View Full Version : Okay, Pam... Time to 'fess Up

12-18-2000, 05:11 PM
The Electoral College functioned as it always has since it's inception. The members chose George W. Bush as the next President of the United States.

Your prediction of doom and gloom and Electors selling their votes did not come to pass.

Time to admit you were wrong on this one.

12-18-2000, 05:35 PM

I have to admit I was a bit nervous about this too, not so much the selling of votes, but just some kind of defection of Bush electors because of all the election hoopla. Ironically as it turns out, the only defector was a Gore elector who abstained as protest about DC voting rights.


12-18-2000, 05:40 PM
gh4Chiefs - I realize that some will change the votes that they are asked to make, but never at the expense of an election has this occurred. Pam made a 60 minutes profile on the issue and told us to watch out for it.

12-18-2000, 06:37 PM
I'll admit it - she was wrong.

Hey, Gore said he would refuse to accept any electoral votes that were pledged to Bush anyway. He's a nice man.

12-18-2000, 08:29 PM
Wolf, you might as well ask the wind to stop blowing. She's apparently a party line member of the NEA and will mouth whatever apocalyptic mantra they choose to give her.

The ONLY time we've had faithless electors was when said electors were making some isolated 'statement'. Knowing that the outcome would be decided by three or four votes, none of these people would do anything so absurd. Actually I'm shocked that even one abstained.

12-18-2000, 08:38 PM
Chuck - Importantly the abstainee did not have any bearing on the outcome of the election and knew so before taking action. So once more, it was a meaningless symbol.

12-18-2000, 08:42 PM
And such is my point. These people are choosen for their party loyality. They wouldn't even consider swaying their vote if they thought it would change the outcome. The only time it happens is when a point is trying to be made.

Pam's soliquy was absurd and strict NEA party line. The unions are scared to death of school vouchers and will indulge any scare tactic to maintain their feifdoms.

Bob Dole
12-18-2000, 08:50 PM
Excuse me mr jerk in

It could have happened. It HAS happened before. I do not abide strictly by NEA opinions. I do have opinions of my own, not like you who has to voice what others say.

Russ. It did not happen, but the possibility was there. It could have happened, but it did not.

Enjoy your 4 years of Bush.


12-18-2000, 08:50 PM
Chuck - The thing that confuses me about the NEA is their lack of ability to provide the basic requests of their representative body.

I cannot think of any other union that has done so little for a group and still maintained control. Classes are still getting larger, raises are too long in coming, benefits get no better,.....

If I were a teacher, I would be the first to stand against the glutted body of the NEA and tell them to shove their 'concerns' up their pork bellied behinds.

12-18-2000, 08:59 PM
Pam, Thank you for your gracious comment on President-Elect Bush. I appreciate your stance and realize that you do not agree with the choice. I also appreciate the fact that you admitted you were wrong on this topic.

However, as I stated before, an elector has only given his vote to someone other than whom he was asked to represent ONLY when the outcome of the election has not been changed.

12-18-2000, 09:02 PM
As would I Wolf, but you never see it happen do you? It would seem to me that a 'right to work' law would easily break up that particular monopoly but you never see a teacher led campaign for it.

What you do see is lots of scare tactics concerning vouchers, which have worked every time they've been tried. You see lots of derision of home-schoolers. The top three spelling bee winners last year were ALL home schooled. And you see all kinds of verbal shots taken at private schools. A survey was done of NEA member teachers and the vast majority sent their kids to private schools.

It seems to me that all this shows very little concern for students and very great concern for their own power.

[This message has been edited by ck_IN (edited 12-18-2000).]

12-18-2000, 09:04 PM
Yes Pam it could happen. A meteor could strike tommorrow and wipe out life as we know it. Now that we're done with coulds and maybes perhaps we should talk about probabilities.

12-18-2000, 10:32 PM
I'd just like to point out that the scaremongers were out in force that the world would end with a Republican victory.

Why even Babs, Cher, and others said they would have to leave the country.

The unions said the minimum wage would be rolled back.

The DNC said Bush was out to take the old folks SS money and Medicare benefits with "risky" schemes.

The DNC and NEA also said that Bush would "gut" education as we know it.

