rehmwa 2
"The illiteracy level of our children are appalling" -- President Bush speech transcript
By
skydivexxl, in The Bonfire
Recommended Posts
quade 4
Quote
That's why I like to check the following site from time to time. It keeps a record of press releases and clippings that mysteriously get altered shortly after being released.
http://www.memoryhole.org
Yeah, but it is the White House and it was the 2003 State of the Union Adress we were talking about.
You'd think stuff like that you wouldn't have to try to hide.
I think them trying to hide it, scrub it, remove it from the web site speaks volumes as to the actual honesty of the Administration.
Sad.
quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver
The World's Most Boring Skydiver
base311 0
Since you're talking about education... and ways to fix it (fix as in restore/cure - not as to make firm, stable, or stationary), check out this mind-boggling bit of dim-witted poly-correctivity:
http://www.ajc.com/metro/content/metro/0104/29curriculum.html
I'm posting a transcript here as this will be moved to pay-only status after a few days. Maybe you don't care to have this much bandwidth wasted, but I guess it's better than a bunch of boobie pics.
_____begin____
Georgia may shun 'evolution' in schools
Revised curriculum plan outrages science teachers
By MARY MacDONALD
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Georgia students could graduate from high school without learning much about evolution, and may never even hear the word uttered in class.
New middle and high school science standards proposed by state Schools Superintendent Kathy Cox strike references to "evolution" and replace them with the term "biological changes over time," a revision critics say will further weaken learning in a critical subject.
Outraged teachers already have told the state it is undercutting the science education of young Georgians.
"Just like any major issue people need to deal with, you need to know the facts," said David Bechler, head of the biology department at Valdosta State University. A member of the committee that worked on the biology standards, Bechler said he was stunned to learn that evolution was not in the final proposal.
"Whether you believe in creationism or not, evolution should be known and understood by the public," he argued.
Cox declined requests for an interview on the issue. A spokesman issued a statement Wednesday that said: "The discussion of evolution is an age-old debate and it is clear that there are those in Georgia who are passionate on both sides of the issue -- we want to hear from all of them."
Cox, a Republican elected to the state's top public school position in 2002, addressed the issue briefly in a public debate during the campaign. The candidates were asked about a school dispute in Cobb County over evolution and Bible-based teachings on creation.
Cox responded: "It was a good thing for parents and the community to stand up and say we want our children exposed to this [creationism] idea as well. . . . I'd leave the state out of it and I would make sure teachers were well prepared to deal with competing theories."
Gateway course
Biology is a gateway course to future studies of the life sciences. And scientists consider evolution the basis for biology, a scientific explanation for the gradual process that has resulted in the diversity of living things.
If the state does not require teachers to cover evolution thoroughly, only the most politically secure teachers will attempt to do so, said Wes McCoy, a 26-year biology teacher at North Cobb High School. Less experienced teachers will take their cue from the state requirements, he said.
"They're either going to tread very lightly or they're going to ignore it," McCoy said. "Students will be learning some of the components of evolution. They're going to be missing how that integrates with the rest of biology. They may not understand how evolution explains the antibiotic resistance in bacteria."
The state curriculum does not preclude an individual public school system from taking a deeper approach to evolution, or any other topic. And the proposed change would not require school systems to buy new textbooks that omit the word.
But Georgia's curriculum exam, the CRCT, will be rewritten to align with the new curriculum. And the state exam is the basis for federal evaluation, which encourages schools and teachers to focus on teaching the material that will be tested.
A year in the works
The revision of Georgia's curriculum began more than a year ago as an attempt to strengthen the performance of students by requiring greater depth on essential topics. The new curriculum will replace standards adopted in 1984 that have been criticized by many educators as shallow. The state Board of Education is expected to vote on the revised curriculum in May.
The Georgia Department of Education based its biology curriculum on national standards put forth by a respected source, the American Association for the Advancement of Science. But while the state copied most of the national standards, it deleted much of the section that covers the origin of living things.
