bill clearly states that when domestic violence and criminal wrong doing are in play, joint custody is out of play. How freaking thick are the skulls that can’t read that? While the background of some of the victims our opponents put on parade today is sad, their argument that this bill puts women in jeopardy for DV is a thin and a cheap tactic to keep the family court money train running smoothly at the expense of our children.
It reminds me of the deposition joke that starts out “So Mr. Smith, when DID you stop beating your wife?” Unfortunately, many family law attorneys and judges (especially in Thurston) finance their yachts by allowing and even encouraging false accusations. Not that the practice cannot be fathomed. After all, who in their right mind discourages stupidity that puts another $30k in their own pocket? I’d think the battered woman from Montesano who stood up to testify would eventually get tired of being a prop for those who like screwing over families and children for profit. The answer to DV is asking for accountability for the shed loads of money flowing from the Violence Against Women Act, not robbing kids of two good parents.
Below are some of the statistics common of children who grow up without fathers. I take serious issue to a few powerful lobbyists holding our state hostage for profit at the expense of families and children.
Fatherless children have higher probabilities of :
o Teen pregnancy
o Dropping out of school
o Committing rape [males]
o Being raped or molested
o Illegal drug use/addiction
o Committing murder or other violent crime
o Being incarcerated for other crime
o Suicide
o Cyclical poverty
o Public Assistance
o Chronic unemployment as adults
o Self esteem issues
o Gang membership
o Not attending college or secondary school
o ...and about 10 thousand more.
Though our good friend to talk radio attempted to make it seem like a “complicated process”, it was pretty clear by the end of the hearing that what he REALLY meant to say was “It takes about a year of profiteering from lawyers to empty a man’s bank account. Then and only then, will I bang my gavel on reducing his parenting role to 2 weekends a month and a support check.” But we already knew that.
Senator Kastama has vetted this bill for nearly a decade with the opposition, yet each time they parade out the same sob story and irrelevant statistics. The bill clearly states that when domestic violence and criminal wrong doing are in play, joint custody is out of play. How freaking thick are the skulls that can’t read that? While the background of some of the victims our opponents put on parade today is sad, their argument that this bill puts women in jeopardy for DV is a thin and a cheap tactic to keep the family court money train running smoothly at the expense of our children.
It reminds me of the deposition joke that starts out “So Mr. Smith, when DID you stop beating your wife?” Unfortunately, many family law attorneys and judges (especially in Thurston) finance their yachts by allowing and even encouraging false accusations. Not that the practice cannot be fathomed. After all, who in their right mind discourages stupidity that puts another $30k in their own pocket? I’d think the battered woman from Montesano who stood up to testify would eventually get tired of being a prop for those who like screwing over families and children for profit. The answer to DV is asking for accountability for the shed loads of money flowing from the Violence Against Women Act, not robbing kids of two good parents.
Below are some of the statistics common of children who grow up without fathers. I take serious issue to a few powerful lobbyists holding our state hostage for profit at the expense of families and children.
Fatherless children have higher probabilities of :
o Teen pregnancy
o Dropping out of school
o Committing rape [males]
o Being raped or molested
o Illegal drug use/addiction
o Committing murder or other violent crime
o Being incarcerated for other crime
o Suicide
o Cyclical poverty
o Public Assistance
o Chronic unemployment as adults
o Self esteem issues
o Gang membership
o Not attending college or secondary school
o ...and about 10 thousand more.
Tuesday, January 24, 2006
The Simple Math of Health Insurance
Gregoire says, "I believe health care is a basic right and not a perk."
GM says, "Health expenditures = $1525 per car produced."
Elitists want free healthcare for everyone. “FREE,” at least until the bill comes due. Of course, when Dean Logan is your accountant, anything is possible.
Fundamentally, showing up for 40 hours a week does not entitle one to health care. This is true everywhere outside the magical wonderland of our State’s capital. Health insurance through an employer is a reward for being skilled enough to contribute to a company where the thin balance of overall productivity and the necessity of retaining a skilled work force merit and demand that health insurance be part of the overall compensation package. When Kia, Honda and Toyota can do both better, GM shareholders need to ask the question of why they are in the auto business. Perhaps healthcare will be even more affordable when those workers are sitting at home doing nothing.