Shrill scare tactics that were intended and succeeded in scaring otherwise good citizens into voting because of their fears, not because of their hopes...<BR>

12-18-2000, 10:37 PM
Pam it's your 4 years of bush whether you like it or not.

Thank god we got someone in there that will set you underperforming teachers straight.

12-18-2000, 10:41 PM
Ouch! Dr. Red laying a boom. :)

corn balls 28

Bob Dole
12-18-2000, 10:41 PM
In many states, electors are bound by law to keep their pledge. But other states - like Florida - have no such law. Some scholars say the laws probably are unenforceable.

Several electors in the past have broken their pledge, most recently in 1988, but never in a close election where it could change the result.

Don't presume to know me or my teaching style. I am the best History teacher you will never have the pleasure of knowing. How dare you question my performance in MY classroom. That is like me saying you don't know how or can't do your job. You don't know me nor how I am in the classroom. I happen to fight for my students and try to help them learn what they need to know.

In the future, we may disagree, but I would appreciate the personal attacks about me and my job out of it.


12-18-2000, 10:47 PM
Well pam since our schools suck and your a part of our school system, I feel it's important you realize the brevity of the situation.

You can say all the feel good things you want about your talent but the bottom line is this. You'll perform or you won't get funding. Performance will be simply based on students taking objective tests to see if the teachers are doing their jobs in teaching principles.

If you meet the requirements than more power to ya. If you don't your school won't get funding and the teachers holding that school back will either be fired or reprimanded or the school will become private.......for the vouchers that will soon be useful to parents nationwide.

12-18-2000, 10:47 PM
I have strong political views, but have always found Pam to be a dedicated teacher. I agree that there is no basis for personal attacks for her views.<BR>

Bob Dole
12-18-2000, 10:52 PM
Bottom line Dr. Red, it is not our teachers that are failing at our school. It is our administration that won't back the teachers in critical situations.

When a teacher refers a student to the office only to have that dicipline referral thrown away, because the parents have caused a stir in the school, it really does not leave the classroom teacher much room to work with.

OUr school will close its doors within two years, but not because the teachers are not doing their jobs, but because the town is dying and the people are leaving and the money is going. That is a shame too because it is a really close knit school for the most part and it will be missed.

HOwever, I will no longer be there after this school year 2000-2001. I will be back in my great state of Kansas :) :) :)

Bob Dole
12-18-2000, 10:55 PM
How do you know our schools suck? Are you there every day? Maybe it is not the teachers that are the problem, maybe it is because the students are not aware how to behave in the classroom and are not taught to show respect.

I would love to put a camera in every classroom then when momma says my Johnny would never do such a thing, I could say watch the tape.

Bottom Line is
Johnny can't read because Johnny's parents don't give a flying....flip.

12-18-2000, 10:57 PM
The bottom line is Pam.

1. Sorry to hear about your school before the rules were applied.

2. Excuses will cease once administrators see their pocket books threatened.

If you don't believe they'll start cracking down your smoking the wacky weed. Bad parents or no. Administrators don't like their budget's messed with.

12-18-2000, 10:57 PM
Pam, when he said that "our" schools suck, I think he meant in general.

corn balls 28

12-18-2000, 11:20 PM
Pam doesn't understand that it's all about the money.

Bob Dole
12-18-2000, 11:26 PM


I was just grateful to get my job you see, I don't coach and Social Studies usually is given to coaches and their coaching is much more important than History or government and such in most administrator's eyes.

For me money is not the issue, although I do need my measly 1400 after taxes a MONTH. Less student loans and rent and utilities. NOt much money motivation for me.

12-18-2000, 11:36 PM
For someone dogging on whitlock, Pam, you sure aren't making a case that your any brighter.

Don't you understand that whether you think money has an effect on your classroom or not it does.

Don't you understand that when you send a student to the office who is causing trouble that administrators who now don't want any issues raised will start raising issues because they will not want to deal with a lack of funding.

Don't you understand that this will put power back in the teachers hand because students will start to trust and respect that when the teacher speaks to them about shaping up that the administrators will back the teachers up regardless.

Don't you understand that this is good for the nation. Not excuses for the status quo.

