therman4's Blog

In a quest for the Chicago Public Schools to entice kids to attend school as they're supposed to and parents to make sure their kids go to school, the system is again offering bribes and goodies to parents and kids for doing what they're supposed to do in the first place.  What a fine lesson the schools are teaching parents and kids that as long as they do what they're minimally expected to do, like make sure your kid's going to school and in school, why we'll give you free family passes to the Field Museum, or gift cards, or even a car just because you went out of your way to do what you were supposed to do in the first place!  What a bunch of trash!  No wonder the young grow up demanding material rewards just because they're there and the expect being rewarded.   The other insidious lesson it teaches parents and kids is that it's OK to have minimal standards, like sending off the kids/going to school.  It's a real big deal doing what you're supposed to do.  The schools are failing the parents and kids, but the parents are also failing the kids because they're instilling in them that bribes, which is what these are, are part and parcel of the education process.  More handouts won't provide a good education, unless of course the parents and kids expect to continue receiving their diplomas not because they intellectually deserve them, but just because they bothered to show up.  That's not what education is about.  Pity the employer once these over-indulged misguided kids become adults and enter the work force.

It was interesting to hear today that the Chicago Public Schools was giving awards and recognition to some 20,000 school students who had perfect attendance.  20,000?  When I heard the number of students involved, I thought the number exaggerated and much too high, or incorrect news reporting.  Yes, there were 20,000 students who, get this, had perfect attendance for about a two-month period!  Awards ranged from family passes to the Field Museum to trips to the Wisconsin Dells.  Exactly who is paying for the CPS to pander to kids this way who are supposed to go to school anyway?  Taxpayers?  Or, was the money to pay for these bribes taken out of needed program funding?  This is ridiculous to prop up kids into thinking that going to school each day, as they're supposed to, and then rewarding and recognizing them for a minor period of time of only two months, is cause for celebration, praise and doling out the awards and recognition.  This is yet another example of how little we expect of kids these days.  Instead of raising the bar and expecting kids to have discipline and attend school each day, the CPS continues to dumb-down the process of going to school.  CPS used to gauge perfect attendance for the entire school year.  That was something for a kid to aspire to because it required discipline and self-pride.  Kids today are being given a false sense of pride and entitlement just for doing the minimum too frequently.  Let's instill in kids what it's like to have pride in achieving that which others aren't capable of achieving, say perfect attendance for the entire school year or even half a school year.  When 20,000 students all achieve a laughable and less than mediocre pandered achievement of only a two-month period of so-called perfect attendance, it's yet another indicator of the decline in our value system.  Geez, what's going to happen to these little dears when they get out into the real world, and get a job, for example, and after a few months expect to be rewarded by their employer just for showing up and doing their job each day?   Guaranteed, they won't be able to handle the rejection from the employer not giving them their expected reward!  The so-called lofty perfect attendance of a mere two-months is another one of those "good job" falsehoods that minimizes the capabilities and character building kids desperately need.

Televised Presidential Debates, for either party can be informative; last evening's event on CNN was no different. What has struck me the most since the early campaigning began, including any subsequent press coverage involving the leading candidates, is especially Senator Obama's repeated use of his tired rhetoric about how "..I've always been against the Iraq War from the start...". For sure Senator Obama hasn't been the only candidate "guilty" of repeating perceived clever sound-bites and tired rhetoric, but any time he has uttered these words, they are misleading and can easily confuse the potential supporter; even a rehash of his commentary is never challenged with fact and clarification. At this point, many of the leading candidates aren't saying anything really new about their platforms. I think the good senator, however, needs to cease making this type of remark, as if to remind his audiences that he has always held the lofty stance of being anti-Iraq War and thus inferring to those who might be misinformed that he was always in a position to alter the US Senate vote authorizing the President to go to war. It's a vastly different situation to be an Illinois State Senator versus a US Senator representing the State of Illinois, but voting on issues that affect the entire Nation. Last evening, he chided former Senator Edwards for lacking the so-called leadership in being against the Iraq War because Edwards voted to authorize President Bush to go to war. A state senator vocally being against a war doesn't show leadership either, particularly when a vote altering the course of the nation isn't at stake; it's rhetoric, period. Had Senator Obama been a US Senator at the time of the vote in the Senate and in fact had an opportunity to vote is one thing, but never having been in that position is a totally different matter. I'm against the war, so does that make me better or a leader comparative to another who was in favor of the war? I don't think so, and Senator Obama's stance is certainly no different. Lastly, I wish one of the other candidates last evening would've immediately corrected Senator Obama on his misleading commentary to finally and factually represent the situation and fact, instead that correction was left up to the Debate's Moderator Wolf Blitzer; his correction unfortunately diminished Senator Obama's mischaracterization.  Clinton was part of the Edwards challenge, but unfortunately she remained silent; that would've been a good time for her to place Senator Obama on notice about his misleading comments.  Voting for any particular candidate should be based on accurate information they presented to the general public, not that which has been deliberately misleading. Senator Obama is doing just that. It's a clever attempt by his handlers to gain him greater support. The good senator doesn't need to stoop to such tactics that ultimately may prove to be a hindrance; let him stand on his own merits and set an example.