Instead of beating up a non union grocery store and fast food chains for the legislature’s own poor math skills, they could ask why hospitals are billing $8 for aspirin and band-aids. Better yet, perhaps if we started attracting companies to the state that DO provide health insurance as part of their basic compensation package, Wally World would respond to free market demand and start providing it.
GM says, "Health expenditures = $1525 per car produced."
Elitists want free healthcare for everyone. “FREE,” at least until the bill comes due. Of course, when Dean Logan is your accountant, anything is possible.
Fundamentally, showing up for 40 hours a week does not entitle one to health care. This is true everywhere outside the magical wonderland of our State’s capital. Health insurance through an employer is a reward for being skilled enough to contribute to a company where the thin balance of overall productivity and the necessity of retaining a skilled work force merit and demand that health insurance be part of the overall compensation package. When Kia, Honda and Toyota can do both better, GM shareholders need to ask the question of why they are in the auto business. Perhaps healthcare will be even more affordable when those workers are sitting at home doing nothing.
Instead of beating up a non union grocery store and fast food chains for the legislature’s own poor math skills, they could ask why hospitals are billing $8 for aspirin and band-aids. Better yet, perhaps if we started attracting companies to the state that DO provide health insurance as part of their basic compensation package, Wally World would respond to free market demand and start providing it.
Monday, January 23, 2006
Pro family legislation
Two key bills up for hearings this week that impact non custodial parent's ability to be "parents."
The first bill is SB2670. This is the Shared Parenting Bill which will receive a hearing Thursday 1/26 at 8:00 am.
The second bill is HB2786 which would require courts to notify schools of parenting plans and require schools to keep both CPs and NCPs equally abreast of key information such as report cards and behavioral issues.
I expect the usual anti family perverts and court profiteers to come out against these bills. As I understand it is a very minute portion of the Senate that is holding the shared parenting bill hostage. It’s really a sad situation when a the underbelly of society is able to wield so much influence over men and women of principle who have won the office of Senate.
On the "Pro" side are stacks and stacks of data showing the kids do better when both parents are contributing (in ways other than their wallet).
On the "con" side are
1- Radical feminists who enjoy a double standard in family court and aren't really interested equality.
2- Judges who want to grease the skids up the court ladder using con group #1 to castrate anyone who gets in their way.
3- The vast majority family law attorneys who earn their summer homes by billable hours of conflict.
4- Reps from DSHS who balance their budget on the backs of broken families. Incidentally, I'm still waiting for DSHS to fulfill my public records request regarding their use of grants as kick backs.
Wow! There sure are a lot of vultures feasting on this carcass.
The first bill is SB2670. This is the Shared Parenting Bill which will receive a hearing Thursday 1/26 at 8:00 am.
The second bill is HB2786 which would require courts to notify schools of parenting plans and require schools to keep both CPs and NCPs equally abreast of key information such as report cards and behavioral issues.
I expect the usual anti family perverts and court profiteers to come out against these bills. As I understand it is a very minute portion of the Senate that is holding the shared parenting bill hostage. It’s really a sad situation when a the underbelly of society is able to wield so much influence over men and women of principle who have won the office of Senate.
On the "Pro" side are stacks and stacks of data showing the kids do better when both parents are contributing (in ways other than their wallet).
On the "con" side are
1- Radical feminists who enjoy a double standard in family court and aren't really interested equality.
2- Judges who want to grease the skids up the court ladder using con group #1 to castrate anyone who gets in their way.
3- The vast majority family law attorneys who earn their summer homes by billable hours of conflict.
4- Reps from DSHS who balance their budget on the backs of broken families. Incidentally, I'm still waiting for DSHS to fulfill my public records request regarding their use of grants as kick backs.
Wow! There sure are a lot of vultures feasting on this carcass.
Tuesday, January 17, 2006
After the soul is sold, then what?
