It's A Dog Eat Dog World

Ok, the silliness that has gotten started about the whole dog thing between Romney and Obama is starting to get on my nerves.  Yes, in 1983, Mitt Romney took a 650 mile trip with his family to their vacation home.  Yes, their dog was on the roof of the car the whole way, but he was in a carrier that was strapped down and had a windshield to protect the dog from the wind.  Yes the dog got sick during the trip, but it was because he had gotten into some human food that disagreed with him before the trip, not because he was so terrified from being on top of the car.  The dog was used to traveling in that fashion and, if he is like most dogs, he more than enjoyed it.  The fact that people would suggest that this is a valid concern in the upcoming election is just stupid.  The fact that Obama would use this as an attack against Romney is stupid.  Why?  Because there are more important issues to worry about than if some carries their dog in a kennel that is strapped down to the top of their vehicle.

As for this retaliation from the Romney camp about the fact that Obama grew up knowingly eating dog… So what?  Yes Obama knew it was dog when he ate it.  Yes, he was a young man at the time living in Indonesia with his step-father.  Yes, dog is a common dish over there that people eat.  But I must reiterate, once again, that is not an important issue. 

The fact that these two candidates want to attack each over issues dealing with dogs when there are much more important issues at hand is just ridiculous.  I know Obama can’t run on the real issues that plague our nation today because it would just highlight his failures, but he could run against Romney’s plans that he has presented.  It’s not a perfect plan but it would stick to the issues at hand when it comes to his opponent.  As for Romney, he really needs to call Obama out on all the failed policies of his administration that have gotten us to the point that we are at now, highlight the failures and present reasonable solutions to get us to a better place both fiscally and globally. 

Seriously, is too much to ask to our presidential candidates to behave adults and cut out the childish behavior by addressing the serious issues that face out nation in an open and honest fashion?  Is it?

Obamas State Of The Union 2012 Part 4

Part 4

“Jackie Bray is a single mom from North Carolina who was laid off from her job as a mechanic. Then Siemens opened a gas turbine factory in Charlotte, and formed a partnership with Central Piedmont Community College. The company helped the college design courses in laser and robotics training. It paid Jackie's tuition, then hired her to help operate their plant.

I want every American looking for work to have the same opportunity as Jackie did. Join me in a national commitment to train two million Americans with skills that will lead directly to a job. My Administration has already lined up more companies that want to help. Model partnerships between businesses like Siemens and community colleges in places like Charlotte, Orlando, and Louisville are up and running. Now you need to give more community colleges the resources they need to become community career centers - places that teach people skills that local businesses are looking for right now, from data management to high-tech manufacturing.

And I want to cut through the maze of confusing training programs, so that from now on, people like Jackie have one program, one website, and one place to go for all the information and help they need. It's time to turn our unemployment system into a reemployment system that puts people to work.”

You know, all of this sounds good but there is just one tiny problem with what Obama is saying here, every American already has the same opportunity that this woman named Jackie had.  That is the way the free market works.  If a business wants someone bad enough because they demonstrated that they have something special to bring to that business, then they will go out of their way to hire those individuals and train them.  We don’t need the Government for that.  If Obama wants to help out the smaller businesses that may struggle to afford training people like this then I say fine, but larger companies like Siemens can already afford to do this without government assistance, oh and while I am at it… don’t attach a bunch of strings because then none of the businesses that could use the money would be willing to because it would not be worth it. 

As for the training programs being different, that is because different states require different things.  This boils down to a state issue and the Federal Government needs to keep their hands out of it.  The states reserve the right to set these regulations because of the different circumstances in each state.

“These reforms will help people get jobs that are open today. But to prepare for the jobs of tomorrow, our commitment to skills and education has to start earlier.

For less than one percent of what our Nation spends on education each year, we've convinced nearly every State in the country to raise their standards for teaching and learning - the first time that's happened in a generation.”

Actually, what he is calling raising standards is in truth lowering them.  The reason I say this is class rooms now can only move as fast as the slowest student in them and we have done away with the special education programs that were reserved for the slower and more challenged students in an effort to make them feel better about themselves.  If we want to raise the standards we need to reinstitute the special education programs so that those students that need it will be able to get the education they need while the students that do not require that level of special attention can get the education they need.  With the current system we are holding our brightest students back and they are suffering for it.

“But challenges remain. And we know how to solve them.”

Yes we do, vote Obama out and get rid of the Department of Education.  Turn the education system back over to the states.

“At a time when other countries are doubling down on education, tight budgets have forced States to lay off thousands of teachers. We know a good teacher can increase the lifetime income of a classroom by over $250,000. A great teacher can offer an escape from poverty to the child who dreams beyond his circumstance. Every person in this chamber can point to a teacher who changed the trajectory of their lives. Most teachers work tirelessly, with modest pay, sometimes digging into their own pocket for school supplies - just to make a difference.

