Milwaukee radio host smeared "greedy, overpaid unionized schoolteacher[s]" who talk about global warming
SUMMARY: On his Milwaukee radio talk show, Mark Belling referred to schoolteachers who talk to their students about global warming as "idiot union teacher[s]," "liberal unionized hack[s]," "greedy, overpaid unionized schoolteacher[s]," and "fruitcake[s]."
During the August 12 broadcast of Milwaukee radio station WISN's The Mark Belling Late Afternoon Show, host Mark Belling repeatedly disparaged schoolteachers who talk to their students about global warming, referring to them as "idiot union teacher[s]," "liberal unionized hack[s]," "greedy, overpaid unionized schoolteacher[s]," and "fruitcake[s]."
While discussing global warming, Belling stated that "school kids" are "victims": "They go into these classrooms, and they have their idiot union teacher standing up in front of them giving them all this crapola about global warming."
Belling went on to say that students "are presuming that they don't have an ideological kook in front of them. They presume that they have a committed educator who is presenting facts, rather than some liberal unionized hack that's presenting a pile of garbage that's being tossed out there by a failed politician." Belling continued: "So, these kids are going to end up -- when they realize that global warming was all a scam, and they learned it -- you know, they learned it in school, they so deeply believed -- they're gonna end up with an incredible distrust of everything. That's not all bad. Any time we can break someone's trust in a greedy, overpaid unionized schoolteacher, that's a good thing rather than a bad thing."
Belling further stated: "You know what a fruitcake your teacher is? Your teacher's been voting for one left-wing hack after another after another after another. The only thing that your teacher does his entire summer is take a look at his pension statement to watch -- to figure out how much money he's gonna make when he gets to retire when he's 55 years old."
Belling is the "afternoon drive time host on News/Talk 1130 WISN-AM" in Milwaukee, owned by Clear Channel Communications, and is listed as one of Talkers Magazine's "Heavy Hundred 2008." According to his website, Belling "is a frequent guest host" for nationally syndicated radio host Rush Limbaugh.
From the August 12 edition of News/Talk 1130 WISN-AM's The Mark Belling Late Afternoon Show:
BELLING: So the people who want to believe so badly that somehow we're burning the planet up, and we're clearly -- "See, look at this. Twenty-two -- we've never had anything like this. Twenty-two days of -- " Do you think that they even are aware that up here in the upper Midwest, we've been freezing our butts off all summer? No. They don't know that.
Now, I do believe that the abs-- that the leaders of the global warming movement have figured out that there's something wrong with their thesis. That's why they've changed -- and I was one of the first to pick up on this -- that's why they've changed the language to "climate change." Now, anything that changes -- if we -- you know, if it -- sunny one day and rains the next, somehow it's man's fault. Planet cools off, man is doing it; planet warms up, man is doing it; planet does nothing, man is doing it. Everything is going to be because of human activity, so they're gradually repositioning themselves away from this global warming as every successive year goes by that shows no increase in warming whatsoever.
Here are the people that are the victims of this. Do you know who the victims are? You don't. Yes, school kids. The absolute most adamant people on global warming are kids. They go into these classrooms, and they have their idiot union teacher standing up in front of them giving them all this crapola about global warming. They show them the stupid Al Gore movie that shows the oceans overrunning the beach in Miami, which -- they see all of this stuff, and they therefore presume that their teacher's telling them the truth.
They've learned things in school. Now, go back to when you were in school. "George Washington was the president. The North beat the South in the Civil War." You learn certain things. You just presume that what they're telling you is true, and by and large, it was true. You didn't see any particular reason why the teacher would lie to you. Nine times seven equals seven-- 63. Well, they turned out that they were right about that. So these kids are presuming that what they're getting is gospel. They are presuming that they don't have an ideological kook in front of them. They presume that they have a committed educator who is presenting facts, rather than some liberal unionized hack that's presenting a pile of garbage that's being tossed out there by a failed politician.
So, these kids are going to end up -- when they realize that global warming was all a scam, and they learned it -- you know, they learned it in school, they so deeply believed -- they're gonna end up with an incredible distrust of everything. That's not all bad. Any time we can break someone's trust in a greedy, overpaid unionized schoolteacher, that's a good thing rather than a bad thing.
