politicalmonster

I see you didn't bother to improve your reading comprehension and decided instead to make incorrect inferences from my statements. Whatever. Go back under your bridge. I remember now why I stopped spending any time on this forum. -PM

For all you wonderful geniuses that are telling me I am stupid, or should get off my A$$ and go pick up my daughter, please re-read my post, and use your language skills. I clearly said in my post that the school was telling the children that the roads were passable, and that parents can get to the school. My point was that IF the main roads are passable, it would make more sense to send a bus to the main entrances of subdivisions. If the main roads are NOT passable, then of course I want her to stay at the school where it is safe and warm. If you think I want her in a bus on unsafe r

My daughter is one of the students stuck at N. Paulding HS, and she texted to tell us that the school is telling them that they aren't even going to run buses today to get them home. If the parents can't get them, they are stuck. WTH? If the main roads get treated, the buses could at least get the kids to subdivision entrances. Most of the subdivisions are iced in, as ours is, so parents can't get out. But the buses could get them to within walking distance. This is ridiculous. -PM

So far, we have seen the shooting in CT blamed on the following: Assault weapons Failed mental healthcare in the country Lack of security in schools Moral degradation of society in general Violent influences of media And probably a few others I am missing. But how about this as a possibility? There are just some screwed up people in this world, and they have the capacity to use WHATEVER they can to inflict the most casualties in order to fulfill their deranged desires. If that is the problem, there really isn't a dang thing we can do to stop it. It's not like it is an epidemi

Lighten up, Francis... -PM

To be honest, I didn't go up high enough to see his post. But figured why not give ya a little tweak since you asked? -PM

No difference. I just felt like commenting on yours. -PM

Yeah, that contributes to rational discussion. Way to keep it intelligent. -PM

Fortunately, our rights and freedoms are not determined by only what we "require", because that would then mean the government has to decide what it is we "require" in order to be free, and I don't think any of us wants that. -PM

There are obviously some medical conditions that can cause or contribute to significant weight gain, but I think it is disingenuous to take the stance that people should be "sensitive" to fat people in general. Being fat is not a "medical condition", it is a result of choices. As someone that was morbidly obese for a time, I know what it is like to have your life ruled by food, but I also know that it is a product of the lifestyle choices we make, and the general lack of willpower by most Americans when it comes to changing your life. If she had a medical condition that led to this, I feel f

How many of your courses discussed how easy it is to manipulate polls, both in the creation phase, as well as the interpretation phase? I took several of the same types of courses when obtaining my poli sci degree, and poll/survey manipulation was a common concern. -PM

I'm with you 100% on the importance of the economy and the policies needed to fix it, but you are wrong with the above statement. Those things are exactly what kept Romney from winning the white house, along with the GOP stance on illegal immigrants. -PM

I am still a Republican by necessity until a 3rd party (Libertarian) candidate becomes viable. But I will say that unless the Republican party as a whole steps back from some of their more divisive and asinine social stances such as gay marriage, aboortzion, and handling the multitudes of illegals already in this country, we may not win another election for awhile. Conservative Republican values regarding the economy and the free market will beat Democratic government solutions every time. But by alienating all gays, hispanics, and women, there is no chance. Allowing two gay people to marry

And sell lots of Doritos. -PM

You were ok, except for this part. We don't need government to be our nannies. Let adults make decisions for themselves. -PM

But here is the rub I have...There is absolutely no reason that public schools can't implement the same methodology and policies that charter schools use to get better results. Oh wait, yes there is a reason. They can't force teachers that are tenured to follow those methods or be fired. (You can say tenured teachers can be fired like any other teacher, but it doesn't make it true.) If public schools could perform like the best charter schools, I wouldn't give a rip about charter schools in the first place. But they don't. So where does that leave our kids? -PM

Really, what groups have a goal of segregation? And to what purpose? -PM

Ok, let me be clear... I think that tenured teachers that don't do their job are the PRIMARY factor in our poor education system. I think that teachers unions and the lobbyists they employ contribute to that, regardless of the collective bargaining aspect. All of your arguments are based on the assumption that government is the best choice to handle education, and that any solution that involves the private sector is bad. I don't agree with that. And I'm not going to waste my day playing "yes, it is, no it isn't" with you. I have stated my belief that more charter schools is a good thing,

It is a easily obtainable number. Here is one of many sources, feel free to use your own: http://febp.newamerica.net/k12/GA -PM

Theoretically, tenured teachers (in Georgia, teachers get tenure after only 3 years) can be fired, but multiple studies have shown that in reality, it is almost impossible to fire them. Here's one example: http://articles.latimes.com/2009/may/03/local/me-teachers3 No teachers unions in Georgia, huh? Someone should tell the Georgia Association of Educators. There was nothing inaccurate or misleading about my information. People should look into it themselves. The documentary "Waiting For Superman" is very illuminating on the immense detrimental impact that under-performing tenured teac

Pointing out that ANY government program is "ripe for corruption" is a laughable straw man argument. The same things you claim "could" happen under the proposed legislation could already occur in the current charter program. The ONLY difference is that someone other than the local school board can approve a charter school that will compete for educational dollars. If the current system was working to give our kids a good education, and not being drug down by teachers that are not held accountable or measured in any meaningful way because of the teacher's union protection, I would agree that t

But this legislation isn't taking away the ability of local school boards to approve their own charter schools. If that were the case, I would agree with you. This is simply providing another avenue for educational competition to come to georgia, and it scares the crap out of the current school boards. -PM They are nothing compared to the teacher's union lobbyists. -PM Thanks for the usual well thought out reply. -PM

But if the charter schools perform better, i.e. provide a better education for the students, then wouldn't it be a good thing to shift tax dollars there as opposed to the poorly performing public schools? Public schools have enough money. We spend almost $10k per student each year in public education. If schools are "just scraping by" it is because of mismanagement of taxpayer funds. Charter schools are a good thing, in that they force competition in an arena where that should be valued. -PM

That is correct. But I think putting the emphasis on "elected school board" vs. an appointed committee is misleading at best. That committee would be appointed by elected officials, and it would be outside of the miniature fiefdoms that are the local school boards, which is a great thing. Look at it this way, the local school board does not have much incentive to approve a charter school which will then take tax dollars away from their existing schools. So money will be going from schools which they have total control over to schools which merely have a charter agreement with them. When (N

It's not divisive. The local PTA groups have been set out to attack the proposed changes to the amendment since the school boards themselves were ordered to stop using taxpayer money to fight the initiative. The local educational establishments are terrified because the proposal would nullify a Georgia Supreme court ruling that basically said the only entity capable of approving a charter school is a local school board. The proposed changes to the State Constitution will provide for a commission also capable of approving charter schools, effectively removing the conflict of interest inher