Tolerance or Stupidity?

Image by Wonderlane via Flickr

In a statement released Friday night, Bloomberg said: "As I said last week, this proposed mosque and community center in Lower Manhattan is as important a test of the separation of church and state as we may see in our lifetime, and I applaud President Obama's clarion defense of the freedom of religion tonight."

Is the building of a mosque in the shadow of  Ground Zero a test of the defense of religious freedom or testing Americans citizens to see how stupid we are?

It is an insult to any American, let alone the families and memories of the innocent victims of religious intolerance known as Islam, to even suggest a Muslim mosque so close to Ground Zero.  Yet, we have not just a President but an entire party, the Democrats, who believe the "rights" of Muslims to build a mosque at that hallowed site is more important than the memories and ideals of the American way of life.This doesn't surprise me since President  Obama said he would stand with his Muslim brothers.

Vote these nuts out! Are you with me?

Government Intrusion or political illusion?

Image via Wikipedia

We vote. A judge makes a "ruling." A Constitution was beautifully conceived. A judge "interprets" it. All the matters is what the judge believes now.

Listen, I've been a student of the Bible for most of my life and one thing I have seen is that if you don't have some rules for interpretation, some set of guidelines for what is an acceptable form of interpretation, anything goes. If you take things out of context, ignore the cultural-historical background, impose your own presuppositions, you make the Bible appear to say almost anything.

Now, apply that same thinking to the Constitution and  laws, you can do whatever suits you. I am deeply afraid of people who "interpret" the constitution. This is usually judges. In California we voted and the majority, decided that marriage should be what it has been, between a man and a woman. The judge, "ruled" that it was unconstitutional and basic civil rights to gays and homosexuals would be denied if it was allowed to remain.

What "civil rights" are being denied to gays and homosexuals? No one is stopping them from voting. No one is denying them due process or equal protection as individuals. But, they are forcing those who hold to a different moral view to accept theirs and live as if it is absolute truth. See, my earlier post where people are being sued because they do not agree with gay and lesbian lifestyles.

Is this government intrusion or just the illusion that we live in a society where our vote counts?

Help for Teachers or Hurt for Education?

Image by The Library of Congress via Flickr

So the POTUS and the congress pushed through another bill aimed at helping teachers and other civil servants. Although I am an educator I am not sure if this bill is a good thing for education. The bill is aimed at saving teachers jobs and also jobs for police and firefighters. There is even money for Medicare that doesn't have to be spent on Medicare.

Washington, D.C. (Aug 10) – The U.S. House of Representatives closed out its emergency session today finalizing H.R. 1586 authorizing funding for states avoiding massive lay-offs this fall. Nearly, 140,000 educators risked being furloughed at the beginning of the school year if the bill was to fail.
The bill passed the House 247 to 161 with only one Republican voting in favor of the bill, and three Democrats voting against the bill.
The bill authorizes $16 billion for Medicaid funding and $10 billion for education all at the cost of reduction of food stamps for families in need.- WorldNewsVine

Enrollment has been declining in California for the last several years. My question is if we have less students shouldn't we have fewer teachers? If we don't need teachers yet "save" teachers' jobs isn't that a just a form of  welfare? That may seem harsh, but, if education is supposed to be about the students why would spend more on teachers if declining enrollment says we need less? And as a 21 year education vet one thing I know is that if "the the big wigs" can put money in the "general fund" and use it for pet special "projects" they will. Because if the money is not coming every year than it is only a band-aid on a severed limb. Saving teachers jobs just to save jobs does not automatically help student achievement. 

Perhaps someone is trying to buy votes.

No Tax Tuesday!

Image by Seven_Null7 via Flickr

How about a No Tax Tuesday, once a month?
Consumers don't pay taxes on purchases.
Businesses don't pay taxes on sales.
Employees don't have to pay income tax, State or Federal!
For one Tuesday a month you keep what you earn!

How about a visit to the gasoline pump? Nationwide we pay about 62 cents per gallon (cpg)of taxes. If you buy 10 gallon of gas that's about $6.20. In California it is more like 63.9 cents per gallon or $6.40. My family owns two vehicles and it takes more like 30 gallons to fill up which means about $20.00 in taxes. No Tax Tuesday means I pay about $20 less.

Now, I have two school aged children and it's back to school shopping time. Here in the formerly great state of California we pay 9.75% sales tax. So, for every $100 I actually only buy $90.25 of clothes. Spending $400 is not that hard for back to school stuff. The breakdown on $400 is $39 for the government and $361 for my children.

Now, if No Tax Tuesday includes my income for that day...well now we're talking. If I was only in the 25% tax bracket (state and federal) that would be $25 for every $100 dollars earned. If I make $200 a day that's $50.

So, if I save $20 on gas, $39 on clothes, and $50 on taxes that comes out to $109. Now, I can do a lot more for my family with that money than the government waste plans can do.

What about you? What do you think about a NO TAX TUESDAY?

Gas Taxes Info
http://www.californiagasprices.com/Tax_Info.aspx

The United States of America or The Americas

Image by Bearman2007 via Flickr

The other day I read a comment to a article in my local newspaper about immigration deform, opps I mean immigration reform. Well, at first I just sort of shrugged it off as another post by someone geographically challenged. But, the more I thought about it, the more it sort of irritated me.

What my geographically challenged neighbor had said (in a "nut" shell) was that Mexico was part of the Americas too. You know that great country called "The Americas." This was of course his argument to why people crossing the border should be allowed to cross at will.

As an educator for the past 21 years in the Southern California area I have a few observations that may shed some light on the struggle for some people to understand why illegal is not legal and why open  borders are like none barred windows in South Central LA. 

First, I have always been aware that many students are not taught, by my fellow educators, geography. Frighteningly, by shear ignorance many grow up not knowing how many states there are, what continent we live on and what other countries are around the USA. 

Second, there has been something called "multiculturalism" taught in most schools, especially in Southern California. The whole idea is to respect other cultures and allow students to feel like their culture has value and that stuff. My observation: we have created "culturally aware" illiterates. 

Third, when the young impressionable minds get to high school they are bombarded by revisionist teachers who teach their version of US History. When the young mind is hit with this lethal combo of multiculturalism and  usually socialist revisionist crap they grow up thinking that America is the great evil and since people have "migrating" back and forth across the border for centuries borders and not real.

The truth is Canada borders the United States of America to the north (on the continent) and Mexico to the south. Mexico is a separate sovereign country. Mexico did not want the southwest. When the governor of   California asked Mexico if they wanted to govern California, Mexico said no.

There is a border. Mexico has northern and southern borders. Illegal is not legal no matter if one is ignorant or not.