Woman sat on toilet for two years.
See, I don't think we'll ever hear more of this story because there probably won't be an answer to why this woman sat on a toilet for two years. But it's one of those stories I wish were fictional because I want an answer.
Maybe someone else can write one.
If you do, give me credit for the idea.
Wednesday, March 12, 2008
{Insert Post Here}
There is no way to really address this story without talking about the substance of the comments in question.
There is no way to really talk about the substance of the comments in question because if there were, she wouldn't have had to quit the campaign.
She had to quit the campaign because we are incapable of having an actual conversation in this country about race or gender without someone feigning shock and horror and chasing the speaker away.
We've come so far this year, yet we fall so far short of true progress.
There is no way to really talk about the substance of the comments in question because if there were, she wouldn't have had to quit the campaign.
She had to quit the campaign because we are incapable of having an actual conversation in this country about race or gender without someone feigning shock and horror and chasing the speaker away.
We've come so far this year, yet we fall so far short of true progress.
Don't work for me
Dear would-be public employee:
This is just some friendly advice. I know you have a lot of options when it comes to where you accept employment and I think, perhaps, you should know that coming to work for me might not be the best idea. I feel crazy telling you this because I'm guessing you'll accept my advice, and we'll be left with some of your lesser-qualified fellow candidates for this position.
You see though, since you work for me, I think you should know that I don't really feel like paying you that much. If you worked for some other people with their private funds, you could make a lot more. And we don't really do that other stuff - company picnics or fundraisers or whatever - like the other guys do. See, we feel you should be GRATEFUL to be able to serve in this position. In fact, all the charity you need to worry about is the charitable donation of your time and energy for less-than-market wages. We're not part of the market. The market is for other people.
You should know too that if the budget goes south or anything else goes wrong, I'll probably blame you for it: for taking all the money and living off my dime. I may also use you as an example of why we need more money, to give it to you, but at the first sign of trouble, I will jump all over you and demand you give much of it back.
I hope you still want to work for me. I'll act like whatever I learn about you is the biggest shock to me and toss you in front of the bus at all available opportunities.
Thanks,
The Public
This is just some friendly advice. I know you have a lot of options when it comes to where you accept employment and I think, perhaps, you should know that coming to work for me might not be the best idea. I feel crazy telling you this because I'm guessing you'll accept my advice, and we'll be left with some of your lesser-qualified fellow candidates for this position.
You see though, since you work for me, I think you should know that I don't really feel like paying you that much. If you worked for some other people with their private funds, you could make a lot more. And we don't really do that other stuff - company picnics or fundraisers or whatever - like the other guys do. See, we feel you should be GRATEFUL to be able to serve in this position. In fact, all the charity you need to worry about is the charitable donation of your time and energy for less-than-market wages. We're not part of the market. The market is for other people.
You should know too that if the budget goes south or anything else goes wrong, I'll probably blame you for it: for taking all the money and living off my dime. I may also use you as an example of why we need more money, to give it to you, but at the first sign of trouble, I will jump all over you and demand you give much of it back.
I hope you still want to work for me. I'll act like whatever I learn about you is the biggest shock to me and toss you in front of the bus at all available opportunities.
Thanks,
The Public
Can someone explain why this office even exists?
Jack O'Connell can overpower an appeals court, notes today's Roundup. It's true!
Wow, you're totally protected from losing the fundamentalist parent vote, Mr. O'Connell. I'm sure you, as a Democrat, had a lot to fear on this subject area.
And should the guy who is in charge of - well, wait, is he in charge of it? who is? anyway - be avidly insisting parents can keep their kids OUT of it? In fact, doesn't he have more to fear - politically - than pissing off parents?
Like what about pissing off CTA? 'Cause that can't be good.
Of course, the above is a bit of a choosy representation of the whole story:
So what O'Connell is really saying - against a backdrop of lax enforcement - is that it's just business as usual.
I think we should pare down the total number of constitutionals in the state.
"Countering a potentially precedent-setting appeals court decision that bars parents from educating their children at home if they lack teaching credentials, California Superintendent of Public Instruction Jack O'Connell on Tuesday affirmed families' right to home school," writes Seema Mehta in the Times.
"'There's no cause for alarm,' he said Tuesday.
"'I want to assure parents that chose to home school that California Department of Education policy will not change in any way as a result of this ruling,' he said in a written statement. 'Parents still have the right to home school in our state.'
So, if you're keeping score at home, apparently the state superintendent can simply ignore the state appeals court.
Wow, you're totally protected from losing the fundamentalist parent vote, Mr. O'Connell. I'm sure you, as a Democrat, had a lot to fear on this subject area.
And should the guy who is in charge of - well, wait, is he in charge of it? who is? anyway - be avidly insisting parents can keep their kids OUT of it? In fact, doesn't he have more to fear - politically - than pissing off parents?
