The winning entries in the Watcher's Council vote for this week are 9/11: Just a Real Bad Day by Right Wing Nut House, and New Trend on the Rise: The Patriotic Terrorist by The Huffington Post.  Here is where you can find the full results of the vote. 
Here are the full tallies of all votes cast:

Posted by: Greg at 02:32 PM | Comments (5) | Add Comment
Post contains 219 words, total size 5 kb.

A lot of folks are whining and wailing about the unfathomably large profit made by Exxon for 2006.

Oil giant Exxon Mobil Corp. on Thursday posted the largest annual profit by a U.S. company _ $39.5 billion _ even as earnings for the last quarter of 2006 declined 4 percent.

The 2006 profit topped Exxon Mobil's own previous record of $36.13 billion set in 2005.

Revenue at the world's largest publicly traded oil company rose to $377.64 billion for the year, surpassing the record $370.68 billion Exxon posted in 2005.
"Exxon Mobil continued to leverage its globally diverse resource base to bring additional crude oil and natural gas to market," Rex W. Tillerson, chairman of the Irvin, Texas-based company, said in a statement.

However, let’s look at some numbers really quick – numbers that make all the difference in the world.

As a percentage of total earnings, Exxon’s profit was 10.45 %. Is that really an unconscionably high profit?

And taken per share, the profit was $6.62. With shares trading at $74 dollars as of this morning, that means that each share had a profit of 8.9%. Again, does the level of profit really shock the conscience?

What I’m suggesting is that no, it does not. Indeed, those earnings are right around where many of us would like our retirement portfolios to be performing.

But most people don’t actually look at numbers like that. They hear “record profit” and assume that something unreasonable, unethical, or unsavory has been going on, not considering how that dollar figure relates to the size and level of capitalization of Exxon.

Watch for politicians and commentators to start demanding that “something be done” about oil company profits. Expect folks to start insisting that these companies be run as if they were not-for-profit enterprises, not business ventures with a primary responsibility to the shareholders AKA owners. After all, those complaining are people who fundamentally misunderstand the nature of business and the role of government.

OPEN TRACKBACKING AT Right Pundits, Perri Nelson's Website, Is It Just Me?, The Random Yak, A Blog For All, Adam's Blog, Right Truth, basil's blog, Shadowscope, Cao's Blog, The Bullwinkle Blog, Phastidio.net, The Amboy Times, Conservative Cat, Conservative Thoughts, Pursuing Holiness, 123 Beta, The HILL Chronicles, Faultline USA, third world county, Right Celebrity, Woman Honor Thyself, stikNstein... has no mercy, Pirate's Cove, The Right Nation, Blue Star Chronicles, The Pink Flamingo, Renaissance Blogger, and Right Voices, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Posted by: Greg at 02:23 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 412 words, total size 5 kb.

A lot of folks are whining and wailing about the unfathomably large profit made by Exxon for 2006.

Oil giant Exxon Mobil Corp. on Thursday posted the largest annual profit by a U.S. company _ $39.5 billion _ even as earnings for the last quarter of 2006 declined 4 percent.

The 2006 profit topped Exxon Mobil's own previous record of $36.13 billion set in 2005.

Revenue at the world's largest publicly traded oil company rose to $377.64 billion for the year, surpassing the record $370.68 billion Exxon posted in 2005.
"Exxon Mobil continued to leverage its globally diverse resource base to bring additional crude oil and natural gas to market," Rex W. Tillerson, chairman of the Irvin, Texas-based company, said in a statement.

However, let’s look at some numbers really quick – numbers that make all the difference in the world.

As a percentage of total earnings, ExxonÂ’s profit was 10.45 %. Is that really an unconscionably high profit?

And taken per share, the profit was $6.62. With shares trading at $74 dollars as of this morning, that means that each share had a profit of 8.9%. Again, does the level of profit really shock the conscience?

What IÂ’m suggesting is that no, it does not. Indeed, those earnings are right around where many of us would like our retirement portfolios to be performing.

But most people don’t actually look at numbers like that. They hear “record profit” and assume that something unreasonable, unethical, or unsavory has been going on, not considering how that dollar figure relates to the size and level of capitalization of Exxon.