Bob Dole
12-18-2000, 11:47 PM
If all that happens, then I will be eternally grateful, but I will hold my breath.

What I don't appreciate is the lumping all the schools problems on all teachers. I will be the first to admit that some teachers need fired. I know 3-4 I would like to fire myself, however we are not all cut from the same cloth.

As for Twitlock, that was just toooo stupid to pass up. Any fan could say that they should play like that all the time.

Baby Lee
12-19-2000, 06:55 AM
Dr. Red,
Maybe i've missed something in your baseless rhetoric, but as a future teacher, I really must ask you what you are referring to.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Helvetica, verdana, ariel">quote:</font><HR>Dont you understand that this will put power back in the teachers hand because students will start to trust and respect that when the teacher speaks to them about shaping up that the administrators will back the teachers up regardless.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

What is "this" you're referring to?

Dr. Red
12-19-2000, 08:20 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Helvetica, verdana, ariel">quote:</font><HR> I feel it's important you realize the brevity of the situation. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Is it over already??

12-19-2000, 11:34 AM
This= To a president who has successfully implemented standards in his own state as a Governor.

As a future teacher you should be all for having more control in your classroom unless your a PE teacher.

Baby Lee
12-19-2000, 11:41 AM
And just how will this be implemented? Neither the congress & senate have a 2/3 majority.

BTW, these "voucher" plans were soundly defeated by voters who could see that despite all of the rhetoric, the only students it would help are those already attending private schools.

The rich get richer.

12-19-2000, 12:27 PM
BTW, these "voucher" plans were soundly defeated by voters who could see that despite all of the rhetoric, the only students it would help are those already attending private schools.

The rich get richer.

More overheated scare rhetoric from your local NEA and DNC. Every time vouchers have been tried they've worked.

I fail to see how providing a voucher to a parent is helping the rich. In fact it's helping the poor since the rich can already fund a better education for their kids. It's simply empowering the parents. Why must everything be rich vs poor?

Baby Lee
12-19-2000, 12:31 PM
Even with a $3,000 voucher, most poor kids can't afford to send their kids to private schools. This would simply be a tax break for the families of those who already attend. Not to mention that this money would come straight out of the funding for public schools.

How would we make up the difference? Higher taxes, of course.

That's why the rich would just get richer.

Dr. Red
12-19-2000, 12:33 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Helvetica, verdana, ariel">quote:</font><HR> Why must everything be rich vs poor? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Because without inter-citizen warfare, activism loses its appeal and an activist platform loses power.

12-19-2000, 12:40 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Helvetica, verdana, ariel">quote:</font><HR>
Why must everything be rich vs poor?

Easy, it plays to the emotions on how life can be unfair to certain people. It isn't because people are lazy or anything that they don't have as much as the next person, it is because some people can't succeed because someone else already is succeeding..

Brian K.

Too bad the only people who know how to run the country are busy driving cabs and cutting hair.
[i]George Burns </I>

12-19-2000, 12:44 PM
Mi this is another mystery to me. The arguement is always made that vouchers would sap the treasury of public schools. Ok, if X students attend public school and Y dollars is sepnt on them, then if X-a students now attend, then one would think that Y-b dollars would be available. The math should balance.

I don't know about the private schools in MI but the private schools around here offer subsidies to students that fit a profile (often low income). Said subsides coupled with vouchers would make up the delta.

It doesn't have to be rich vs poor. The DNC and NEA simply make it that way because class warfare is one of the few arrows in their quiver.

Baby Lee
12-19-2000, 12:51 PM
I've never checked about subsidies. Neither of my kids are in school yet. I DO know that a number of schools said that they wouldn't accept vouchers, for fear of falling under state government regulations.

Sound lame? Absolutely. The simple fact is that private schools don't want to accept just anyone. They are perfectly happy segregating rich vs. poor. Thats why a voucher program won't work.