Like what about pissing off CTA? 'Cause that can't be good.
Of course, the above is a bit of a choosy representation of the whole story:
The state Department of Education now allows home schooling as long as parents file paperwork with the state establishing themselves as private schools, hire credentialed tutors or enroll their children in independent study programs run by charter or private schools or public school districts while still teaching at home.
The education department does little to enforce those provisions and insists that it is the local school districts' responsibility. In addition, state education officials acknowledge that some parents home school their children without the knowledge of any educational entity.
O'Connell repeatedly refused Tuesday to rule out requiring parents to enroll their children in a formal program.
So what O'Connell is really saying - against a backdrop of lax enforcement - is that it's just business as usual.
I think we should pare down the total number of constitutionals in the state.
Tuesday, March 11, 2008
Get Your Kidney Tested
Today is the first of two days of kidney screening over at the Capitol's front lawn.
Results from last year:
Thirty-eight percent of those tested had high total cholesterol, 25 percent had high blood pressure or hypertension, two people were shown to have possible kidney disease and one person had high blood pressure, kidney disease and diabetes -- with the latter two unknown prior to the screening.
Results from last year:
Thirty-eight percent of those tested had high total cholesterol, 25 percent had high blood pressure or hypertension, two people were shown to have possible kidney disease and one person had high blood pressure, kidney disease and diabetes -- with the latter two unknown prior to the screening.
Sunday, March 9, 2008
3rd District Congressional race rhetoric heats up. Kinda.
Democratic candidate Bill Durston takes on third-district Representative Dan Lungren in a new radio ad that takes Lungren to task for being soft on torture. Or strong on torture. He likes torture anyway - or at least - likes a broad definition of aggressive interrogation techniques.
Mmm, that's warm and fuzzy.
The Bee's Ad Watch analysis reports that Lungren doesn't really take issue with the Durston ad's assertions. The ad is airing on liberal radio though, so it won't do much more than catch the base's attention and maybe pull in some cash which Durston sorely needs.
Good luck!
Mmm, that's warm and fuzzy.
The Bee's Ad Watch analysis reports that Lungren doesn't really take issue with the Durston ad's assertions. The ad is airing on liberal radio though, so it won't do much more than catch the base's attention and maybe pull in some cash which Durston sorely needs.
Good luck!
Is there a Penn State vs. State Pen joke here?
There must be since we're talking about huge increases in the state's private prison bills:
Dude, it IS like the difference between public and private colleges, isn't it? Private prisons have perks. Public prisons have to provide services to more people and the quality suffers. This is just weird.
The article certainly adds fuel to the anti-union fire too: the high bill comes from privates' desire to raise guard pay rates from around $10 to around $15 per hour.
State correctional officers - you know, the CCPOA guys - start at $35 an hour. And that doesn't include all that overtime and other benies. Yikes! Maybe privates can do everything better than publics - in any arena.
I know, I know, these are the easy criminals they are guarding - not the crazy sick and dangerous guys in state facilities. Still, that's quite a price difference, no?
Oh right - that's why CCPOA hates private prisons.
The private guys aren't really cops though - no batons, no guns, no POST certificates.
I don't think we think nearly enough about prisons or prisoners. We get lots of coverage about costs and guards though.
Private prisons generally house lower-risk, healthier inmates in the final 18 months of their terms. It's a class of prisoner that costs less to incarcerate than the dangerous, the sick and the long-term who require added expenses for things such as security and medical care.
On a recent visit to the Golden State facility, 25 miles north of Bakersfield, inmates lauded the prison for its easier feel, which they said contrasts sharply with the oppressive environment of state institutions marked by overcrowding, violence and control.
"Right here is love, compared to where I've been," said inmate William Cook, 27, of Newark, who previously walked the yards at San Quentin, Pleasant Valley and Lancaster. "Here you get all the football games, you get movies every day. It's real easy to do your time here. You don't have to worry about nothing – no politics right here."
Dude, it IS like the difference between public and private colleges, isn't it? Private prisons have perks. Public prisons have to provide services to more people and the quality suffers. This is just weird.
The article certainly adds fuel to the anti-union fire too: the high bill comes from privates' desire to raise guard pay rates from around $10 to around $15 per hour.
State correctional officers - you know, the CCPOA guys - start at $35 an hour. And that doesn't include all that overtime and other benies. Yikes! Maybe privates can do everything better than publics - in any arena.
I know, I know, these are the easy criminals they are guarding - not the crazy sick and dangerous guys in state facilities. Still, that's quite a price difference, no?
Oh right - that's why CCPOA hates private prisons.
The private guys aren't really cops though - no batons, no guns, no POST certificates.
I don't think we think nearly enough about prisons or prisoners. We get lots of coverage about costs and guards though.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)