Watch for politicians and commentators to start demanding that “something be done” about oil company profits. Expect folks to start insisting that these companies be run as if they were not-for-profit enterprises, not business ventures with a primary responsibility to the shareholders AKA owners. After all, those complaining are people who fundamentally misunderstand the nature of business and the role of government.

OPEN TRACKBACKING AT Right Pundits, Perri Nelson's Website, Is It Just Me?, The Random Yak, A Blog For All, Adam's Blog, Right Truth, basil's blog, Shadowscope, Cao's Blog, The Bullwinkle Blog, Phastidio.net, The Amboy Times, Conservative Cat, Conservative Thoughts, Pursuing Holiness, 123 Beta, The HILL Chronicles, Faultline USA, third world county, Right Celebrity, Woman Honor Thyself, stikNstein... has no mercy, Pirate's Cove, The Right Nation, Blue Star Chronicles, The Pink Flamingo, Renaissance Blogger, and Right Voices, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Posted by: Greg at 02:23 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 415 words, total size 5 kb.

Well, the end is fast approaching for the beloved Harry Potter series. All will be revealed, now that JK Rowling has written the last words of the saga of "the boy who lived".

J. K. Rowling, the author of the record-setting Harry Potter books, announced yesterday that the seventh — and last — installment in the series, “Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows,” will be published on July 21.

That will be just eight days after the release of the film version of the fifth book in the series, “Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix,” promising a huge summer for fans of the young wizard.

Millions of fans around the world are fiercely anticipating the final installment. But the end of the series, in which Ms. Rowling has hinted she may kill off one of the main characters, comes as a bittersweet finale not only for readers but also for the publishing companies, booksellers and licensees that have cashed in on the international phenomenon since it began more than nine years ago with “Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone.”

And it will be sad, givent he international phenomenon that hte books have been for the last decade. And while there are at least two additional movies to be made, one wonders if we really have seen the last of the young wizard and his friend. Will Rowling be able to resist the call to write additional books about Harry Potter? Or will she kill the hero? And will death be sufficient, or will he make an unexpected return like Conan Doyle's Sherlock Holmes did after an apparent tumble over a waterfall?

Only time will tell.

Oh, and as a side note, the big screen's Harry Potter is branching out with a nude scene in Hairy Potter and the Happy Trail Equus on the London stage.

more...

Posted by: Greg at 11:36 PM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 321 words, total size 2 kb.

I'll be looking for the results of this set of genetic tests -- designed to answer an old question about the presence of Roman soldiers in China, and the continued survival of their descendants.

Residents of a remote Chinese village are hoping that DNA tests will prove one of history's most unlikely legends — that they are descended from Roman legionaries lost in antiquity.

Scientists have taken blood samples from 93 people living in and around Liqian, a settlement in north-western China on the fringes of the Gobi desert, more than 200 miles from the nearest city.

They are seeking an explanation for the unusual number of local people with western characteristics — green eyes, big noses, and even blonde hair — mixed with traditional Chinese features.

"I really think we are descended from the Romans," said Song Guorong, 48, who with his wavy hair, six-foot frame and strikingly long, hooked nose stands out from his short, round-faced office colleagues.

"There are the residents with these special features, and then there are also historical records about the existence of these people long ago," he said.

The legend has it that some soldiers of Crassus' ill-fated expedition against the Parthians may have settled in the region after serving as mercenaries, sometime around 36 BC. Personally, I wonder more about possible descendants of Alexander's army, which pushed well into India. But whatever teh answer, it will be fascinating -- even if it destroys the myths that have sprung up over the ages.

Posted by: Greg at 11:25 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 256 words, total size 2 kb.

And personally, I'm quite content to see that happen. I argued that we should use a system with a paper trail back when Harris County selected its paperless system before the 2002 elections.

Gov. Charlie Crist announced plans on Thursday to abandon the touch-screen voting machines that many of FloridaÂ’s counties installed after the disputed 2000 presidential election. The state will instead adopt a system of casting paper ballots counted by scanning machines in time for the 2008 presidential election.