Nonetheless, it's going to make people question everything that they learned in the world. Talk to some of these kids about global warming, and you try to give them the other side, and they just can't -- they -- you know, they can't process it. "Well, but my teacher said." Yeah, your teacher. You know what a fruitcake your teacher is? Your teacher's been voting for one left-wing hack after another after another after another. The only thing that your teacher does his entire summer is take a look at his pension statement to watch -- to figure out how much money he's gonna make when he gets to retire when he's 55 years old. You're listening to this guy and telling you what's happening to the planet?
I met a woman in high school too. One night, she went out into the street and yelled at sandsshistybuff for star gazing. He's never been the same. He wandered around in a daze, listening to silly radio hosts whose only talent comes by denying basic facts and name calling.
Oddly enough, that's just what the right wing was looking for, so a number of strange people bankrolled the right wing attack machine and gave employment to the wretched refuse on our teaming shores. The rest is history.
do you mean teeming shores.
might try getting an education, but at a private school.
btw, when is the last time you saw any stars to gaze at. too much light pollution.
And I suppose you have some equally lame and nonsensical excuse for all your fragmented sentences? I couldn't care less about your writing style, but if correcting someone's spelling is your only rebuttal, then you should take the plank out of your own eye first.
if i hit the cap key, or the question mark key, my computer throws me for a loop
Sands, I've got the webcam on, and I think I see your problem.The basement's pretty damp, and you may have a short.Throw some of those dessicant packs on the floor.
Oh, and MOm says dinner's almost ready, and pick up your 1920s comic books.
Plus, one should not end a sentence in a preposition, although the practice is being more widely accepted.
CORRECTION: When was the last time you saw any stars (at which) to gaze?
"might try getting an education, but at a private school."
Careful -- talk about going to a private school and conservatives might brand you an elitist.
But only if you're a liberal/progressive who goes to a private school.
IOKIYAR
"No -- I am just a lazy, overpaid, left-leaning English teacher."
I hope you're not one of those unionized teachers who is trying to teach our children about global warming using the liberal lies that Gore pushes. You know, the ones that are illegal to use in the British school system because of the lies and fearmongering. Actually, you better not be teaching or even mentioning global warming in english class what-so-ever. But, being that you are a left-leaner, I suspect you do claim factuality in a subject you know only what Gore tells you to know. That's the trouble with today's school system...too many teachers teaching subjects they know NOTHING about. But, those are probably just the unionized ones. All the rest of the teachers have to work for a living.
Leave teaching global warming to those who actually KNOW what they're talking about. We don't need HS teachers teaching subjects they learn from hacks and misinformants. You can teach your own kids that bunk, if you want, but don't teach it to anyone else. Not on MY dime, anyway.
"Leave teaching global warming to those who actually KNOW what they're talking about."
Uh, right... like dumbass talk radio hosts such as this one and Limbaugh? I'd like to see their credentials and their degrees in climatology while we're at it.
Whatever you say, Phil... keep on sucking up that koolaid.
Well, I believe the science and even if the data is misunderstood, reducing fuel consumption and reducing the amount of pollution poured into our air is only a good thing.
What do you stand to lose if kids learn about global warming? Nothing.
What do you stand to gain if kids aren't taught the science of global warming? Nothing.
"What do you stand to lose if kids learn about global warming? Nothing."
What do you stand to lose if you teach your kids math like this; 1+1=4 or 3/4= .290 What is lost is the truth and facts. If you want to teach your kids falsehoods and myths, then teach them at home. Let them read mmfa articles. If you want to teach them facts and truths, then a HS teacher is not the source to go to. I do not want some left wing zealot with an agenda teaching my kids anything about global warming. If they are going to learn about it, I want it taught by impartial authorities who don't have an agenda.
"What do you stand to gain if kids aren't taught the science of global warming? Nothing."
What did you learn in school about global warming? How much do you know about it now? Perhaps they don't need to learn about it in school. Perhaps that time could be better spent teaching them math/english/history.