I've talked to a number of Senators in the past few weeks on the subject of SB6270 which would reset the starting point of each parent to 'equal' in custody battles. One would think this bill to be a no-brainer, however there is such absolute fear of feminist backlash that few will take a stand on this. In fact they run from it.
From my own perspective this bill already has too many concessions to appease the small but overly vocal opposition. The protections for children are so incredibly rock solid; ie returning full discretion to judges when joint custody is obviously not in the child's best interest (cases involving drugs, violence, or criminal wrong doing) that opposing this bill is absurd.
Who in their right mind wants to limit parenting except those who profit from the destruction of family? Take a week to examine the issue with experts and you will find lots of vultures feeding on the decaying carcass of "family" in Washington State. It truly makes me wonder if terrorists are America's greatest enemy.
Let me re-serve up some good advice to those in our legislature who ran for office with noble intentions but can't see their way to go to the mat on this bill:
From my own perspective this bill already has too many concessions to appease the small but overly vocal opposition. The protections for children are so incredibly rock solid; ie returning full discretion to judges when joint custody is obviously not in the child's best interest (cases involving drugs, violence, or criminal wrong doing) that opposing this bill is absurd.
Who in their right mind wants to limit parenting except those who profit from the destruction of family? Take a week to examine the issue with experts and you will find lots of vultures feeding on the decaying carcass of "family" in Washington State. It truly makes me wonder if terrorists are America's greatest enemy.
Let me re-serve up some good advice to those in our legislature who ran for office with noble intentions but can't see their way to go to the mat on this bill:
Never give in--never, never, never, never, in nothing great or small, large or petty, never give in except to convictions of honour and good sense. Never yield to force; never yield to the apparently overwhelming might of the enemy.
Sir Winston Churchill, Speech, 1941, Harrow School
Friends with Low Wages
Here is a hilarious move by unions in their campaign to browbeat Wal-Mart. American Rights at Work created a flash presentation to mock Garth Brooks and Wal-Mart to the tune of Brooks’ “Friends in Low Places.” However, the lyrics now go, “Friends with low Wages.”
The presentation portrays Wal-Mart, which happens to be one of the largest donors to the Katrina disaster relief effort, as slave drivers with whips forcing aged workers to lick toilets. It is sad to see the Left has lost sight of reality so badly. All I can do is laugh.
Click here to watch the flash movie.
The presentation portrays Wal-Mart, which happens to be one of the largest donors to the Katrina disaster relief effort, as slave drivers with whips forcing aged workers to lick toilets. It is sad to see the Left has lost sight of reality so badly. All I can do is laugh.
Click here to watch the flash movie.
Legislated Benefits
Two bills, HB 2517 and SB 6356, have been introduced in the legislature requiring employers with over 5,000 employees to spend a minimum of nine percent of their payroll on health benefits. Nobody is sure how many business this bill will affect, but all know it is intended to point the finger at Wal-Mart. This move is just one move in the national campaign by Big Labor to beat Wal-Mart into submission for various reasons. The AFL-CIO hopes to introduce similar legislation in at least 30 states this year.
Businesses will invariably rally against this measure, not necessarily because they like Wal-Mart, but because the legislation sets a bad precedent. If legislatures get into the habit of targeting legislation at businesses for the purpose of “benefiting the common good,” it will only be a matter of time before it is their turn.
Seattle Times columnist, Bill Virgin wrote an intriguing column in today’s paper. Click here to read it.
This is how he says supporting legislators should describe the bill:
“This bill is intended to publicly whack someone we don't like very much. As for accomplishing anything about the underlying problem, or worrying about loopholes in this legislation, or ways to get around it, or unintended consequences, eh, we'll deal with that later.”
Businesses will invariably rally against this measure, not necessarily because they like Wal-Mart, but because the legislation sets a bad precedent. If legislatures get into the habit of targeting legislation at businesses for the purpose of “benefiting the common good,” it will only be a matter of time before it is their turn.
Seattle Times columnist, Bill Virgin wrote an intriguing column in today’s paper. Click here to read it.