In watching the special CDC news briefing today on this disturbing issue, it's apparent that this individual was excessively careless, selfish and only cared about this honeymoon, knowing full well he was infected with this virulent strain of treatment-resistant TB. 1) He met with local and CDC health officials prior to his departure. 2) He was informed on three occasions during the meeting that he shouldn't fly. 3) Succumbing to, according to health officicals "weighing the rights of an individual to those of the public", the health officials didn't press for getting court documents prohibiting his travel, and instead was assured by the infected male that he would wear a mask. 3) It was later learned that he never wore a mask. 4) CDC officials then located him and contacted him in Rome to update him on his situation and presumably advised him that they were in the process of securing the necessary paperwork to have him return to the U.S. 5) Instead, this male decided to leave from Rome anyway, again not caring at all about anyone else except himself to continue his self-absorbed marital escapade, whereby potentially risking more and more people on and off the plane and wherever he decided to go throughout Europe. 6) The CD apparently further dropped the ball in not moving quickly enough to inform carriers by adding his name to a do-not-fly-list. 8) Because of privacy issues and rights, no information was given on the location where this person resides and even where he works. 7) The CDC is expending funds all because of this selfish individual to locate all of the carrier involved, individuals who work with this person, the person's family, friends, etc. All because he, the health officials and the CDC decided it was more important to protect the rights of this one individual than the health, safety and well being of hundreds, perhaps thousands. The CDC has a lot more contacting to do. The statistics they revealed at the news conference were distrubing. Just because a person was exposed may not necessarily mean they will become infected, although they could be a carrier and pass the infection onto others they come in reasonably close contact with. Further, the infection may not appear for six weeks to four months, which is why each individual who suspects they may have been exposed to this person-unknown will have to have several sequential tests to initially eliminate them as having been infected. All of this hassle because an idiot selfish male thought more about his honeymoon and trekking around the globe to wine, dine and romance his new bride. How proud does this idiot feel now, especially since he's now involved numberous European agencies and frightening hundreds and hundreds of those who may've been exposed and now must be tested? How can a person who causes this much turmoil because of his stupidity and selfishness live with his consequences? I hope someone goes after a Freedom of Information Act to obtain this individual's name and release it on the Internet to properly inform the unsuspecting public about the potential health risks they may have been exposed to. Our government cares more about paperwork and dragging its proverbial feet than moving rapidly on matters such as this; and although not the same as having connected the dots with the terriorists of 9/11, laxity on the part of the government was a contributing factor to this current situation waiting to turn tragic. Where matters of potentially infectious contagins are concerned, the rights of one selfish individual when compared to the obligation of protecting the public from unnecessary harm and potentail danger is infinitely more important that the so-called rights of one individual. The fact that the infected male wasn't moral, ehtical or honorable enough to not travel after being made fully aware of his condition is not only repugnant, but it should be criminal, much the same as someone who has been diagnosed with HIV/Aids who then goes on to have unprotected intercourse, infecting his victims; that's a criminal offense of assualt and endangerment. Everyone failed in this situation: the infected male, his family, his fiance now wife, his local health officials and the CDC. Each one had their own agenda and little domain to protect, and it never included the health and welfare of the greater public. Lastly, the government goes through great lengths and expense with Homeland Security in their issuing watch/do not fly lists for would-be terrorists. Adding the name or names of infected individuals, such as this person to similar lists such as those is reasonable. Homeland Security should be also paying attention to matters of public health, particularly when its deliberately and willfully jeopardized by a single individual. If more laws are needed to prevent this from ever happening again, then so be it.