"I believe the science and even if the data is misunderstood,"
That's what makes you a good liberal. You will believe whatever they tell you, no matter what it is...as long as they tell you to believe it, you will. When you get a better grip on reality and learn a little about this subject why don't you rejoin us. Maybe, if you start thinking for yourself you might find some more truths to the matter. Or, just go back to HS and let the unionized teachers continue telling you what to think. It doesn't matter if it's right or wrong, as long as you are told to believe it, you will.
Is that how you make other decisions in your life? Wow, what a good liberal you are.
This douchebag is right. After I'm done undoing whatever (crackhead-anti-authority-Oakland-Raiders-fanatic-second-hand-weed-smoking-Hannah-Montana-worshipping-X-box-imagination-drained-self-baby-sitting-bad-diet-child-smoking-health) issues and related notions that might afflict my students, nothing validates my self-worth or justifies my huge teacher's salary like talking to the kids about GLOBAL WARMING despite it not being a part of my state's adopted curriculum at all.
I'm sick of so-called conservatives opining on what teachers are doing "politically" when they never take the time to visit their kids' schools. It needs to be said: most teachers worth their salt are too busy undoing the damage done at home by cognitively negligent parents to waste time "putting condoms on cucumbers" or "talking about global warming" or "telling Johnny that Susie has two mothers and that's okay". One teacher does something deemed politically incorrect or politically correct and all of a sudden every teacher is doing this or that and "political correctness is out of control".
I get really tired of the same old "know it all" baloney that comes from people out of their element in a discipline (i.e. "Left field") in the teaching world. I teach physical sciences- you know- the world of Newton, Lord Kelvin, and so on as opposed the soft sciences - e.g. Oprah and Dr. Phil..
It really irks me that this same sort of "teaching" from the pre-programmed left academics who think because they are teachers that they know everything on every subject. Al Gore is an example of this, although he's hardly a teacher.
I'd challenge Al Gore to explain something within his so called "field" of global warming expertise, from just a scientific principle standpoint to see if he knows his stuff. Let's see if he can expoound on something relevant to global warming such as the Osanger reciprocal relationship applied to the second law of thermodynamics.
And before all you "enlightened eltists" go googling and come back with your own delusional version of your understanding of it, Lars Osanger won the Nobel prize in the 1960's for this work. It involves a lot of statistical mechanics and very little dialogue , so before you spout off, you should brush up on your numerical methods of analysis and integral calculus first. I'm sure all you liberal sociologists and englsh teachers will have no problem with it. lol Stick with being the spelling and grammar cops where you're ahead of the game.
did you proof read your own text before you clicked the post button? LOL
I believe the Brits use a phrase that goes like this- "hoisted by their own petard"...
What the heck?? Why in the world would I teach about global warming in English class? Have you ever been in an English classroom? I have enough to do to try to teach critical reading and strong writing skills to students. I can not read the tone of your post. My first assumption was that you are trying to be funny? If not, I feel sorry for your children's teachers. Do you dictate their curriculum?
Damn it, Jim, I'm an English teacher, not a scientist.
Sands -- when you say "Do no confuse me with Science" are you suggesting that you are literally -- physically -- not the same person? Or are you differentiating between "Sands" and your alter egos? I mean, "Sands", "History", "Science", "Colonel", "Archie" (sic) . . . Isn't there a term for this kind of identity confusion?
Oh -- and glad that you got that pesky shift key to work at least part of the time.
How dare teachers expect a living wage, health care and a pension in return for dedicating their careers to educating our children and providing our nation with a literate workforce from which American enterprise and capitalism profits and thrives.
They’ve got a lot of nerve, don’t they?might try getting an education, but at a private school.
Like it would matter. The U.S. would still be , on average, dumber than many European countries with their socialized public education.
"Global Climate Change is real. High School teachers mostly know this,"
Oh? And, which direction is the change going now? Perhaps your favorite HS teacher ought to stick to teaching spelling and grammar. Maybe you ought to have them teach PE, and get some of these porky kids active. I guess that would be asking too much from a teacher, huh? Provide an education AND physical fitness.
Either way, HS teachers are NOT qualified to teach anything about global warming. Any more than I'm qualified to build a space ship. Leave teaching global warming to experts not opinionated, unionized misinformants.
unionized misinformants.