A committee of science teachers, college professors and curriculum experts was involved in reviewing the proposal. The state did not specify why the references to evolution were removed, and by whom, even to educators involved in the process.
Terrie Kielborn, a middle school science teacher in Paulding County who was on the committee, recalled that Stephen Pruitt, the state's curriculum specialist for science, told the panel not to include the word evolution.
"We were pretty much told not to put it in there," Kielborn said. The rationale was community reaction, she said.
"When you say the word evolution, people automatically, whatever age they are, think of the man-monkey thing," Kielborn said.
Pruitt could not be reached Wednesday for comment.
Cox released the state's proposed new curriculum on Jan. 12 and invited comments on all subject areas for the next three months from parents, teachers and students. She described the new curriculum as world-class and said it provides clear direction to teachers for the first time on what will be expected of students.
Backlash a result
The biology revision was eagerly awaited by a strongly organized network of scientists, university professors and classroom teachers. Several teachers and professors say they are pleased the state adopted large sections of the national standards, which include a strengthened explanation of the nature of science, the function and structure of cells and genetics.
But the treatment of evolution prompted a backlash. More than 600 Georgians, including professors and teachers, by Wednesday had signed an online petition challenging the curriculum as misguided.
If Georgia approves the revised curriculum, the state will be among six that avoid the word "evolution" in science teaching, according to the National Center for Science Education, a nonprofit organization that advocates for evolution instruction.
Many other states, including North Carolina and South Carolina, have adopted national standards that cover evolution in detail.
The word "evolution" itself is important because it is a scientific term, said Sarah Pallas, an associate professor of biology at Georgia State University. "Students need to know the language of science," she said. "They don't need to know euphemisms. It's just silly."
The proposed changes in the Georgia curriculum would leave students with tremendous gaps when they reach college, Pallas said.
"The students from other states always perform better in my classes, and that's a real indictment of the state educational system," the professor said. "North Carolina, another very conservative state, adopted all of the benchmarks. If they can do it in North Carolina, why can't Georgia do it?"
Debate over how and whether to teach evolution has divided communities and states for years.
In metro Atlanta, the Cobb County school system became the center of national attention in 2002 after it placed disclaimers about evolution in science textbooks and adopted a policy that could have allowed discussion of alternate views in science class.
The Cobb superintendent defused the dispute by issuing guidelines for teachers that told them to stick to the state curriculum.
_______________
In the words of Sheriff Buford T. Justice, "What the hell is the world comin' to?"
-Gardner
http://www.ajc.com/metro/content/metro/0104/29curriculum.html
I'm posting a transcript here as this will be moved to pay-only status after a few days. Maybe you don't care to have this much bandwidth wasted, but I guess it's better than a bunch of boobie pics.
_____begin____
Georgia may shun 'evolution' in schools
Revised curriculum plan outrages science teachers
By MARY MacDONALD
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Georgia students could graduate from high school without learning much about evolution, and may never even hear the word uttered in class.
New middle and high school science standards proposed by state Schools Superintendent Kathy Cox strike references to "evolution" and replace them with the term "biological changes over time," a revision critics say will further weaken learning in a critical subject.
Outraged teachers already have told the state it is undercutting the science education of young Georgians.
"Just like any major issue people need to deal with, you need to know the facts," said David Bechler, head of the biology department at Valdosta State University. A member of the committee that worked on the biology standards, Bechler said he was stunned to learn that evolution was not in the final proposal.
"Whether you believe in creationism or not, evolution should be known and understood by the public," he argued.
Cox declined requests for an interview on the issue. A spokesman issued a statement Wednesday that said: "The discussion of evolution is an age-old debate and it is clear that there are those in Georgia who are passionate on both sides of the issue -- we want to hear from all of them."
Cox, a Republican elected to the state's top public school position in 2002, addressed the issue briefly in a public debate during the campaign. The candidates were asked about a school dispute in Cobb County over evolution and Bible-based teachings on creation.