12-19-2000, 01:20 PM
Why all the rhetoric directed at Pam and her views about Bush? Like her, I am a public employee. I'm not a teacher, but I have a lot of respect for anyone that enters that career. It sure isn't for the money. Also like her, I felt that Gore would have done a better job in the White House than Bush. I looked at the candidates and decided that I would benefit to a greater degree, personally and professionally, with Gore as President. Was I right? Hell, I don't know. If I knew that for sure, I wouldn't be a public employee. ;)
There also seems to be a perception, real or imagined, that the Democrats and NEA are the only ones that use scare tactics. Every party and every special interest group uses them to the best of their abilities. Especially in election years. That's what politics are all about, unfortunately.

Dr. Red
12-19-2000, 01:36 PM
Can't speak for everyone, but it seems that the vehemence is because Pam eschewed the 'I felt that Gore would have done a better job in the White House than Bush' rhetoric for something more along the lines of;

go ahead and elect Bush you idiots, and put blacks back into slavery and burn down all the schools, and start a war with God knows who'all, and take all the possessions of the working poor and use them to fuel Bill Gates' fireplace on a chilly Seattle night, 'Cuz that's what Bush'll do, if he's not too St-St-Stoopid to do anything.

Naturally, I'm paraphrasing here.

Bob Dole
12-19-2000, 03:36 PM
Excuse me,

I really take offense to that JC JOhnny,

I said...I felt that the US would be in trouble if we had all rep. house, senate and whitehouse and supreme court. We lose our checks and balances. I also said that there was a possibility of the "faithless" electors being up for grabs (money, power). Think about it. NO one is perfect no matter how hard one trys.


Dr. Red
12-19-2000, 03:57 PM
Ya know, I'm not gonna go back and cut and paste all the outlandish things you said about the evil of non-Gore-ites and the evil they would wreak upon this country. But I do note that the only one you specifically refute is the slavery. On that one, I may have overstated, or I may [MAY] have gotten you mixed up with Jesse. But I stand behind the tone, which I think accurately reflects the tone you were voicing at the time of election and shortly thereafter.

I am sorry that you are offended. But I didn't take to kindly to your rhetoric at the time either [obviously].

Bob Dole
12-19-2000, 04:09 PM
Never did I say anything about slavery. As a human being and history teacher Slavery is nothing at all funny or stupid to joke about.

I will agree that I posted something about keeping my body as my rights--not that I would ever have to use that--and losing the checks and balances. And school reform.

That is all. I think you have me mixed up with someone else.

NOt like I am in love with the title dummycraps or demorats ect...

Lets move on. It is over like it or not Bush is the president for 4 years. But change is a coming.

Dr. Red
12-19-2000, 04:31 PM
Truce, if you mean it. I'm more than willing to move on. Just color me more than a little weary of the vilification spouting from SO MANY sources of a party simply scared to be out of power for the first time in half a decade. Also color me a little sad that any views I may share with them become quickly obscured by that vilification.

If I attributed more of that to you than you deserved, I apologize. But if I didn't, please realize that that tone is how it comes across.

And I'm not trying to be funny or joke about anything. At least not in this series of posts. When Jesse Jackson equates the SC decision with the Dred Scott decision, it is no accident, and its not a joke. Its the desperate act of a desperate man who depends on the fear of his supporters against 'outgroups' for his power.

[This message has been edited by JC-Johnny (edited 12-19-2000).]

12-19-2000, 04:33 PM
I think a lot of good things are going to happen. Folks predicted the end of the world with Reagan, and it didn't happen. He did end the Soviet Union though.

So who knows what the future holds? Is the glass half-empty or half-full?<BR>

12-19-2000, 07:10 PM
Joe - Time for me to intervene. My mother was not rich, and she was single almost my entire childhood. She sent me and my brothers to a private school. We worked in the classroom cleaning chalkboards and on the grounds mowing and fertilizing fields. She paid the rest of the tuition thanks to an evening job. We supplemented Christmas by folding, rubber banding, and distributing those annoying free papers thrown in your yard (for a lousy 3 cents a paper). We were not rich, and our public school system sucked - for 2 semesters of my childhood it was rated one of the worst 5 in the state.

Now why should my mother have paid school taxes for a failed system? And why shouldn't she get a tax break.

My mother's struggles were the main reason in forming my political beliefs. We lived in a pro-democratic area of Indiana and the slick willies of the county would stop by and tell my mom what a wonderful job she did. Then they taxed the hell out of her and gave the money to shiftless baby-producing plants that never worked.