I think there are some high school issues you still have to work through.
I don't have any issues with HS. I did ok (b- average). They did not teach anything about global warming, yet I know as much about it as the next guy. And, anything I don't know is only a few keystrokes away.
What do you have against HS where you want social studies/ english lit/ music classes to be denied a student so they have the chance to study about global warming? I guess it isn't ME who has the "issues" with HS. It is YOU who wants english lit or music classes denied to a deserving student so they can learn something that is readily available on any computer.
You are a typical liberal. You want students to learn your moral compass and not learn basic knowledge, like music or english lit or history.
"Is this because you know that you're dead wrong about global warming and any competent scientist--even those with only a BA or a BS--can show this?"
What am I dead wrong about?? You didn't answer the question, neither has any other liberal at this site. Are you saying I'm dead wrong for asking a simple global warming question? Please provide some details as to which direction the global warming process is going and please provide proof that it isn't cyclical (sp?). Are you incapable of answering? Get some help from your local HS teacher and ask.
Hurray for Mark Belling!
Teachers are telling our kids that we are to blame for global warming and that we’re killing the polar bears. That’s total rubbish and it’s not the business of the teachers to sell a leftwing agenda to our kids.
I personally doubt global warming in the first place (look at this summer, one of the mildest.) Also, where were all the Hurricanes last season?
secondly, the assertion that global warming is manmade is poppycock until it is proven. (Which it hasn’t been btw.)
Objection: Despite what the computer models tell us, there is actually no evidence of significant global warming.
Answer: Global warming is not an output of computer models; it is a conclusion based on observations of a great many global indicators. By far the most straightforward evidence is the actual surface temperature record. While there are places -- in England, for example -- that have records going back several centuries, the two major global temperature analyses can only go back around 150 years due to their requirements for both quantity and distribution of temperature recording stations.
These are the two most reputable globally and seasonally averaged temperature trend analyses:
Both trends are definitely and significantly up. In addition to direct measurements of surface temperature, there are many other measurements and indicators that support the general direction and magnitude of the change the earth is currently undergoing. The following diverse empirical observations lead to the same unequivocal conclusion that the earth is warming:
There is simply no room for doubt: the Earth is undergoing a rapid and large warming trend.
When you have ALL the facts, then teach them. - Philib
That's ridiculous. Under that principle virtually no science (or many other subjects) could ever be taught. At the high school level, the responsibility of the teacher is to teach the consensus opinion when it is determinable. When teaching chemistry, the teacher doesn't need to be up to date on all of the most cutting-edge research on the topic. He/she just needs to provide the consensus opinion on the facts, with as much detail as is appropriate for the grade level. It's the same for physics, biology (including the fact of evolution) and all other sciences.
GW, and human contribution to it, has been accepted by the consensus opinion of the large majority of those scientists most knowledgeable on the topic, with the proper qualifications to render an opinion. The naysayers are a small minority of qualified scientists, whose presented cases have poorly withstood scrutiny. Therefore, HS teachers would be poorly serving their students by not covering the topic in an appropriate amount of detail.
Those are facts, flying in the face of conservative "lies and misinformation."
naysayers are a small minority of qualified scientists
Or rather, a small minority of bribed scientists...
"Under that principle virtually no science (or many other subjects) could ever be taught."
And here is the explanation for why rightwingers are so STUPID en masse. Hasta be either 'all or nuthin' otherwise it ain't worth teachin. Yeah, I get it. Typical STUPID black-and-white 'thinking' going on.
Objection: Current warming is just part of a natural cycle.
Answer: While it is undoubtedly true that there are natural cycles and variations in global climate, those who insist that current warming is purely natural -- or even mostly natural -- have two challenges.
First, they need to identify the mechanism behind this alleged natural cycle. Absent a forcing of some sort, there will be no change in global energy balance. The balance is changing, so natural or otherwise, we need to find this mysterious cause.
Second, they need to come up with an explanation for why a 35% increase in the second most important greenhouse gas does not affect the global temperature. Theory predicts temperature will rise given an enhanced greenhouse effect, so how or why is it not happening?