This is how he says supporting legislators should describe the bill:
“This bill is intended to publicly whack someone we don't like very much. As for accomplishing anything about the underlying problem, or worrying about loopholes in this legislation, or ways to get around it, or unintended consequences, eh, we'll deal with that later.”
Friday, January 13, 2006
Recent Gains for Merit Pay
To follow up with Andy’s post a few days ago, the Houston School District just became the largest district in the nation to implement a program to pay teachers based on their effectiveness. Read the story HERE in the Seattle Times.
Stupid in America: How we are cheating our kids
Will more money make our schools better?
In light of the Washington Education Association’s eternal calling for more school funding comes this new report by 20/20. Here is an excerpt from an informational release. You can view a teaser online HERE.
-------------------------------------------------------------
TONIGHT!!
STUPID IN AMERICA: HOW WE ARE CHEATING OUR KIDS
ABC’’s John Stossel looks at how U.S. public schools are failing kids
TUNE IN TO 20/20 ON ABC TONIGHT (JANUARY 13) AT 10:00 P.M. EST.
http://abcnews.go.com/2020/Stossel/story?id=1491217
American students fizzle in international comparisons, placing 18th in reading, 22nd in science and 28th in math - behind countries like Poland, Australia and Korea. But why? Are American kids less intelligent? That's the question Stossel examines in his special report: What is it that's going wrong in public schools?
Thursday, January 12, 2006
Honorable mention
Another clear indicator the legislature is out of touch with reality.
SB6200- Creating a badge of honor for paying court ordered extortion…er alimony, er child support.
So lack of recognition from the state is why non-custodial parents fall behind on child support payments.
Really? All of those studies showing that custodial interference is the number one reason that parents don’t pay child support must be complete bilge water.
Now I don’t normally partake in conspiracy theory games, but strategically this bill looks like it was drafted to take attention away from the shared parenting bill. I’m curious how it has been scheduled for hearing by the Human Services and Corrections committee and the shared parenting bill was not.
I watched this committee earlier this week during my lunch hour and they seemed to have a grasp on reality, but even giving this bill 10 minutes of committee hearing time is ridiculous.
SB6200- Creating a badge of honor for paying court ordered extortion…er alimony, er child support.
So lack of recognition from the state is why non-custodial parents fall behind on child support payments.
Really? All of those studies showing that custodial interference is the number one reason that parents don’t pay child support must be complete bilge water.
Now I don’t normally partake in conspiracy theory games, but strategically this bill looks like it was drafted to take attention away from the shared parenting bill. I’m curious how it has been scheduled for hearing by the Human Services and Corrections committee and the shared parenting bill was not.
I watched this committee earlier this week during my lunch hour and they seemed to have a grasp on reality, but even giving this bill 10 minutes of committee hearing time is ridiculous.
Legislative Session: Absurdity of the Week Award
SENATE BILL 6265 deserves the “Absurdity of the Week Award.”
“[A]n emergency worker shall make every practicable attempt under the circumstances, when engaged in emergency management activities, to rescue a victim's pet animal.”
Being in search and rescue, I can say most search and rescue personnel will do everything they can to save people and their accompanying pets. Why then must the legislature presume those who care enough about human life to be involved in search and rescue have such callous hearts toward pets?
This bill seems unnecessary and, on its face, an insult. However, I’d like to hear the story behind it.
“[A]n emergency worker shall make every practicable attempt under the circumstances, when engaged in emergency management activities, to rescue a victim's pet animal.”
Being in search and rescue, I can say most search and rescue personnel will do everything they can to save people and their accompanying pets. Why then must the legislature presume those who care enough about human life to be involved in search and rescue have such callous hearts toward pets?
This bill seems unnecessary and, on its face, an insult. However, I’d like to hear the story behind it.
Tuesday, January 10, 2006
The kindness of strangers
I have ventured to our capital a couple of times in the past few days during lunch to meet with our elected officials on some family related legislation. Before you call me a GOP bigot, I'll say this is not about the gay rights bill.