Cox responded: "It was a good thing for parents and the community to stand up and say we want our children exposed to this [creationism] idea as well. . . . I'd leave the state out of it and I would make sure teachers were well prepared to deal with competing theories."
Gateway course
Biology is a gateway course to future studies of the life sciences. And scientists consider evolution the basis for biology, a scientific explanation for the gradual process that has resulted in the diversity of living things.
If the state does not require teachers to cover evolution thoroughly, only the most politically secure teachers will attempt to do so, said Wes McCoy, a 26-year biology teacher at North Cobb High School. Less experienced teachers will take their cue from the state requirements, he said.
"They're either going to tread very lightly or they're going to ignore it," McCoy said. "Students will be learning some of the components of evolution. They're going to be missing how that integrates with the rest of biology. They may not understand how evolution explains the antibiotic resistance in bacteria."
The state curriculum does not preclude an individual public school system from taking a deeper approach to evolution, or any other topic. And the proposed change would not require school systems to buy new textbooks that omit the word.
But Georgia's curriculum exam, the CRCT, will be rewritten to align with the new curriculum. And the state exam is the basis for federal evaluation, which encourages schools and teachers to focus on teaching the material that will be tested.
A year in the works
The revision of Georgia's curriculum began more than a year ago as an attempt to strengthen the performance of students by requiring greater depth on essential topics. The new curriculum will replace standards adopted in 1984 that have been criticized by many educators as shallow. The state Board of Education is expected to vote on the revised curriculum in May.
The Georgia Department of Education based its biology curriculum on national standards put forth by a respected source, the American Association for the Advancement of Science. But while the state copied most of the national standards, it deleted much of the section that covers the origin of living things.
A committee of science teachers, college professors and curriculum experts was involved in reviewing the proposal. The state did not specify why the references to evolution were removed, and by whom, even to educators involved in the process.
Terrie Kielborn, a middle school science teacher in Paulding County who was on the committee, recalled that Stephen Pruitt, the state's curriculum specialist for science, told the panel not to include the word evolution.
"We were pretty much told not to put it in there," Kielborn said. The rationale was community reaction, she said.
"When you say the word evolution, people automatically, whatever age they are, think of the man-monkey thing," Kielborn said.
Pruitt could not be reached Wednesday for comment.
Cox released the state's proposed new curriculum on Jan. 12 and invited comments on all subject areas for the next three months from parents, teachers and students. She described the new curriculum as world-class and said it provides clear direction to teachers for the first time on what will be expected of students.
Backlash a result
The biology revision was eagerly awaited by a strongly organized network of scientists, university professors and classroom teachers. Several teachers and professors say they are pleased the state adopted large sections of the national standards, which include a strengthened explanation of the nature of science, the function and structure of cells and genetics.
But the treatment of evolution prompted a backlash. More than 600 Georgians, including professors and teachers, by Wednesday had signed an online petition challenging the curriculum as misguided.
If Georgia approves the revised curriculum, the state will be among six that avoid the word "evolution" in science teaching, according to the National Center for Science Education, a nonprofit organization that advocates for evolution instruction.
Many other states, including North Carolina and South Carolina, have adopted national standards that cover evolution in detail.
The word "evolution" itself is important because it is a scientific term, said Sarah Pallas, an associate professor of biology at Georgia State University. "Students need to know the language of science," she said. "They don't need to know euphemisms. It's just silly."
The proposed changes in the Georgia curriculum would leave students with tremendous gaps when they reach college, Pallas said.
"The students from other states always perform better in my classes, and that's a real indictment of the state educational system," the professor said. "North Carolina, another very conservative state, adopted all of the benchmarks. If they can do it in North Carolina, why can't Georgia do it?"
Debate over how and whether to teach evolution has divided communities and states for years.
In metro Atlanta, the Cobb County school system became the center of national attention in 2002 after it placed disclaimers about evolution in science textbooks and adopted a policy that could have allowed discussion of alternate views in science class.