The mainstream climate science community has provided a well-developed, internally consistent theory that accounts for the effects we are now observing. It provides explanations and makes predictions. Where is the skeptic community's model or theory whereby CO2 does not affect the temperature? Where is the evidence of some other natural forcing, like the Milankovich cycles that controlled the ice ages (a fine historical example of a dramatic and regular climate cycle that can be read in the ice core records taken both in Greenland and in the Antarctic)?
Is this graph a candidate for explaining today's warming? A naive reading of this cycle indicates we should be experiencing a cooling trend now -- and indeed we were gradually cooling over the length of the pre-industrial Holocene, around .5C averaged over 8,000 years.
Not only is the direction of the change wrong, but compare the speed of those fluctuations to today's changes. Leaving aside the descents into glaciation, which were much more gradual, the sudden (geologically speaking) jumps up in temperature every ~100,000 years represent a rate of change roughly ten times slower what we are currently witnessing.
So could current changes be part of a natural cycle? Well, no natural cause has been identified. There is no climatological theory in which CO2 does not drive temperature. And natural cycle precedents do not exhibit the same extreme changes we're now witnessing.
In short: No.
It does, but the proof you want is in the ice cores.
It proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that warming is occurring.
What's wrong with you guys anyway?
Don't give a sh#t, think you are gonna be raptured before all the bad stuff happens? What?
Oh yes -- hooray for the attack on a whole cross-section of the American public with widely diverse political, social, and religious affiliations!!! The fact that the only shared trait that Belling has targeted is that of profession makes perfect sense. ALL teachers think alike and act in lockstep, just like ALL democrates subscribe to identical political beliefs in ALL areas, ALL Muslims are radicals, and ALL liberals are atheists.
Actually I have heard Belling host Limbaugh's rantfest and he spends a lot of time criticizing teachers and public education. Maybe, like Limbaugh, he did not have a particlularly positive experience in school and he blames his teachers (ALL of them) for his own lack of academic success.
Actually, I try to focus on helping my students became more critical readers and more proficient writers and speakers. Sorry to disappoint, but I really have very little time to expound on any political agenda. Nor do I, or the vast majority of my felllow teachers, think that is appropriate.
One more thing -- do you oppose unions for all workers or just for educators? Do you, perhaps, long for the days when a teacher was considered, almost literally, a public servant?
These attacks on public education are part of their lie campaign to convince working people they have nothing to gain from unions and that privatized schools are superior.
These guys are prostitutes. They spread these lies because they are paid by advertisers to tell working folks that our interests are the same as millionaires. Whatever.
Unions lift up all workers, not just union members. Only the unions fought for the 40 hr. work week, living wages, pensions, child labor laws and human rights for working people. They paid, with their blood, for the benefits that jerks all across the country take for granted.
And private schools (just like healthcare) create a tiered system that forces us to chose only as much as we can afford.
I can't stand a wingnut.
I agree, even though I find the union reps at my school to be the most annoying people on campus-even more annoying than kindergarteners- unions do serve a greater good. I'm talking about people who can't be bothered to look up from their lunch to answer a question about a student because they're on their sacrosanct lunch-break, or refuse to give up a prep time or stay after school to coach something or to tutor because the union says they don't have to- that kind of annoying stuff. Teachers who are sticklers for union rules, or who teach only for the money, really chap my hide, but I think most educator/commenters here will agree that these folks are the minority. The greater issue is how the populace is being trained to hate on teachers (accusing us of nefariously "indoctrinating" and everything else 'liberal' under the sun) while ignoring the epidemic of cognitive negligence that is stupifying our kids.
To blame unions for the inaction of a handful of backsliders is to grant immunity to corporate transgressions against the rights of workers.
This foul little rant of Belling's actually gives a nice window into the truth, which is, of course ,that conservatives don't want to "fix" education, and they never have.
They simply want control of the content of education.
Sure it has Maxie.
Equating weather and climate tells me all I need to know about your knowledge level on the subject.
Is there any subtly in your position at all, or is your position first, last, and all points inbetween, ideological?
Can I just register a general note of disgust for anyone who thinks schoolteachers are overpaid? I mean ... I know that as a teacher I had to buy my own materials for teaching (including copies and the raw materials for displays and even supplies for students) and work about 9 hours+ in my 6-hour day! Maybe if the education system in this country did not cater (only) to the lowest common denominator and constantly force teachers to do more with less, could they be considered to be overpaid.