Voting experts said FloridaÂ’s move, coupled with new federal voting legislation expected to pass this year, could be the death knell for the paperless electronic touch-screen machines. If as expected the Florida Legislature approves the $32.5 million cost of the change, it would be the nationÂ’s biggest repudiation yet of touch-screen voting, which was widely embraced after the 2000 recount as a state-of-the-art means of restoring confidence that every vote would count.

Several counties around the country, including Cuyahoga in Ohio and Sarasota in Florida, are moving toward exchanging touch-screen machines for ones that provide a paper trail. But Florida could become the first state that invested heavily in the recent rush to touch screens to reject them so sweepingly.

Personally, I like the optical scanner machines -- but then again, as a teacher who works with scantron test sheets on a regular basis, i am familiar with the technology and trust it on a regular basis. And it isn't that I don't trust the touch screen system and other paperles forms of voting -- I do. But I feel there has to be a back-up, and I saw first-hand the limitations of the touch screen system this fall when the confusing nature of the machines and their instructions may have given the CD22 election over to Nick Lampson rather than Shelley Sekula-Gibbs.

Hopefully we will gt some sort of paper trail here in Harris county -- and the sooner the better.

Posted by: Greg at 11:12 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 332 words, total size 2 kb.

Over the years, I've sen many features about Dubai and its growing tourism/leisure industry. After all, it is unique among the United Arab Emirates in that the bulk of its revenue comes from something other than oil. The powers-that-be have made some wise decisions in steering their economy in that direction, for the desire for relaxation and recreation in beautiful surroundings will never fade.

And now, you can purchase property in Dubai at exciting sites like the Dubai Marina, Dubailand, The Palm, or the internationally renown Dubai Sports City.

Seriously, folks -- this is worth a look if you are a fan of fun in the sun and low taxes!

Paid Endorsement.

Posted by: Greg at 06:00 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 113 words, total size 1 kb.

Yeah, heÂ’s a poverty pimp and a race ho, but he also has a sense of humor.

Mr. Sharpton said that when Mr. Biden called him to apologize, Mr. Sharpton started off the conversation reassuring Mr. Biden about his hygienic practices. “I told him I take a bath every day,” Mr. Sharpton said.

ItÂ’s nice to know the man doesnÂ’t take himself too seriously.

Posted by: Greg at 02:12 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 88 words, total size 1 kb.

I find this development a bit disturbing.

The office of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is pressing the Bush administration for routine access to military aircraft for domestic flights, such as trips back to her San Francisco district, according to sources familiar with the discussions.

The sources, who include those in Congress and in the administration, said the Democrat is seeking regular military flights not only for herself and her staff, but also for relatives and for other members of the California delegation. A knowledgeable source called the request "carte blanche for an aircraft any time."

"They are pressing the point of her succession and that the [Department of Defense] needs to play ball with the speaker's needs," one source said. The request originally went to the Pentagon, which then asked the White House to weigh in.

I guess the Whore of Babylon-by-the-Bay thinks that she and her fellow Congresscritters shouldn’t have to mingle with the masses – and neither should their employees and relatives.

Now I’ll concede that in the immediate aftermath of 9/11, there were grounds for giving the Speaker special protection in this regards, but I wonder if it should not have ended some time ago. However, I’d be willing to accept the request IF it were limited to the Speaker herself. But it isn’t – she wants to turn the US military into her own personal airline for her the favored few. And that, my friends, is intolerable.

Also, I love this little tidbit from a Pelosi aide.

The aide asserted that the administration was using a Washington Times reporter, in effect, to negotiate with the speaker's office by leaking information about Mrs. Pelosi's request.

I guess we see the Democrat double standard on leaks.

Leaks that embarrass high-ranking Democrats are bad leaks, even if they do no real harm to the nation. This is especially true if the recipient of the leak is from a non-approved media outlet like the Washington Times.

Leaks that endanger national security and undermine the war effort are good leaks, especially when they go to the al-Qaeda Ministry of Intelligence the New York Time, Washington Post, CNN, CBS, or other terrorist left-leaning media outlets.

Posted by: Greg at 02:11 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 366 words, total size 2 kb.

I find this development a bit disturbing.