The Cobb superintendent defused the dispute by issuing guidelines for teachers that told them to stick to the state curriculum.
_______________
In the words of Sheriff Buford T. Justice, "What the hell is the world comin' to?"
-Gardner
turtlespeed 226
QuoteThanks Kev, but how about something less subjective and closer to where we can affect it?
Or, I'd challenge you to quanitify your metric so we can actually use it for something other than just 'gut-feel'.
Edit: Turtlespeed - you forget, that prejudging someone and placing them in one size fits all buckets is what liberals do best. Or else how can you HELP that pathetic wretch who is, oh so less intelligent than the controlling aristocratic leadership. You don't need to test that teacher - the democrats already know he's obviously not qualified? Man, if I ever teach Physics, I better not volunteer to coach football.
You mean we aren't allowed to stereotype? You know you are right, that would be teachist. In some regaurds I am agreeing that there are enough tests, so iliminate the irrelevant ones, the ones that are testing to lower levels, and save our tax money that way, OR, simply test the teachers more on their abilty to teach.
I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun
kallend 2,105
QuoteQuote
You mean we aren't allowed to stereotype? You know you are right, that would be teachist. In some regaurds I am agreeing that there are enough tests, so iliminate the irrelevant ones, the ones that are testing to lower levels, and save our tax money that way, OR, simply test the teachers more on their abilty to teach.
Your teachers didn't appear to test your ability to spell....
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
SkyDekker 1,465
QuoteI think them trying to hide it, scrub it, remove it from the web site speaks volumes as to the actual honesty of the Administration.
Off course this administration is honest, that has always been without any doubt. It is impossible that the US administration lies to its citizens, specially one led by GWB.
There has to be an obvious reason that the 2003 State of the union Adress is off line and the president does not have to share it with you. There is obviously some top secret information that has led to this course of action.
turtlespeed 226
>>>Cox responded: "It was a good thing for parents and the community to stand up and say we want our children exposed to this [creationism] idea as well. . . . I'd leave the state out of it and I would make sure teachers were well prepared to deal with competing theories." <<<
OK, so both should be taught then, correct?
Who would be responsible for teaching "this [creationism] idea" then.
Well we cant do that!!! It might lead to prayer.
OK, so both should be taught then, correct?
Who would be responsible for teaching "this [creationism] idea" then.
Well we cant do that!!! It might lead to prayer.
I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun
kallend 2,105
QuoteMan, if I ever teach Physics, I better not volunteer to coach football.
This was a real example from a school district here in Illinois. They couldn't afford to hire a physics teacher, so they asked the coach to do it. Illinois is at or near the bottom of the list in state support for public schools, so the school quality is very dependent on local property taxes, which in turn means that poor communities have terrible schools.
Apparently football was more important.
...
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
turtlespeed 226
Quote
Your teachers didn't appear to test your ability to spell.
Actually, they did, but it is my typing they didn't test, since I never took that class, that would be irrelevant as well.
Ever notice how, if there is a lack of true argument, the only recourse to be had is a personal scrutiny of ones ability to spell, or type?
I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun
JDBoston 0
God, that's just fucking sick. These people are IDIOTS. What's next - stop teaching kids about gravity? What a crock of shit.
What I want to know is: what are the other 5 states that I should never attempt to raise kids in?
Joe
What I want to know is: what are the other 5 states that I should never attempt to raise kids in?
Joe
kallend 2,105
So, how do you feel about the White House purging the 2003 State of the Union address from its web site?
...
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
turtlespeed 226
Quote
So, how do you feel about the White House purging the 2003 State of the Union address from its web site?
Haven't looked into it.
Believe me when I say that I am not a Bush Lackie - There are a lot of undesireable things that he has done and continues to do, but he is the better of the two choices between himself and Algore. Not unlike the fact that he is the better choice between the nine main candidates running for the opportunity to oppose him in the up coming election.