I have noticed a big difference in actual courtesy toward a complete stranger from various senators and aides. I have also hounded an elected official or two about taking extremely large amounts of campaign contributions from out of their district. One of the excuses I have heard is that as state reps- they represent the entire state, not just their district....which is funny because several reps refuse to meet with me because I don't live in their district. I'm curious if they will be so rude when I start personally funding direct mail campaigns against them in their district on my dime about this issue?
Hint- when a normal person, aka an unpaid lobbyist thinks an issue is important enough to take time off of work to set up a meeting with you in person... take the meeting and if you disagree bother to tell them WHY you can't support them in their cause. The legislature has wasted enough time arguing about gay rights to prove they've plenty of time to talk about real issues impacting families in our state.
I have noticed a big difference in actual courtesy toward a complete stranger from various senators and aides. I have also hounded an elected official or two about taking extremely large amounts of campaign contributions from out of their district. One of the excuses I have heard is that as state reps- they represent the entire state, not just their district....which is funny because several reps refuse to meet with me because I don't live in their district. I'm curious if they will be so rude when I start personally funding direct mail campaigns against them in their district on my dime about this issue?
Hint- when a normal person, aka an unpaid lobbyist thinks an issue is important enough to take time off of work to set up a meeting with you in person... take the meeting and if you disagree bother to tell them WHY you can't support them in their cause. The legislature has wasted enough time arguing about gay rights to prove they've plenty of time to talk about real issues impacting families in our state.
Just as an FYI:
Pass "Jessica's Law" Rally
Friday, January 13, 2006
12 NOON
State Capital - Olympia
www.preservechildhoodinnocence.com
Featured Speakers will include:
Jim Hines - Founder/President - Preserve Childhood Innocence
Special Guest Father from Florida (Hint: helped pass 1st "Jessica's Law in Florida")
Lisa Lockwood, Theresa Gibbs, Michele Clute - Parents/Victim Advocates
Please Help send the message to this State's Leaders that no priority is more important than protecting Washington's children.
Jessica's Law will mandate 25 years to life for all sex offenders who violate any child under 12 years of age. It's time to protect the children of Washington State. Please join us in sending our voice to Olympia.
For More information visit:
www.preservechildhoodinnocence.com
Friday, January 13, 2006
12 NOON
State Capital - Olympia
www.preservechildhoodinnocence.com
Featured Speakers will include:
Jim Hines - Founder/President - Preserve Childhood Innocence
Special Guest Father from Florida (Hint: helped pass 1st "Jessica's Law in Florida")
Lisa Lockwood, Theresa Gibbs, Michele Clute - Parents/Victim Advocates
Please Help send the message to this State's Leaders that no priority is more important than protecting Washington's children.
Jessica's Law will mandate 25 years to life for all sex offenders who violate any child under 12 years of age. It's time to protect the children of Washington State. Please join us in sending our voice to Olympia.
For More information visit:
www.preservechildhoodinnocence.com
Sunday, January 08, 2006
Getting tough on big tobacco (profits)
Thank you Christine
Altria has been one of the top performing stocks in my portfolio. Thanks to our state addiction to Tobacco money, MO and others will continue to be a good investment for years to come. With the aid of a crooked and bankrupt system, big tobacco will forever be immune to any serious lawsuits.
Though there are many attempts at going after MO money in court, these ongoing cases are nothing more than a good way to bolster the option value. Sometimes a crooked system does have a silver lining.
Altria has been one of the top performing stocks in my portfolio. Thanks to our state addiction to Tobacco money, MO and others will continue to be a good investment for years to come. With the aid of a crooked and bankrupt system, big tobacco will forever be immune to any serious lawsuits.
Though there are many attempts at going after MO money in court, these ongoing cases are nothing more than a good way to bolster the option value. Sometimes a crooked system does have a silver lining.
Thursday, January 05, 2006
Are unions intentionally keeping the quality of education low?
I posed this question to the Zero's chat with Bill Lahmann, Olympia School District Superintendent.
Andy, Olympia: I read in The Wall Street Journal of a school district in the Midwest that has had some incredible improvements in all key metrics through at-risk pay incentives. Has the Olympia School District explored performance bonus programs for district employees? If there are no significant pay incentives for top performers and overall district performance/efficiency, how does the district recruit and retain talented employees?