The office of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is pressing the Bush administration for routine access to military aircraft for domestic flights, such as trips back to her San Francisco district, according to sources familiar with the discussions.

The sources, who include those in Congress and in the administration, said the Democrat is seeking regular military flights not only for herself and her staff, but also for relatives and for other members of the California delegation. A knowledgeable source called the request "carte blanche for an aircraft any time."

"They are pressing the point of her succession and that the [Department of Defense] needs to play ball with the speaker's needs," one source said. The request originally went to the Pentagon, which then asked the White House to weigh in.

I guess the Whore of Babylon-by-the-Bay thinks that she and her fellow Congresscritters shouldn’t have to mingle with the masses – and neither should their employees and relatives.

Now I’ll concede that in the immediate aftermath of 9/11, there were grounds for giving the Speaker special protection in this regards, but I wonder if it should not have ended some time ago. However, I’d be willing to accept the request IF it were limited to the Speaker herself. But it isn’t – she wants to turn the US military into her own personal airline for her the favored few. And that, my friends, is intolerable.

Also, I love this little tidbit from a Pelosi aide.

The aide asserted that the administration was using a Washington Times reporter, in effect, to negotiate with the speaker's office by leaking information about Mrs. Pelosi's request.

I guess we see the Democrat double standard on leaks.

Leaks that embarrass high-ranking Democrats are bad leaks, even if they do no real harm to the nation. This is especially true if the recipient of the leak is from a non-approved media outlet like the Washington Times.

Leaks that endanger national security and undermine the war effort are good leaks, especially when they go to the al-Qaeda Ministry of Intelligence the New York Time, Washington Post, CNN, CBS, or other terrorist left-leaning media outlets.

Posted by: Greg at 02:11 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 372 words, total size 2 kb.

Well, William M. Arkin proved today that he, not those of us who disagree with him, is “arrogant and intolerant”. After all, he seems a little bit miffed that after using his First Amendment rights to bash the troops and spew his moronic views, some Americans (including some of those same troops, their families, and veterans) would dare to use their rights under the First Amendment to respond and to criticize. Indeed, he seems to believe that harsh responses are a threat to the First Amendment.

Well, one thing's abundantly clear about who will actually defend our rights to say what we believe: It isn't the hundreds who have written me saying they are soldiers or veterans or war supporters or real Americans -- who also advise me to move to another country, to get f@##d, or to die a painful, violent death.

Excuse me, Comrade Arkin, but it seems to me that you are the one who doesn’t believe in the right to say what one believes. After all, are we to remain silent and bow down before the Almighty Wisdom of William M. Arkin, Journalist and Demigod? Are you immune from criticism and critique, or even vitriol, after you have insulted our troops? No one is stopping you from speaking – but you seem to wish to delegitimize any speech that you disagree with. You know, just as you argued it isn’t legitimate for soldiers to disagree with the all-wise and knowing public opinion polls when you stated in your earlier column that you “hope that military commanders took the soldiers aside after the story and explained to them why it wasn't for them to disapprove of the American people.” Or more accurately, the views of an ignorant and ill-informed (thanks to folks like you and your employer).

Of course, now he defames them even further, after implicitly calling them over-privileged mercenaries with fascist tendencies. Now he has gone and said it flat out.

I was dead wrong in using the word mercenary to describe the American soldier today.

These men and women are not fighting for money with little regard for the nation. The situation might be much worse than that: Evidently, far too many in uniform believe that they are the one true nation. They hide behind the constitution and the flag and then spew an anti-Democrat, anti-liberal, anti-journalism, anti-dissent, and anti-citizen message that reflects a certain contempt for the American people.

In other words, Arkin objects that those who are in Iraq have an opinion that he disagree swith, and he want to do his damnedest to make sure that they understand that only he, and those who think like him, have the right to an opinion – precisely what he object to in the comments, blog-posts, and emails he complains about.

They don’t like the cut-and-run Democrats – how dare they, after that party won the last elections!

They don’t like liberals – who do they think they are, objecting to folks who have been out to undercut their mission since before it began.

They don’t like journalists – don’t they understand that reporters are High Priests of the First Amendment and immune to criticism?