Teachers matter. So instead of bashing them, or defending the status quo, let's offer schools a deal. Give them the resources to keep good teachers on the job, and reward the best ones. In return, grant schools flexibility: To teach with creativity and passion; to stop teaching to the test; and to replace teachers who just aren't helping kids learn.”

Once again I have to say, if Obama really means what he said than you need to turn the education system back over to the states.  Also in order to do what he claims he wants then we seriously need to look at tenure and reform it.  Tenure is one of the reasons that we have teachers that should not be teaching in our schools and the sooner they can be held responsible the sooner thing will be able to improve.  Traditionally, the Dems are against tenure reform because that puts the teachers that try to indoctrinate student toward the liberal agenda at risk.

“We also know that when students aren't allowed to walk away from their education, more of them walk the stage to get their diploma. So tonight, I call on every State to require that all students stay in high school until they graduate or turn eighteen.”

I have to disagree with this.  Every student that drops out does it for their own reasons.  Some do it because they know they won’t graduate and that allows them to enter the work force earlier to get valuable experience, others drop out so that they can get their GED and move on to college.  There are numerous reasons that students drop out of high school, some good some bad.  This call to change the way that students can drop out is not a good one because he does not want circumstances taken into consideration.

“When kids do graduate, the most daunting challenge can be the cost of college. At a time when Americans owe more in tuition debt than credit card debt, this Congress needs to stop the interest rates on student loans from doubling in July. Extend the tuition tax credit we started that saves middle-class families thousands of dollars. And give more young people the chance to earn their way through college by doubling the number of work-study jobs in the next five years.”

All of this I actually agree with the President on. 

“Of course, it's not enough for us to increase student aid. We can't just keep subsidizing skyrocketing tuition; we'll run out of money. States also need to do their part, by making higher education a higher priority in their budgets. And colleges and universities have to do their part by working to keep costs down. Recently, I spoke with a group of college presidents who've done just that. Some schools re-design courses to help students finish more quickly. Some use better technology. The point is, it's possible. So let me put colleges and universities on notice: If you can't stop tuition from going up, the funding you get from taxpayers will go down. Higher education can't be a luxury - it's an economic imperative that every family in America should be able to afford.”

And then Obama drops the ball here.  The states do their part; the main thing that is driving tuition costs up is the fact that the Federal Government restricts what can be taught at each university and college.  This makes some schools worth more than others and since those schools are worth more, they charge more because they have to pay more to the professors that they have to hire.  If the universities and colleges were allowed to teach any programs they desired instead of having to conform to what the Government dictates (which they do because they don’t want a lot of competition between universities and colleges on the programs that are taught. 

Can these schools do more to lower costs?  Yes they can and they should, but threatening to take funding away from them if they don’t comply with your will is just wrong.  If this were to happen the more tuitions costs would just go up that much more to make up for what the Government won’t cover.  Higher education is a luxury despite what the President says.  There are plenty of programs out there to help people who cannot afford to pay for it on their own, but the recipient has to earn the right to get that money.  If you can’t afford it and don’t have the drive to do what it takes to get the student loans, scholarships or grants to help you pay for it then you don’t need it.  Everyone has a fair chance at getting a higher education, they just have to want it, but they are not entitled to it.

Also, think of it like this, if everyone went to college and graduated then the value of that education would drop drastically because the job market would be flooded and then you would have a bunch of highly educated people who could not get the jobs that they have been educating themselves for over the course of the last 2 to 4 years (assuming they stop with their bachelor’s degree).  Most of these people would refuse to do any “lesser” jobs because they would think it was beneath them, after all, who wants to flip burgers when you have a degree in engineering of physics? Just saying.

“Let's also remember that hundreds of thousands of talented, hardworking students in this country face another challenge: The fact that they aren't yet American citizens. Many were brought here as small children, are American through and through, yet they live every day with the threat of deportation. Others came more recently, to study business and science and engineering, but as soon as they get their degree, we send them home to invent new products and create new jobs somewhere else.

That doesn't make sense.”

Yes it does.  If they want to stay in the US they can apply for citizenship like any other LEGAL citizen that has immigrated has done.  As for the children, I hate to say that they should be punished for the crimes of their parents but, at least they can still be with their family once they all are sent back to where they came from.  If the parents demonstrate that they have no respect for American laws, and then they should be punished, unfortunately the children are affected too, but the parents should have thought about that before they broke the law.  American children suffer everyday as they are shipped off to foster homes because their parents broke the law, children that are here illegally should not be given any special treatment.  Sure it isn’t their fault, but they are their parent’s responsibility.  If their parents bring them then they should leave with them.  If they want to come back then they should have to do like everyone else and go about it the legal way.  Cases of people seeking asylum are different and should be treated differently.  But we are not currently talking about people seeking asylum in the US. 