It used to be that parents wanted a better life for their children. With little media coverage locally, and briefly mentioned on a few cable news programs (almost as a footnote) a recent study revealed that today a thirty year old is earning less than their parents did a generation ago and that they're also having a tougher time making a go at a decent living than their parents experienced. And yet, we continue to hear about an economic outlook that is rosey and upbeat. Sorry, not for the average person. The unemployment rate is down, yet the numbers don't reveal how many people still can't find full-time, livable work; or those who are under-employed, such as part-time or doing low-paying retail service work; or those who have given up in trying to find work that either doesn't exist, is going to illegal immigrants, or which has been parced out overseas. How about the current housing foreclosure rates due to unscrupulous lenders, or the decrease in new housing starts, or those trying to sell their homes (usually due to financial issues) and having to keep lowering the selling price or never sell it at all and then go into foreclosure? How about the growing number of poor and hungry? How about the growing number of the medically uninsured? How about the average person's reality of economy turning into a Wal*Mart mentality because that's all they can afford now, and barely; they're forced to buy sub-standard or non-existing quality standard goods because that's all they can afford? How about the businesses and investors that keep getting richer, while the majority of people are suffering and not being able to tackle the bread and butter issues for themselves or their families? How about the gap between the rich and reduced middle-class-poor widening? How about the superficially high gas prices? People's need for gas hasn't increased, the need for greed from the oil companies has, however; and don't believe the bunk about no new refineries; the only reason there aren't any new ones being built in decades is becaused the gluttonous oil companies don't want to build; they'd rather create artifical shortages with convewnient and staged simultaneous maintenace of their plants, and gouge more money from the average consumer. How about the elimination of, or a significant reduction in funding for needed programs, federally and on the state level, especially education and health, because the Treasury's coffers are going bare because needed funding is being syphoned off to continue the Iraq War, reward the rich and big-business with favorable tax incentives or no taxes at all, including businesses who don't pay taxes because they'd rather pay illegal immigrants under the table and avoid their corporate employment taxes, or continue the abject waste of the failed policies of FEMA (e.g. Katrina), or because of a diminished infusion of income taxes because of the correlation of inadequate employment or illegal immigrants being paid under the table, etc. It's no wonder why the younger generation is lagging behind the prosperity their parents had hoped for them.

If some still needed convincing that the current Supreme Court is heavy-handed with pro-business interests, driven by the Republican Party which has always favored business over average citizenry, a recent decision by the Court, which struck down a women's claim of repeated gender-based pay discrimination by her employer every time she received her pay check because the employer knew it was deliberately not paying the same wages as a man performing the same job, is repugnant, despicable and an endorsement by the current Supreme Court for businesses, regardless of size, to continue (or begin) discriminating willfully against protected classes that the government categorizes as minorities (e.g. women, Blacks, Asian, Native American, those over forty, veterans, disabled, etc.). This one case wasn't just about a woman who discovered the pay discrimination was going on for years, and who discovered it fairly recently, either. That her case was struck down by the Court sets a dangerous precedent. The Court's decision essentially mandated that in such cases the current laws, where individuals have to bring charges against the offending party through petitioning the EEOC or hiring independent counsel for lititgation, that the narrow window of maximum of 180 days for filing a grievance, which is yet another hardship for the aggrieved, must be the only maximum allowable time for bring such charges. Ironically, in most litigations, a declared period of "discovery" can set the clock ticking. The Court, with its pro-business record, could've cited a compromise decision, but instead pretty much told this woman that her employer had every right not to pay her equal pay as that of a male doing the same job. The vote was 5-4. Supreme Court Justice Ginsberg, the only woman on the bench took the rightful charge of the decision's unfairness, particularly in light of the fact that most people don't find out about their having been discriminated against in such matters as wage disparity is usually not known until a considerable amount of time has passed, especially since most businesses keep their wage information secret from all of its workers (a Union shop may've prevented this). It now behooves the Congress to amend the current EEOC ruling to eliminate the maximum 180 day window for aggrieved individuals to sue their employers over such matters. Businesses will pay their employees as little as they can get away with, and because of the secrecy of wage information, will also use any excuse not to pay a fair and equitable wage to different classes of individuals who are performing the same job or function because they know they can get away with it under our current punitive laws. When the EEOC was formed, it was supposed to safeguard citizenry from business predators who use gender or race, for example, as an excuse to pay less; in retrospect, its enactment was a ruise to veil pervasive wage discrimination within businesses, which is why women and other minorities continue to earn less, dollar to dollar, for performing the same job; many of the aggrieved often have greater qualifications (e.g. education) than those being paid more. The days of men being paid more than women for doing the type of job or function, for example, should've been eradicated by now. But as long as businesses are not punished more aggressively and punitively than the palter few who have been made to cough-up some of their gluttonous profits (e.g. Wal*Mart), again, businesses will use any excuse and whatever means possible to disenfranchise certain classes of employees. The Court struck a blow to wage equity and it could care less, and instead has rewarded business for doing whatever it wants to, which isn't really much of a surprise.