They don’t like dissent – even though what they are complaining about is rhetoric that gives aid and comfort to the enemy (a phrase I intentionally use) while they are in the field.

And they don’t like citizens – even though they are citizens, and are simply exercising their rights as citizens to be critical of Arkin and his ilk.

And then there is the grand finale to his comedy of errors.

The notion then that we should defer to the military to fight when and how and where they want is absurd. As the debate about the Iraq war demonstrates, war-making is a shared endeavor and the arrogant and intolerant few who think they are above the people seem to be those who are wearing the uniform.

I’ll agree – deferring to the military is not a value I espouse. But I consider that to be closer to American values than the contempt that Arkin has shown the troops in these last two pathetic excuses for political commentary. They are angry and frustrated that their viewpoint doesn’t get out, while wing-nuts and moonbats on the Left are given plenty of ink and air time by the MSM. For them to argue that too many Americans are ignorant of what is going on in Iraq is not arrogant and intolerant – and for Arkin to again argue that the troops are a threat to American values and freedom places him beneath contempt and beyond serious consideration.

Oh, and this little update tidbit – Arkin has apparently wimped out and taken down this post from his front page on his WaPo blog. Unfortunately for him, it still appears if you have the permalink. I wonder how long until he scrubs this cowardly piece from that location, too. Don’t worry, Billy-boy – bloggers worldwide have the page cached and saved and will preserve your trash for posterity.

UPDATE: Arkin has since returned the post to his frontpage.

More at Michelle Malkin, Jammie Wearing Fool, Candy Slice Of Life, Riehl World View, Right Wing Nut House, Bill's Bites, Sensible Mom, CatHouse Chat, Don Surber, 7.62mm Justice, Running The Gauntlet, Michelle Malkin, Captain's Quarters, Blackfive, Hugh Hewitt, Hot Air, Riehl World News, OpFor, Blue Crab Boulevard, Jammie Wearing Fool, Bill's Bites, Leaning Straight Up, NW Bloggers, Hennessey's Views, Alphabet City, Flopping Aces, TacJammer, Gun Toting Liberal

OPEN TRACKBACKING AT Right Pundits, Outside the Beltway, Perri Nelson's Website, A Blog For All, Right Truth, Big Dog's Weblog, Stuck On Stupid, Common Folk Using Common Sense, Cao's Blog, The Bullwinkle Blog, Jo's Cafe, Maggie's Notebook | Conservative Blog, Faultline USA, third world county, The Crazy Rants of Samantha Burns, stikNstein... has no mercy, The Pink Flamingo, Right Voices, and Gone Hollywood, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Posted by: Greg at 02:08 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 1003 words, total size 10 kb.

Well, William M. Arkin proved today that he, not those of us who disagree with him, is “arrogant and intolerant”. After all, he seems a little bit miffed that after using his First Amendment rights to bash the troops and spew his moronic views, some Americans (including some of those same troops, their families, and veterans) would dare to use their rights under the First Amendment to respond and to criticize. Indeed, he seems to believe that harsh responses are a threat to the First Amendment.

Well, one thing's abundantly clear about who will actually defend our rights to say what we believe: It isn't the hundreds who have written me saying they are soldiers or veterans or war supporters or real Americans -- who also advise me to move to another country, to get f@##d, or to die a painful, violent death.

Excuse me, Comrade Arkin, but it seems to me that you are the one who doesn’t believe in the right to say what one believes. After all, are we to remain silent and bow down before the Almighty Wisdom of William M. Arkin, Journalist and Demigod? Are you immune from criticism and critique, or even vitriol, after you have insulted our troops? No one is stopping you from speaking – but you seem to wish to delegitimize any speech that you disagree with. You know, just as you argued it isn’t legitimate for soldiers to disagree with the all-wise and knowing public opinion polls when you stated in your earlier column that you “hope that military commanders took the soldiers aside after the story and explained to them why it wasn't for them to disapprove of the American people.” Or more accurately, the views of an ignorant and ill-informed (thanks to folks like you and your employer).

Of course, now he defames them even further, after implicitly calling them over-privileged mercenaries with fascist tendencies. Now he has gone and said it flat out.