Just what we need, another excuse for people to disrespect the authority of educators, and think that teachers know nothing.
Hear hear!
"Overpaid schoolteacher" is an oxymoron.
My mother was a schoolteacher. My grandmother was a schoolteacher. By no means did they live the good life.
My mother was also a teacher. She is now 79, but I remember her teaching years well. My father died when I was young, leaving her with 5 kids. She finished school and worked teaching for years afterward. There were many hours of work nights and weekends grading papers and preparing for classes. There were many, many supplies she bought for her classroom herself. She cared deeply for her students and took great pride in helping a student with a problem break through his/her barriers.
In addition, she was active in the teachers' union and was head of it for a several-county region for several years. I lived with her, heard all of the inside stories of problems teachers had with the administration - abuse, favoritism, discrimination - and I know how much worse it would have been without the union.
I grew up proud to say my mother was a union activist. And no one can ever tell me she was less of a teacher for her union activities.
sands, you are truly an ignorant a55hole.
One of the first targets of The Contract ON America was to work over the Dept of Education.
No Child Left Behind rates the same attitude towards education that the Blue Sky Initiative had towards reducing polution. There's a theme somwhere in this.
I'm a high school teacher and I take extreme offense to this guy's comments.
I don't even know where to start with his comments. Its funny that I'm "lazy and over-paid" considering that each day consists of 10+ hours of work, not counting weekend grading and planning. During my varsity basketball season, each day is 12+ hours and game days are 15 or 16 hours long.
If I was paid by the hour for the work that I do, it would breakdown to about a dozen bucks an hour, sometimes less depending on longer weeks.
Sorry that Belling had teachers that crammed their point of view down his throat. I disagree with just about every decision George Bush has made, yet when students jump on his case, I play the other side and argue for the man. I've never said that I don't like him and that I'm voting for Obama. Most teachers are very neutral like this, at least the ones I work with. Its kind of disheartening to hear that people actually think like this.
But we should vote McBush and give parents vouchers so they can yank up their students and go to another school everytime a teacher doesn't give their child an A. Thats the answer....right....
You are clearly an overpaid, underworked, liberal elitist.
Dean,
You had my agreement up to the last paragraph. Up till then you sounded reasonable. Oh well.
I find it quite laughable, that a rightwingnut troll would come here and complain about our kids being taught about global warming.
This same rightwingnut troll has previously stated that our children should be taught intelligent design.
Which of the two theories is more believable?
Please take the time to research the avg. temp. ... You will see that we are cooling not heating. The highest avg temp was in Jan. of 98 with El Nino. ... Since Jan. 08 we are below the agv. temp. - Markbfoot199
You're badly in need of some fact checking. Virtually no one is questioning that global temperatures have been rising. Here are a couple of graphs from NASA using two different methods:
Can you see the trend? It's true that 1998 was a peak year, but that is a case of rising global temperatures being given an extra short term boost by El Nino. The next years were lower, but were still among the highest ever recorded and showed a mathematical trend upward.
Don't worry too much about it. We all make mistakes. You just need to learn from yours.
Objection: Satellite readings, which are much more accurate, show that the earth is in fact cooling.
I wonder how long before this one stops coming up?
Answer: There are a few advantages to the satellite readings,mainly the more uniform global coverage and the fact that readings can be taken at different altitudes. However, it is an extremely complicated process which uses microwaves emitted by the oxygen in the atmosphere as a proxy for temperature.
The complications arise from many things, including decay of the satellite orbits, splicing together and calibrating records from different instruments, trying to separate the signals by the layer of atmosphere they originate from, etc. It is a little ironic that the same people who distrust the surface record so happily embrace this even-more-convoluted exercise in data processing!
Anyway, it has been many years since the satellite analysis showed cooling.
Until recently, though, one of the many analyses of tropospheric temperatures did show very little warming and was in direct contradiction to model predictions that say the troposphere should warm significantly in an enhanced greenhouse environment. Something had to be wrong, the observations or the model predictions. Naturally, the skeptics had no doubt it was the models that were off.