If the foreigners that come to the US for whatever reason want to stay then they should have the respect for the nation that they wish to live in and strive for citizenship the proper way.

More in part 5.

Of All The Starving Children

First off, this is a rant.  Why because I can contain it no longer.  There is a certain commercial that has been playing on the radio where I live now for about a year.  I will not name the organization or its web address because I don’t want to promote them.  This organizations commercials usually feature a pathetic sounding child (sometimes an adult but mostly children) talking about how they struggle with hunger.  They quote some statistics then talk about how they were told they could grow up to be anything they want to.  The ending line is literally “I want to grow up to be someone who doesn’t go to bed hungry at night”.  Then an announcer starts talking about who you can donate money on their web site and that each dollar you donate provides seven, yes you heard right, seven meals. 

Ok, let’s start with the statistics.  In the commercial they claim that 1 in 4 children in America “Struggle with hunger”.  How do they get that number?  Doesn’t that seem a bit high?  I have a theory about how they get that statistic (aside from the fact that, as anyone who has studied statistics would tell you, you can make statistics say whatever you want them to say) and I am going to share it with you now…

Time – 5:45pm Setting – Jessica (age 11) is on the phone in her home while her parent is busy cooking supper.

Caller: Hello little Jessica, how are you today?

Jessica: I am good, how are you?

Caller: I am doing well, thank you for asking.  Jessica, I want to ask you a question and you can answer me honestly.  Have you been hungry in the last week?

Jessica: I am hungry right now, but-

Caller: Thank you Jessica, That is all I need to know.

Jessica looks confused as the caller hangs up on her.

Maybe I am being mean or maybe not, but I really find the 1 in 4 hard to believe.  I am not denying the fact that there are children that go hungry here in the USA but, the fact remains that we as a nation have the world’s fattest poor people.  Now you don’t get fat (at least not the type of fat that we are) by going hungry… Unless…  There is a statistic that says that 1 in 6 adults are morbidly obese… Hmmm… Couple that with the 1 in 4 children struggle with hunger… Eureka!  I have got it!  All the adults are eating the food for themselves instead of giving it to their children!  Yes I know I am being ridiculous, but I am just expressing how ridiculous I feel these commercials to be.  Like I said before, I know that there are children in America that go hungry and my heart goes out to them, really, but I think that this organization is a fraud. 

Let’s look at the other huge problem I have with this ad, the line about every dollar you donate.  If food was that cheap nobody in America would have to worry about penny pinching when it came to buying groceries.  This line is just ridiculous.  If they were really serious about feeding people, then they would be asking for non-perishable food items to fill food banks that they could then give out to families in need before asking for money.  The fact that they only ask for money sends red flags up for me.  I can understand the organization wanting money, after all you have to pay for a way to transport the food, store the food and pay the people to do all the work that comes with all that food.  But the fact that they don’t want food, they just want money?  It seems suspicious to me, just saying.

Now on to what I think is the true heart of the matter.  If there are this many children in the USA “struggling with hunger” then why haven’t the states stepped in with DHR and removed those kids so that they can go somewhere that they will be fed?   Also, what about the school systems?  Children from “under privileged families” (I always hated that term, but that is a whole other rant) have programs where the get free breakfast and lunch at school on the taxpayers dollar.  The schools in most places will even feed them when school is not in session.  On top of that they are talking about implementing a program to cover supper as well.  Guess the next thing to happen will be that the schools just let the children live there, call is a taxpayer funded boarding school.

Also, what about the communities that the hungry children live in?  One of the things that used to make our country so great was the generous nature of the American citizen.  What has happened to that?  Once upon a time, if a community knew that it had a family that was suffering from hunger that was a part of that community, then the people came together and helped that family out as best as they could.  Not everyone in that community could afford to help with money or food, but they could at least give time if nothing else. 

What has happened to the generous nature we had as a nation?  I personally blame the Government.  The reason for this is that once the government started raising taxes so that it could step in and provide services like child welfare, WIC and food stamps, the people of the community saw two things happen.  First they saw that they had less money with which to provide help to their neighbors in need.  Second since the Government was handling the responsibilities of the community, they saw that there was no need for the community.  This broke the communities and neighborhoods down to the point that the people in them started to ignore one another as well as the needs of those around them.  I don’t mean to say that this applies everywhere or to everyone, but it does apply to more than not and to make matter worse, it is getting worse with each generation. 