Vouchers would be an excellent idea for failing school systems, and Kansas City School District would be a perfect place to start. Millions upon millions of dollars have been heaped upon the problem and the school no has no accredidation because of lazy democrats in control.

Baby Lee
12-19-2000, 07:42 PM
I had typed out a long post, but it wouldn't let me post it, so i'll be brief:
1. My father wasn't rich. He only had 1 arm, and not many places back then would give him a chance. He worked 2 jobs JUST TO SURVIVE. We had no dreams of private school.
2. A right wing extremist complaining about tax cuts for corporations? WOW! Did you ever stop to think that the school district may have done a little better if they had some of this "corporate welfare"?
3. Private schools here said they would not accept vouchers, saying that they didn't want any government intrference. BS. The real reason? They want to pick & choose their students. How many students from poor, failing districts do you honestly think they will take?

Baby Lee
12-19-2000, 07:51 PM
And what of the kids in the KC school district that they "don't have room for?" Should we propose legislation that helps a few kids, while screwing twice as many? How is that a solution?

12-19-2000, 07:53 PM
Joe - I appreciate your father's predicament. There were plenty of times that we had ham and beans or potato soup three or four nights in a row.

As far as 'corporate welfare'. #1. I have never supported tax breaks for companies. I believe that a flat rate for all would be sufficient for our economy. #2. Throw all the money you want at public schools, it doesnt make them better. THe KC district has received millions for failure in bussing, magnet schools, overcrowding, closing schools, and now even failure to educate properly.

You did not answer my questions however. Why should anyone in the Kansas City School District be FORCED to pay taxes for a product that has been broken for 20 years? That is SOCIALISM at its worst. We all take exception to paying for any product that does not work, why should our government's failures be any different? Are you stating that the people in Kansas City are obligated to pay hard earned money for a product that now guarantees their children will not be accepted in any college in the United States?

12-19-2000, 07:57 PM
Joe - In fact, I believe that extreme measures are now necessary for the failure of schools across the United States.

I believe that any child who is a senior in the Kansas City School District this year should have his parents sue the City of Kansas City for millions of potentially lost earnings due to their failure to provide for the children they were entrusted to instruct.

Baby Lee
12-19-2000, 08:05 PM
Throwing money may not fix the problem, but taking money certainly will not. I have no insight into the KC school problem, but i'm guessing that vouchers alone will not fix the problem. What will? I have no idea, if I was that smart, I'd be in Miami now, not getting ready to shovel more snow. :)

You also didn't answer my question: why support legislation that screws twice the kids that it can possibly help?

As far as 'Corporate welfare', the Detroit & Flint school districts here in Michigan are also pretty bad(but not as bad as KC's it sounds). They went downhill in 1988, a year after GM closed their plants& moved to Mexico, putting nearly 100,000 people out of work AFTER receiving $1.8 billion in tax cuts(while making a profit, BTW). And people on this board(BIG_DADDY for one) have the audacity to complain about a single mom getting $200 a month to feed & clothe her kids. Incredible.

[This message has been edited by Mi_chief_fan (edited 12-19-2000).]

12-19-2000, 08:13 PM
Joe - I agree that the situation you speak of in Detroit is horrible, and I disagree wholeheartedly with supporting companies that generate their own revenues.

And, yes I did answer your question, it may be roundabout so forgive me. If (for the sake of argument) I have 1,000 students who will definitely not go to college (through no fault of their own) although I have paid for their education (too much as far as I am concerned), and I have the opportunity to send 100 of those children to college - You are damned right I would send those 100 kids.

Education is not a promise in the Constitution. It is not guaranteed. Dont get me wrong, I don't mind paying for education, if I get the product I pay for. But right now, we are the single worst country in the industrial world in education. Again, If I dont get what I pay for, why should I pay for it.

If I have a house that is condemned, do you believe that it would be fair for the community of tax payers to pay me full price for the house. If you buy a tool that is broken, do you expect NAPA to tell you to get lost? If the autorepair shop screws up your car, do you still pay them full cost for repairs and ride the bus away?