I guess I was shocked to recently learn that a growing number of U.S. school systems are adopting a different approach to instructing primary education students in math, by teaching them what's called "REFORM MATH", which is based on estimating, or DELIBERATELY AND INCORRECTLY GIVING THE WRONG ANSWER TO A MATH EQUASION. What kind of so-called educator came up with this one? Presumably this methodolgy will eliminate the need for the kid to memorize math tables, which are deemed almost useless by this different approach. Oh sure, let's continue to dumb-down the education system and handicap the future of our country even more than it is already and make it easy for the poor little dears in not having to use their brains and refine the disclipline called memorization. So, two plus two will equal five under this system, which is now good enough for our children? WRONG! This type of approach is a detriment to our children learning how to become functioning adults in the real world. I'd like to see one of these "brilliant" so-called educators of Reform Math try and make a financial transaction that doesn't require an "exact and correct" completion or answer, and instead use their idotic "estimation" method. What about the math portions of college entrance exams, for example? Students who are instructed in this new approach will fail and fail miserably in these sections because a correct answer, and not estimating, is required for the answers. Reform Math is a handicap for children and sends the wrong message when it comes to educating them. Reform Math is another way to accommodate and pander and foster a dangerous attitude of "..it's OK, as long as your answer is close enough, you're doing a GOOD job..". The future will not accept this type of failed educational approach, nor will it accept those who have been misled into thinking that estimating in math is appropriate. This type of bogus instruction will be the downfall of everything else these misguided, ill-informed and intellectually handicapped students will try to do as adults. Most things in life require accuracy, exactness and correctness; very little is based on estimating. Reform Math handicaps and squanders the future of our children because its basic premise is flawed.

It's making the news rounds about the idot parent who wasn't controlling their out-of-control spoiled little brat in a museum who went over and ruined countless hours of sand art created by visiting monks. The monks were much too kind, and not so much to the kid who obviously is being raised abusively without appropriate rearing, but to the idiot parent who not only didn't care about their kid, they didn't care at all about the efforts and property of others. In the same vein, the other day I went to return an item at my local Target. There was a toddler left in a shopping cart in the return area, with its parent conducting a transaction at the counter, back turned and totally oblivious the the child. I was in line for at least five minutes, enough time for a lunatic to kidnap the kid and do whatever it wanted to. In the entire time the parent was at the counter, not once did it even bother to turn around to see if anyone else was behind her, or bothered to take a look at her child to make sure it was OK. It would've served this abusive and neglectful iodiot of a parent for something terrible to have happened to her child. Both examples point that far too many individuals like the propsect of creating a child, but once it comes, they totally abdicate their responsibility in taking care of and keeping control of their kids at all times. The rest of us are not your nannies or keepers of your kids. It's disgusting and there's absolutely no excuse for it whatsoever. The kid at Target, well, as the self-absorbed idiot parent finally concluded her transaction she quickly turned around and nearly walked into me; between where she was and where she left her kid in the shopping cart, there was a good six feet or more. I sure hope nothing every terrible happens to the kid because of this idiot's laxity in parenting, because if it does, more than likely she'll blame everyone else, except herself. Parents, take care of your kids; show some respect for them and others and stop being so selfish and self-absorbed.

Will someone, anyone that is fluent in a language other than English and Spanish please, please start writing blogs? You'd think that only these two languages were spoken in this area by the millions who reside, mostly legally, in the greater Chicago Metro area. If we're truly going to be fair and balanced, other languages should be appearing as well, like Italian, Polish, German, Vietnamese, Mandarin, etc.