I was dead wrong in using the word mercenary to describe the American soldier today.

These men and women are not fighting for money with little regard for the nation. The situation might be much worse than that: Evidently, far too many in uniform believe that they are the one true nation. They hide behind the constitution and the flag and then spew an anti-Democrat, anti-liberal, anti-journalism, anti-dissent, and anti-citizen message that reflects a certain contempt for the American people.

In other words, Arkin objects that those who are in Iraq have an opinion that he disagree swith, and he want to do his damnedest to make sure that they understand that only he, and those who think like him, have the right to an opinion – precisely what he object to in the comments, blog-posts, and emails he complains about.

They don’t like the cut-and-run Democrats – how dare they, after that party won the last elections!

They don’t like liberals – who do they think they are, objecting to folks who have been out to undercut their mission since before it began.

They don’t like journalists – don’t they understand that reporters are High Priests of the First Amendment and immune to criticism?

They don’t like dissent – even though what they are complaining about is rhetoric that gives aid and comfort to the enemy (a phrase I intentionally use) while they are in the field.

And they don’t like citizens – even though they are citizens, and are simply exercising their rights as citizens to be critical of Arkin and his ilk.

And then there is the grand finale to his comedy of errors.

The notion then that we should defer to the military to fight when and how and where they want is absurd. As the debate about the Iraq war demonstrates, war-making is a shared endeavor and the arrogant and intolerant few who think they are above the people seem to be those who are wearing the uniform.

I’ll agree – deferring to the military is not a value I espouse. But I consider that to be closer to American values than the contempt that Arkin has shown the troops in these last two pathetic excuses for political commentary. They are angry and frustrated that their viewpoint doesn’t get out, while wing-nuts and moonbats on the Left are given plenty of ink and air time by the MSM. For them to argue that too many Americans are ignorant of what is going on in Iraq is not arrogant and intolerant – and for Arkin to again argue that the troops are a threat to American values and freedom places him beneath contempt and beyond serious consideration.

Oh, and this little update tidbit – Arkin has apparently wimped out and taken down this post from his front page on his WaPo blog. Unfortunately for him, it still appears if you have the permalink. I wonder how long until he scrubs this cowardly piece from that location, too. Don’t worry, Billy-boy – bloggers worldwide have the page cached and saved and will preserve your trash for posterity.

UPDATE: Arkin has since returned the post to his frontpage.

More at Michelle Malkin, Jammie Wearing Fool, Candy Slice Of Life, Riehl World View, Right Wing Nut House, Bill's Bites, Sensible Mom, CatHouse Chat, Don Surber, 7.62mm Justice, Running The Gauntlet, Michelle Malkin, Captain's Quarters, Blackfive, Hugh Hewitt, Hot Air, Riehl World News, OpFor, Blue Crab Boulevard, Jammie Wearing Fool, Bill's Bites, Leaning Straight Up, NW Bloggers, Hennessey's Views, Alphabet City, Flopping Aces, TacJammer, Gun Toting Liberal

OPEN TRACKBACKING AT Right Pundits, Outside the Beltway, Perri Nelson's Website, A Blog For All, Right Truth, Big Dog's Weblog, Stuck On Stupid, Common Folk Using Common Sense, Cao's Blog, The Bullwinkle Blog, Jo's Cafe, Maggie's Notebook | Conservative Blog, Faultline USA, third world county, The Crazy Rants of Samantha Burns, stikNstein... has no mercy, The Pink Flamingo, Right Voices, and Gone Hollywood, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Posted by: Greg at 02:08 PM | Comments (102) | Add Comment
Post contains 1015 words, total size 10 kb.

And the Dems keep telling us what a shitty economy we are in. I say – give us more of this shit!

Know what's really impressive about today's boffo 3.5 percent GDP growth number for the fourth quarter? It wasn't so long ago that Wall Street economists were wondering if the number would be a "one-handle"–meaning growth between 1.0 and 1.9 percent. And instead of a "hard or "soft" landing, investment pros are now talking about a "growth scare" where a surprisingly robust economy would push the Federal Reserve into raising interest rates.