12-19-2000, 08:18 PM
I also take exception to people like Pam laying the entire blame on the parents for lack of education in the country. Parents dont pass children who cant read. Parents dont dumb down tests and grade on a curve.

My children all carry very good grades, we work hard with them to insure this. However, compare my 10 year old "A" student with a german "B" student or a Japanese "C" Student, and the international market will look forward to the two latter graduates than my own daughter. Why? Because education is not considered seriously as education by the people in charge. If a product is failed, I dont want to pay for it.

Baby Lee
12-19-2000, 08:22 PM
Now I believe we're getting somewhere. OK, now we have just 1 problem: what to do with the other 900 students? Build more private schools? Here's something interesting: our local paper here was profiling the 10 area national merit scholars. Of the 10, 9 attended public schools. There are some outstanding public schools out there.

I think a better way of looking at the problem is: why are some public schools prospering, and some failing?

Now, I'm not all that familiar with the area there, but i'll go out on a limb and say that the Overland Park school system is 100% better than the KC district, and probably competitive with alot of private schools. Why?.................

Baby Lee
12-19-2000, 08:24 PM
I think Pam is dead on: Education in other societies around the world is taken much more seriously than it is here. Ask an exchange student.

[This message has been edited by Mi_chief_fan (edited 12-19-2000).]

12-19-2000, 08:40 PM
Joe - I would venture to state that the Blue Springs and Overland Park districts are superior because the school boards are run by republicans and libertarians. There is no waste, salaries are competitive, and resume's are important to hiring.

While the democratic kansas city board has had 4 members brought up on various civil and felonious actions in the last several years, only to keep having them in the spotlight and taking their words as sincere individuals.

Again, I am sure that you agree with Pam. But I do take my childrens' schooling very serious. So, If I put 100% into their education, why are the japanese and german students considered superior? As I stated earlier, parents dont pass children who cant read - lazy teachers do.

12-19-2000, 08:46 PM
Joe - As far as your question as to what to do with the other 900 students, I dont know? But I dont know what to do with all the homeless, hungry, less intelligent, minimum wage, diseased people on this planet either. I know that I should do what I can for whom I can....

Jesus Christ - "There will be poor, always"

12-19-2000, 09:14 PM
All right.....

1. Wolfman way to hold the fort.

2. Mi_Chief_fan......it's obvious your young. 900 times 3000 = $2,700,000 just on vouchers. That doesn't include other goverment funding and other forms of revenue for schools. Do you really need an Income and Expense Report breakdown on a singular school that couldn run a standard rich environment for 4 million a year. You better get into a math class son.

Your little theory is shot to hell. Because I know there are some venture capitalist out there who would have no problem setting up private schools across this United States that would be standard based and make money at it while they do it.

Baby Lee
12-20-2000, 06:13 AM
Dr. Red,
That is a sad, sad statement. You think venture capitalists would put education over making money?

School districts ran like HMO's. Now THAT'S a scary thought.

12-20-2000, 08:52 AM
MI Chief said:

"As far as 'Corporate welfare', the Detroit & Flint school districts here in Michigan are also pretty bad(but not as bad as KC's it sounds). They went downhill in 1988, a year after GM closed their plants& moved to Mexico, putting nearly 100,000 people out of work AFTER receiving $1.8 billion in tax cuts(while making a profit, BTW). And people on this board(BIG_DADDY for one) have the audacity to complain about a single mom getting $200 a month to feed & clothe her kids. Incredible."

Letting people (or companies) keep more of what they EARN is different than handouts to people (or companies) for not doing anything.

I do think that there should be a safety net, as long as it is not a hammock.

Here is another argument, do companies really pay taxes? Or do they just pass the increased cost along to the consumer?

12-20-2000, 09:02 AM
Bob Dole is a firm supporter of Social Darwinism.

Baby Lee
12-20-2000, 04:07 PM
Do you think that companies which "earn" billion dollar profits should close down plants, move to Mexico and put 100,000 people out of work so that the executives' stock options will go up 1/2%? Don't forget all the "lazy" poor people who made companies like GM what it is today.

When corporations close their doors and put people out of work, sometimes there is mo place else to turn.<P>