However, it turns out that additional errors were uncovered and the MSU Satellite temperature analysis now shows warming well in line with model expectations. Real Climate has a good rundown of the technical details for those with the stomach for it. In short, this long-running debate turned out to be a great validation of the models and a real death blow to the "earth is not warming" crowd.
Beware of zombies!
55% is actually a not too bad rate considering that 17 of the 50 biggest city-school districts in the country graduate less than 50%. By no means am I saying its a good thing.
Sure there are some lousy teachers at my school, but they are weeded out (3 non-tenured teachers let go last year) and other ones were assigned class loads of optional classes that students don't need to graduate and can be avoided because the classes are electives. Its not perfect.
I know that the students who drop out of my school play video games until the wee hours of the morning and sleep through my class. Others come to school without eating or proper materials for school and fail. Others still come to school using bad language or wear shirts that depict sex and swearing, and once they're disciplined, they hold a grudge and seem to lag behind. I wish I could do more to help these kids, but the parents have to come somewhere in this picture to help. Teachers can't solve all of America's problems.
Education starts at home and requires parental participation with their kids' teachers.
Dean,
I agree that many teachers are very dedicated and spend long hours grading and drawing up lesson plans outside the classroom. I also agree that it is the parent/s (or lack of parenting by parent/s that are failing these kids in these large school districts far more than the teachers.
What this announcer is verbalizing is the union leadership, because of their opposition to vouchers are using their political clout with the Democratic Party to prevent school choice by concerned parents who, due to economic circumstances, live in these large districts but cannot send their children to private schools.
It looks to the outsider that the Unions are more concerned with protecting the status-quo and the teachers than they are in allowing parents to get their kids out of failing schools and into environments where the child can learn.
Yeah, our schools aren't doing well right now. But we can change that. I believe in equal access to quality education for all. I believe in public education and have seen public schools provide quality education cheaper and to high standards such that they were they envy of the world. There was a day, AA when our country took pride in our commons, our public infrastructure.
But every time I hear a conservative talk about choice, I know I'm about to get conned. Our freedom of choice is limited to our wealth and if your aren't, or maybe don't even care to be wealthy, you get to chose an inferior "product." It's sick and goes against the American principle of equality.
Nope, we need to fix, not discard, our public education system so that all of our children have a good school to attend.
Bill, about your NASA report!
NASA doesn't fully publish computer source code and formula they use to calculate the trends and the graph nor the correction used to arrive at the correct data. So when you do reverse engineer the process by comparing the raw data and the processed data. And the bottom line is, that 1998 is no longer -- you can say NASA made a reporting error or did they make a reporting error? Did they do this on purpose?
when 1934 was the hottest year on record, and NASA may know about it and doesn't correct the data, and when a guy named James Hansen involved in all this, who is a political activist, then you have to figure there is a reason why they want 1998 continue to be reported as the warmest year on record.
If there is something specific you can point to with regard to NASA's data or methodology, please do so. Or perhaps you have another source of data that contradicts NASA? You're trying to create an illusion of data manipulation based on your own fevered fantasies.
As for 1934 replacing 1998, you know, don't you, that that change referred ONLY to US data? That 1998 is still the warmest on record GLOBALLY? And that most of the hottest years on record occurred within the last decade GLOBALLY?
You do know, don't you, that we're discussing GLOBAL temperatures here? And that the US only covers about 2% of the earth's surface? Do you really think that change is very significant?
This again takes me back to my first statement, I believe in Climate Change, not man made global warming, do not be so naive to think that man can create global warming, unless back in the late 1900's they had some great SUV's, or maybe we just had a large number of Stock (cows) putting out CO2, but wait I am sure you believe that cow fluctuations are part of global warming also.
"Nine times seven equals seven-- 63."
Right here you can see Mark Belling's credibility go up in smoke.
"So these kids are presuming that what they're getting is gospel. They are presuming that they don't have an ideological kook in front of them. They presume that they have a committed educator who is presenting facts, rather than some (conservative) hack that's presenting a pile of garbage that's being tossed out there by a failed politician."
This statement pretty much represents my opinion of teaching Intelligent Design.