We as a nation, as a people, need to learn to come together once more and support those that are in need.  We need to elect people into office who will have the guts to stand up and shut these programs down that have only served to make up more dependent upon the Government, then have the integrity to also lower taxes so that we the people will have the money that should rightfully be ours anyway.  I am not saying that this is a change that needs to occur overnight, it needs to be done slowly so that the people of this nation have time to adjust back to where we came from.  I believe that if that were to happen, we as a nation would learn once again what it means to be a community which will in turn make us stronger.

The Great Education Heist

Anyone who has been paying attention should know about the current teachers strike up in Wisconsin. The teachers union in the state has a bunch of it's members crying bloody murder because of legislation to end collective bargaining (In fact, some of the teachers have gone so far as to bring in their students so they can hide behind them, students that have no clue why they are there.). Anyone with half a brain knows this will cripple the unions in that state and if it can be passed there, it can potentially pass anywhere in the US. That makes it a threat to unions everywhere.

Obviously, you can't expect the unions to sit back and just take this. They are, when you think about it, fighting for their continued existence as they currently are. In fact, the unions are so afraid of this passing that they have started shipping in people from other states to build numbers. If this law passes the union powerhouses will be a thing of the past, at least in Wisconsin. This much is true, but there is a lot of misinformation out there trying to cover the truth of what is happening.

The unions claim that if this law passes, union workers (teachers being the main target here) will start being fired left and right, that they will have their pension plans stripped from them and that they will lose all the benefits they have worked to earn.

Take this into consideration, IF the law passes and the state starts firing teachers without regard to their service or abilities, the state will just cripple itself. For this reason, the only teachers that should have anything to fear are the ones that are just crappy teachers. My personal opinion is that all the teachers that lied about being sick just so they could go on strike and protest at the capital are the bottom of the dung pile. They are the ones that must realize they are such horrible teachers that they feel the only way to keep their jobs is to try to bully the state government. These are the one hiding behind the kids they teach (mean while these days that the teachers are on strike count as snow days. Poor kids, don't realize this is just going to make the school year last longer and longer.).

Also, if all the teachers were to have their pension plans stripped away, how would the state be able to bring in bright new teachers to educate the children? Wisconsin would have no way to stay competitive in the field of education if they were to do this. Anyone who really believes the state would hurt itself like this is an idiot. All the state wants to do is require the teachers to pay 5.8% into their pensions so that the state can devote the difference in tax money to the hole the state is in. For that matter, it is only a less then 1% change to the take home pay of the teachers. I realize that that will be a little pinch in the pocket, but if it allows the state (provided they do what they say they want to with the money) to dig it's way out of the financial hole it is in, it will be worth it in the long run. I'll go so far as to say, it will help the students that these teachers claim to care about so much.

On top of all this idiocy, the state Democrats have fled the state in order prevent having to sit down and make a decision on where they stand on the law. By fleeing they have locked up the process they claim they strive to respect. They are making a mockery of the legislative process by doing this and I think the next law that needs to be implemented after this one passes is one that requires by law, senators to show up to votes they have been informed about. If they don't show to vote, then they should not get a vote. It's that simple. They are still getting paid to do their job, yet like these teachers, they are refusing to do what they are getting paid to do. If I were to do this I know what would happen to me.... I would be fired faster then I could blink.

While I think Governor Walker is doing a superb job not backing down, in fact, I think he should go one step further. I think he should do what President Reagan did when PATCO went on strike in 1981. Governor Walker should give the teachers 48 hours to return to work, if they refuse then they should be fired. The state should not waste anymore money on people who aren't willing to do the job they agreed to do when hired. There is an overabundance of teachers out there looking for work so it wouldn't be hard to find replacement teachers.

Think about what the children are learning from this strike. This strike (if it succeeds) will teach these kids that if they complain loud enough they can get away with anything. This warped sense of reality will cripple them when it comes to the professional world. They will grow up thinking they should be given hand outs for nothing and there should be no repercussions. This line of thinking will lead to a whole generation of losers who don't have a clue and will destroy themselves.

Also any of the children that are affected by this strike, have something to hold over their teachers heads. After all, how can these teachers expect to punish these kids for anything. They have set an example for these children that says you should be rewarded for acting out. This is the wrong message to be sending such impressionable minds.

Lastly, Mr. Obama.... I hate having to single you out..... again. This is what is referred to as internal state politics. You have no business in them. Learn your place, because apparently you don't know it. Stay out of states rights, you have no place there. If asked your opinion, that is one thing, but you weren't. You jumped right in and started to chastise the Governor for sticking to his guns even though he is in the right. You offered support to the people who are are trying to break the system, which as far as I'm considered that is like the equivalency of you coming out in support of Al-Qaeda. You might want to think about where you stand, because it sure looks like you want to destroy the system that makes this country great. Stop aiding this heist of our education system.