In any event, I am starting to lend more personal credence to the theory that a combination of strong growth, fat corporate profits, and already tight labor market might push the unemployment rate to lows we have not seen since the 1960s.

LetÂ’s hear it for the Bush Boom!

Posted by: Greg at 02:07 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 158 words, total size 1 kb.

And that is precisely what this bill would give me and other teachers in the state of Texas. I therefore consider it to be a bad idea.

Parents beware: Miss a meeting with your child's teacher and it could cost you a $500 fine and a criminal record.

A Republican state lawmaker from Baytown has filed a bill that would charge parents of public school students with a misdemeanor and fine them for playing hooky from a scheduled parent-teacher conference.

Rep. Wayne Smith said Wednesday he wants to get parents involved in their child's education.

"I think it helps the kids for the parents and teachers to communicate. That's all the intent was," Smith said.

Do I have parents who won’t show up if I try to schedule a conference with them? You bet. Have I rearranged my schedule to accommodate a parent who wanted to meet, only to have them not show up when I’ve stayed until 4:00 just to talk to them? Sure – which is especially irritating when they have initiated the contact. But I don’t think that being an inconsiderate jackass is grounds for an encounter with the legal system. And I also do not believe it is appropriate for me to be able to summon a parent on pain of criminal sanction. After all, parent-teacher meetings are all too often an adversarial event – let’s not write that into law.

Posted by: Greg at 02:06 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 242 words, total size 1 kb.

And that is precisely what this bill would give me and other teachers in the state of Texas. I therefore consider it to be a bad idea.

Parents beware: Miss a meeting with your child's teacher and it could cost you a $500 fine and a criminal record.

A Republican state lawmaker from Baytown has filed a bill that would charge parents of public school students with a misdemeanor and fine them for playing hooky from a scheduled parent-teacher conference.

Rep. Wayne Smith said Wednesday he wants to get parents involved in their child's education.

"I think it helps the kids for the parents and teachers to communicate. That's all the intent was," Smith said.

Do I have parents who won’t show up if I try to schedule a conference with them? You bet. Have I rearranged my schedule to accommodate a parent who wanted to meet, only to have them not show up when I’ve stayed until 4:00 just to talk to them? Sure – which is especially irritating when they have initiated the contact. But I don’t think that being an inconsiderate jackass is grounds for an encounter with the legal system. And I also do not believe it is appropriate for me to be able to summon a parent on pain of criminal sanction. After all, parent-teacher meetings are all too often an adversarial event – let’s not write that into law.

Posted by: Greg at 02:06 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 249 words, total size 2 kb.

This one deals not only with the illegitimate nature of the segregation caucuses, but also their operating procedure and the sexism that infests at least one of them.

Rep. Loretta Sanchez has quit the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, accusing the chairman, Rep. Joe Baca, of telling people she's a "whore."

Baca denied the charge.

In an interview with The Politico Wednesday, Sanchez, a California Democrat as is Baca, also cited concerns about whether Baca was properly elected Hispanic Caucus chairman in November and about his general attitude toward female lawmakers. The caucus represents 21 Hispanic Democrats in Congress.
"I'm not going to be a part of the CHC as long as Mr. Baca illegally holds the chair Â… I told them no. There's a big rift here," Sanchez said. "You treat the women like shit. I have no use for him."

In a statement to The Politico, Baca said Sanchez "has decided to resign from the Congressional Hispanic Caucus (CHC), and has chosen to air baseless statements. Let me be clear; her comments are categorically untrue."

The last time lawmakers withdrew from the Hispanic caucus was in the late 1990s when the group's Republican members left over partisan differences.
Sanchez said she had been approached earlier this year to contribute funds from her office budget to support the CHC's shared staff, a requirement for all its members. She refused.

"I told them to take me off the list, take me off the Web site, take me off everything," Sanchez said.

IÂ’d be inclined to believe the denials, were it not for a longstanding history of accusations by female members of the caucus that Baca has engaged in demeaning and inappropriate conduct towards them. But this again points out the problems endemic in allowing these racist segregation caucuses to exist at all.

Posted by: Greg at 02:05 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 312 words, total size 2 kb.