I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun
base311 0
Well, I just hit the National Center for Science Education's website and found this (though it doesn't address your question entirely):
Missouri House Bill
Also found this:
Ohio
I'll spend a little more time and figure them all out and come back to update when I have less to do; there isn't an apparent handy list of the rogue states.
Gardner
P.S. just ran across this from Press Background:
"Attempts to change the role of evolution in science standards, as happened in Kansas in 1999. Some attempts are more successful than others. In recent years, there was a significant amount of opposition (by the public and/or state Board of Education members) to inclusion of evolution in science education standards in: Michigan, Illinois, Arizona, Texas, Alabama, New Mexico, Nebraska, Kansas, Idaho and Kentucky, among others."
Missouri House Bill
Also found this:
Ohio
I'll spend a little more time and figure them all out and come back to update when I have less to do; there isn't an apparent handy list of the rogue states.
Gardner
P.S. just ran across this from Press Background:
"Attempts to change the role of evolution in science standards, as happened in Kansas in 1999. Some attempts are more successful than others. In recent years, there was a significant amount of opposition (by the public and/or state Board of Education members) to inclusion of evolution in science education standards in: Michigan, Illinois, Arizona, Texas, Alabama, New Mexico, Nebraska, Kansas, Idaho and Kentucky, among others."
JDBoston 0
This stuff honestly makes me sick to my stomach.
The more this kind of thing happens, the more jobs we will lose, and the less of a leader the US will be - in ANYTHING.
Why are people so gullible and stupid? It's so frustrating. Intelligent Design cannot be tested and PROVEN WRONG, therefore it is NOT science. Meaning: it makes assumptions that cannot be proven or disproven.
Real scientists laugh at it. It's a fucking joke, and it's absolutely flat-out CRIMINAL to present it to impressionable kids as anything but.
Can you tell I have strong feelings about this?
Joe
The more this kind of thing happens, the more jobs we will lose, and the less of a leader the US will be - in ANYTHING.
Why are people so gullible and stupid? It's so frustrating. Intelligent Design cannot be tested and PROVEN WRONG, therefore it is NOT science. Meaning: it makes assumptions that cannot be proven or disproven.
Real scientists laugh at it. It's a fucking joke, and it's absolutely flat-out CRIMINAL to present it to impressionable kids as anything but.
Can you tell I have strong feelings about this?
Joe
rehmwa 2
QuoteYour teachers didn't appear to test your ability to spell.
You weren't reading - obviously, the teacher's weren't tested on their ability to teach spelling to the students that were taught spelling by that teacher, who, by the way wasn't well tested on his teaching spelling skills
...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants
Why do I have the feeling that someone who has spent a good portion of his life teaching students in a post-secondary education, at one of the top schools in the country, would have a better handle on how to evaluate students than you or the President?
We have students here in my school that are fantastic, and incredibly smart. However, due to poor testing their grades do not reflect that. I just had to let one of my students go this week - he spent more time in school and after-hours than ANY one else in school, yet due to his poor testing and mandates associate with being an accredited college and Title IV funding, we had to let him go.
We have students here in my school that are fantastic, and incredibly smart. However, due to poor testing their grades do not reflect that. I just had to let one of my students go this week - he spent more time in school and after-hours than ANY one else in school, yet due to his poor testing and mandates associate with being an accredited college and Title IV funding, we had to let him go.
_________________________________________
you can burn the land and boil the sea, but you can't take the sky from me....
I WILL fly again.....
you can burn the land and boil the sea, but you can't take the sky from me....
I WILL fly again.....
rehmwa 2
QuoteI just had to let one of my students go this week - he spent more time in school and after-hours than ANY one else in school, yet due to his poor testing and mandates associate with being an accredited college and Title IV funding, we had to let him go.
There is a tough one. Was he really super bright, or did you just admire his study ethic? We have people here at work that put in 16 hour days, but they don't necessarily get anything done (as I'm surfing DZ.com - oh the irony). Or did he have test anxiety? Or was he not versed on the test matter?