It took the actions of a heinous individual such as Luna to murder seven people without any regard for their lives and in so doing, permanently forced a death sentence on his victim's families and friends to suffer day in and day out. Our sentencing guidelines must be changed to prevent what happened with yesterday's sentencing of murderers. Luna most definitely deserved the death sentence; instead his life was spared, as if it were precious and meaningful. It was neither. That a single juror can over-rule the consensus and majority of jurors, who wanted the death penalty, and solely impose a misguided and selfish decision, is insane and not justified. I don't know how this single juror, a woman will ever be able to live with herself or her conscience, presuming she has one. No doubt, her decision was precipitated by her sanctimonious hypocral "morality". Her decision single handedly imposed a renewed death sentence to the victim's families and friends of this crime. She has also single handedly sentenced all tax payers to a sentence of having to pay upkeep for Luna until his "natural" death; excuse me, but the death penalty would've been too good for Luna. Luna deserved to be put to death, as do all death row criminals. Luna, like other death row murderers, don't deserve any consideration whatsoever in having their life spared and allowed to live. These murderes didn't give their victims the same consideration, and neither should any juror. If the death penalty were more routinely utilized and the amount of time for appeals shortened, there might be a reduction in the number of murders commited each year; of course, we'll never know how to gauge such a premise because our system is gravely flawed with individuals, such as the single female juror in the Luna case. I doubt if this juror would ever have the capacity or moral integrity to feel the same way if one of her family members or friends were murdered.

I ask all of you to pray for all of the innocent victims, their families, friends, teachers and classmates who were impacted by this senseless and indefensible heinous act by the cowardice of one crazed individual at Virginia Tech just now.  Whatever God or deity you believe in, pray for all of those murdered or injured and pray too for the rest of humanity that it finds its way.  If ever there was a case to immediately impose federal legislation banning assault weapons and ammunition of any type for these guns, this is that time.  These weapons aren't meant to defend and protect, which our Constitution historically references and guarantees in "..a right to bear arms..".  We must not let the gun lobby and the NRA dictate what, where, why and under what circumstrances the next type of slaughter and horror is going to occur.  We have all been victimized again by this tragedy, because it could've happened any where, any place and any time.  True, laws may not totally ban these weapons of mass destruction, but they'll make it more difficult for the deranged and criminally disturbed to get their hands on them, because they will no longer be legal.  Hunters use simple guns for their sport.  Murderers use assault weapons like what was used at Virginia Tech. Enough is enough!

1) The firing of Astronaut Nowak is a reminder of how sexist government agencies especially are, not that they're any different than non-governmental agencies.  Nowak's lying, cheating Lethario should also be fired, as well as his other NASA babe.  Presumably NASA is looking into the matter over inappropriate emails being sent from space.  Nowak would've never done her dirty deed were it not for an man's lies and cheating ways.  She thought she was his one and only.  I hope she gets the help she needs.  No man is worth this.

2) Chicago is celebrating too much over the so-called increases in statewide test scores for grade school children.  If you see what's really behind the increase, a great deal of accommodation was given to these test takers, by allowing them significant amounts of time to complete math and English sections, as compared to what is the norm in other states and national tests.  Sadly this shows a trend in our society and that is our children are too slow with their thought process.  This will not serve them well as they mature.  Corporations have deadlines for work completion.  If these kids can't complete a task in a reasonable amount of time, and expect a handout in getting extra time just so they can complete the task, they will fail as adults.  Instead of improving their overall capabilities, the city and state are actually handicapping them.

3) Jennifer Hudson's current celebrity high will be short-lived within a few years max.  She has minimal talent and is primarily a screamer.  The current season Idol female contestants, especially the blacks, are much more talented than Hudson.  And, her constant bashing of American Idol, which gave her exposure and praise from judges, but not the voting viewers (since she didn't win) is out of line.  Her celebrity status was a quirk and without Idol's exposure, she'd still be plugging along in Chicago going nowhere fast.  He ungrateful arrogance isn't setting a very positive role model for young mpressionable children. 

4) Rosie O'Donnell's latest rant is out of line.  I guess since her fewd with Trump has fizzled, now she's going after American Idol.  O'Donnell isn't happy unless she's ranting about someone or something.  Someone should shut her up.  

 

 

Isn't it rather ironic that indigenous tribes presumably pressured the NCAA about this traditional symbol, claiming it negatively portrayed them; and in turn, the NCAA caved in to this pandering, as well as the Board of Trustees at Illinois? If these tribes genuinely are concerned about their image, than what exactly are they doing constructively to improve living conditions for their own kind? Are they doing anything about the rampant illiteracy rates in their tribes? What about the alcohol and other substance abuse problems? If these tribes genuinely cared about the lives and image of their own, then they'd spend more time on such matters, which are more serious than a paleface white man dressed in Native American Costuming motivating fellow classmates at a school sporting event. It's not like Chief Illiniwek re-enacted an Indian scalping. I hope the alum withhold donations from Illinois for being so silly and yes, stupid!