Lahmann: That's an interesting one. In the state of Washington we don't have the capacity to provide differentiated pay incentives for our teachers. We have collective bargaining in this state and under those rules we pay our staff based on years of experience and education. OSD has been fortunate in that we're able to attract and retain really highly qualified teachers at a time when statewide there are some shortages. We are able to provide some professional development incentives that will help those teachers that want to improve their instructional skills for students with some additional time and compensation. But performance incentives isn't something we're allowed to do. In order to get really quality teachers in this district, we're finding that's not something we need to do.
So if I understand Bill's response correctly, Unions are intentionally keeping any incentive for doing a good job out of the picture in order to keep themselves relevant? This would explain the burnout factor of so many teachers coasting into retirement.
I know of no person who would want to work in an environment with no pay differentiator between the best and worst employee nor reward for exceeding expectations. It goes against every major pillar of effective management. Also he did not address a district wide pay incentive for improving on cost per student, which would be an administrative issue. As some of the others noted the org appears to be getting fat on the number chiefs and low on carrots for the indians.
BTW- I grew up in a house supported by 1 teaching salary. The performance bonus would have been very nice. It's about time we start looking for ways to reward teachers going the extra mile. When talented people feel rewarded for what they do, you generally get more than you pay for.
Andy, Olympia: I read in The Wall Street Journal of a school district in the Midwest that has had some incredible improvements in all key metrics through at-risk pay incentives. Has the Olympia School District explored performance bonus programs for district employees? If there are no significant pay incentives for top performers and overall district performance/efficiency, how does the district recruit and retain talented employees?
Lahmann: That's an interesting one. In the state of Washington we don't have the capacity to provide differentiated pay incentives for our teachers. We have collective bargaining in this state and under those rules we pay our staff based on years of experience and education. OSD has been fortunate in that we're able to attract and retain really highly qualified teachers at a time when statewide there are some shortages. We are able to provide some professional development incentives that will help those teachers that want to improve their instructional skills for students with some additional time and compensation. But performance incentives isn't something we're allowed to do. In order to get really quality teachers in this district, we're finding that's not something we need to do.
So if I understand Bill's response correctly, Unions are intentionally keeping any incentive for doing a good job out of the picture in order to keep themselves relevant? This would explain the burnout factor of so many teachers coasting into retirement.
I know of no person who would want to work in an environment with no pay differentiator between the best and worst employee nor reward for exceeding expectations. It goes against every major pillar of effective management. Also he did not address a district wide pay incentive for improving on cost per student, which would be an administrative issue. As some of the others noted the org appears to be getting fat on the number chiefs and low on carrots for the indians.
BTW- I grew up in a house supported by 1 teaching salary. The performance bonus would have been very nice. It's about time we start looking for ways to reward teachers going the extra mile. When talented people feel rewarded for what they do, you generally get more than you pay for.
Rapists and child molesters given more freedom than Non Custodial Parents in UK
Big Brother Anklet for dads.
Anyone who has had their house broken into, car or credit card stolen, checks forged, knows the amount of anger and emotion that comes from when you see police, county and city officials not taking crime seriously. However when the state can balance their budget on the enforcement of fleecing fathers, the justice system goes into turbo mode. As Fathers for Justice in the UK will aptly point out, the majority of these dads were never given a shot at joint custody. The courts took their kids from them and then smacked them with an enormous bill for the privilege. This begs the question of what a rational person will do when this happens to them. It’s a credit to 99.9% of NC fathers that don’t end up like Perry Manly.
Anyone who has had their house broken into, car or credit card stolen, checks forged, knows the amount of anger and emotion that comes from when you see police, county and city officials not taking crime seriously. However when the state can balance their budget on the enforcement of fleecing fathers, the justice system goes into turbo mode. As Fathers for Justice in the UK will aptly point out, the majority of these dads were never given a shot at joint custody. The courts took their kids from them and then smacked them with an enormous bill for the privilege. This begs the question of what a rational person will do when this happens to them. It’s a credit to 99.9% of NC fathers that don’t end up like Perry Manly.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)