"Maybe there's nothing wrong with you, skydiving is not your sport, take up golf" - maybe this student was in the wrong major....... Sorry about the student anyway, it's tough to admire someone and see them lose, especially when they are really trying.
...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants
wmw999 2,517
QuoteThere's plenty of testing already, without adding an extra layer. Get rid of the football coach physics teacher and you won't need the extra test.
If you read the "does anybody care" thread, you'll hear some of the teachers talking about teaching to the test.
As a parent, I hated having 6 weeks of the year devoted to making sure that the kids had the necessary skills to pass the test. This was an excellent school district, so it wasn't a matter of having to catch up or make sure he could read (it's the same affluent school district with NASA).
The one-size-fits-all answer isn't testing; that might help to ensure some basic skills, but when students come in with such widely divergent levels of preparation, it's really really hard to say that the teachers of some are incompetent.
Yes, there are incompetent teachers out there. But ask the teacher whose kids all come in knowing numbers, colors, and the alphabet, and then the teacher whose kids come in knowing none of them, just how easy it is to prepare them to read.
And the districts where the kids are ill-prepared probably pay less, so that they don't get the more-skilled teachers they need.
I don't have a solution, but it's not an easy problem that can be solved with the simple application of a test. Unless there is a willingness to fund schools for longer for the less-prepared kids. Yes, it's the parents' responsibility to prepare their kids. But they don't always. So then the school gets to play catchup, because a well-educated population is in the best interests of the country as a whole.
Wendy W.
There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)
QuoteWell, I just hit the National Center for Science Education's website and found this (though it doesn't address your question entirely):
Missouri House Bill
Also found this:
Ohio
I'll spend a little more time and figure them all out and come back to update when I have less to do; there isn't an apparent handy list of the rogue states.
Gardner
P.S. just ran across this from Press Background:
"Attempts to change the role of evolution in science standards, as happened in Kansas in 1999. Some attempts are more successful than others. In recent years, there was a significant amount of opposition (by the public and/or state Board of Education members) to inclusion of evolution in science education standards in: Michigan, Illinois, Arizona, Texas, Alabama, New Mexico, Nebraska, Kansas, Idaho and Kentucky, among others."
This might interest you as a good writeup that debunks the "evolution is only a theory" myth:
http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-evolutiontheory.htm
turtlespeed 226
Yes, and like the creation theory, we will probably never know in our LIFE time what the actual truth is.
The fact remains that there is noone around today that was there when it al started and thus we have no documentation of the events leading up to evolution, nor do we have anyone that was around a few thousand years ago to document Creation. One thing that is a fact however, there is a far older book that details Creation, while we infact have no book as old as this detailing evolution.
The fact remains that there is noone around today that was there when it al started and thus we have no documentation of the events leading up to evolution, nor do we have anyone that was around a few thousand years ago to document Creation. One thing that is a fact however, there is a far older book that details Creation, while we infact have no book as old as this detailing evolution.
I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun
QuoteYes, and like the creation theory, we will probably never know in our LIFE time what the actual truth is.
The fact remains that there is noone around today that was there when it al started and thus we have no documentation of the events leading up to evolution, nor do we have anyone that was around a few thousand years ago to document Creation. One thing that is a fact however, there is a far older book that details Creation, while we infact have no book as old as this detailing evolution.
Your argument is so full of holes it's practically collapsing in on itself in a gigantic black-hole of bullshit.
You're saying that the relative validity of an argument that is described in a book can be determined by how old the book is? i.e. if it's an older book it must be more valid? That is absolutely absurd.
Or, I'd challenge you to quanitify your metric so we can actually use it for something other than just 'gut-feel'.
Edit: Turtlespeed - you forget, that prejudging someone and placing them in one size fits all buckets is what liberals do best. Or else how can you HELP that pathetic wretch who is, oh so less intelligent than the controlling aristocratic leadership. You don't need to test that teacher - the democrats already know he's obviously not qualified? Man, if I ever teach Physics, I better not volunteer to coach football.
...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites