null

Show Entries

Religious Cocksuckers!
Entered on: October 12, 2007 3:55 PM by Ross

I had no idea this was coming, but apparently the Illinois legislature has passed a law - overturning a veto by the ordinarily douchebaggy governor - to mandate a moment of silence every day in public schools.  Needless to say, I am incensed.

So once Heather goes back to teaching in January, she will be forced to set aside some time (the law doesn't say how long) for kids to pray or "reflect on the coming day."  What really irritates me is how dishonest these lawmakers are, saying it's not about prayer, but instead, a few seconds of silence every day could avoid violence: 

Rep. Will Davis (D-Homewood), the bill’s chief sponsor, denied he was promoting school prayer but instead said a moment of silence possibly could avert tragedies like the recent school shooting in Cleveland, where a troubled 14-year-old shot two students and two teachers before killing himself.

What a dishonest howler of a crock of shit!  There's no way this jackhole actually believes that.  This sounds very similar to the Intelligent Design creationists who say that ID isn't about Christianity.  But every one of them is an evangelical Christian, and the ones who pushed it in Dover, PA denied their motivation in court and got called out on it by the judge.  

Anyway, there's no stipulation about how long the silence has to be, so I would think a few seconds would do it for me if I was the teacher.  As a student, I have no use for this - I get times to reflect plenty of times - on the bus, walking to/from home, in the bathroom, whatever.  This wouldn't be necessary (and wouldn't assuage any feelings of violence I might have).  So as long as the kid keeps quiet (a rule most teachers probably try to enforce anyway) and works on his homework or whatever, shouldn't that cut it?  Or would he have to sit stock still, arms at his sides or clasped in prayer?  That's the real point of contention, if you ask me.  I'm going to keep my eye on this and see what Heather's coworkers end up doing.

NEWS 448 - 20 Comments
From: Swerb Entered on: October 15, 2007 6:53 PM
Everything about this is disingenuous. It seems to have been written by Stacy's principal ...
 
From: NickNick Entered on: October 16, 2007 7:35 AM
If anything, it will promote the violence because it will give that one unstable kid a little more time to build up the courage to do it, or it might become the "perfect" time to start the killing.  I have no problem with letting kids pray in school or around the flag or whatever it is they want to do, just don't make it a law.
 
From: Jackzilla Entered on: October 16, 2007 9:51 AM

With all the work that needs to be done, this dimwit elected official, with a finite time in office, feels this is what he wants to spend his time doing:  Making a law for a mandatory quiet time?

Good grief, Charlie Brown.


 
From: Ross Entered on: October 16, 2007 11:24 AM
Exactly, Jack!  The IL state congress has so many things they need to fix, too.  We have a major budget crisis with respect to the public transit system and they are dragging their heels and bickering about nonsense like this instead of doing their jobs. 

 
From: NickNick Entered on: October 16, 2007 11:42 AM
Ross said:
Exactly, Jack!  The IL state congress has so many things they need to fix, too.  We have a major budget crisis with respect to the public transit system and they are dragging their heels and bickering about nonsense like this instead of doing their jobs. 
I want to get elected to congress.  I would love to have a 4 year vacation and live off the taxpayers money.

 
From: Heather Entered on: October 16, 2007 12:38 PM

For what it's worth, even if Blagojevich is a dimwit, he actually vetoed this crazy law.  Congress are the ones who put this into play by overriding his veto.  There are definitely more things in our schools that congress should be focusing on than some bullshit moment of silence.

 BTW, my friend reported to me after the first moment of silence.  My school is opting to use only 10 seconds to "reflect".  This is in no way enough time to even think about taking a shit let alone think about the important events of your day.  As I do with the Pledge, I will stand and do the part, but I will NOT force a child to participate.  I don't make them recite the Pledge and last I checked, you can force anyone to reflect.  They may stand there is silence, but what goes on in their heads is of their own choice.  As Ross even suggested, I wouldn't mind if my students were reading or doing some last minute silent studying before a big test.

Ah, the joys of public schools...


 
From: BigFatty Entered on: October 16, 2007 12:38 PM
NickNick said:
I want to get elected to congress. I would love to have a 4 year vacation and live off the taxpayers money.

Try losing your job..... I got a two year vacation on unemployment where I was able to live and travel in Europe, plus go to school there, all on the tax-payers dime.

God bless the USA!!! - Oops - Moment of silence................ the USA!

Yes - this is stupid.  WTF!!!  Where can they show that a moment of silence will prevent a Columbine???  How can they even say that?  How can the court system allow themselves to be manipulated on this slippery slope?  Mandatory anything is against what this country was based upon.  What if my kids don't want to do this?  What about their rights?  Having a moment of silence does not allow for the pursuit of anything.... much less happiness.  You are just sitting there.


 
From: Ross Entered on: October 16, 2007 12:39 PM
NickNick said:
If anything, it will promote the violence because it will give that one unstable kid a little more time to build up the courage to do it, or it might become the "perfect" time to start the killing. 
I said the exact same thing... Smile
 
From: Ross Entered on: October 16, 2007 12:44 PM
BigFatty said:
NickNick said:
I want to get elected to congress. I would love to have a 4 year vacation and live off the taxpayers money.

Try losing your job..... I got a two year vacation on unemployment where I was able to live and travel in Europe, plus go to school there, all on the tax-payers dime.

 My archetypal example of "living fat off taxpayer money" and still phoning it in is the postal service.  I truly understand wanting to "go postal" after even 10 minutes at the post office.  Maybe the DMV is as bad, but I go there so infrequently, it's hard to know. 

God bless the USA!!! - Oops - Moment of silence................ the USA!

Yes - this is stupid. WTF!!! Where can they show that a moment of silence will prevent a Columbine??? How can they even say that? How can the court system allow themselves to be manipulated on this slippery slope? Mandatory anything is against what this country was based upon. What if my kids don't want to do this? What about their rights? Having a moment of silence does not allow for the pursuit of anything.... much less happiness. You are just sitting there.


Kids don't have rights, really... well, they have the right to exist and a few other basic rights - but one right they definitely don't have is to make noise anytime they want in school.  So IMO you're not stripping them of any rights by imposing this on them; kids are supposed to be quiet in class.  The only real difference is what the teachers are doing.  So like Heather said, if the kids just do their own thing during that time, it's not a huge deal (especially if it's only 10 seconds) but what gets me the most is that it is obviously religiously motivated and the congresspersons are lying about that.
 
From: Ross Entered on: October 16, 2007 2:12 PM
BigFatty said:

How can the court system allow themselves to be manipulated on this slippery slope? 

One other thing I think bears clarification:  our system of checks and balances dictates that the courts are not at the whim of the legislature, or vice versa.  So the bottom line is, as stinky as it is in this case, the courts are duty-bound to "be manipulated" in this way, at least at first.  

Only once someone presents a challenge to this law in the form of a lawsuit can the courts declare the law to be unconstitutional or otherwise illegal.  So for now, the courts must remain silent.


 
From: Jackzilla Entered on: October 16, 2007 2:28 PM
Ross said:
My archetypal example of "living fat off taxpayer money" and still phoning it in is the postal service. I truly understand wanting to "go postal" after even 10 minutes at the post office. Maybe the DMV is as bad, but I go there so infrequently, it's hard to know.

Woah woah woah!  I have to defend the post office now!

As I understand it, the post office does not receive taxpayer money but is sustained on it's postage rates -- like an independent business.  And I can't talk for most, but everyone at my local post office appear to be busy and efficient (even friendly!).  Now, the old grandma that's ahead of you in line and makes it come to a complete stand still because she wants to know about all the different stamps that are available?  Don't blame the post office worker for her!

And it's still one of the best deals around.  41 cents and I can send an envelope anywhere in the country?  WTF!?  And I'm sure they lose mail here and there -- but it's the exception for sure.  I've never had a lost piece of mail in my life as far as I know.  All those people that tell you the checks in the mail and it must have gotten lost?  They lied.

Go hug a postal worker. 


 
From: Ross Entered on: October 16, 2007 5:38 PM
Jackzilla said:

Woah woah woah! I have to defend the post office now!

As I understand it, the post office does not receive taxpayer money but is sustained on it's postage rates -- like an independent business. And I can't talk for most, but everyone at my local post office appear to be busy and efficient (even friendly!). Now, the old grandma that's ahead of you in line and makes it come to a complete stand still because she wants to know about all the different stamps that are available? Don't blame the post office worker for her! 

I agree that (roughly) half the problem is the retards in line ahead of me.  However, the workers have no incentive to work harder or faster than a snail's pace. 

Why?

The USPS is a federal government agency.   They do not have competition.  They are a statutory monopoly, and in my opinion, a racket.  While it may be true that they don't receive federal funding, they might as well be, since by law no one can compete with them and they can therefore set their rates however they please.  

Furthermore, working for them makes you a federal employee (you have to take that stupid government worker test) and that just breeds some kind of complacency.   Seems to me their jobs are just as protected as any federal employee's. 

And it's still one of the best deals around. 41 cents and I can send an envelope anywhere in the country? WTF!? And I'm sure they lose mail here and there -- but it's the exception for sure. I've never had a lost piece of mail in my life as far as I know. All those people that tell you the checks in the mail and it must have gotten lost? They lied.

Hmm... or I can send an email for nearly free and with a much higher delivery success rate.  I'll relay another favorite postal horror story of mine in a while, I'm heading home right now...

 
From: Bunky Entered on: October 16, 2007 5:43 PM

I'll be participating in a moment of silence for Zilla tomorrow, right before The Bionic Women starts. During these few moments, I will reflect on our "joyous times" on Halo 3 and Gears, and think about how much I will miss him while he is watching Earth 2.

 


 
From: Jackzilla Entered on: October 16, 2007 7:27 PM

Bert - You seem to be describing all jobs with unionized work forces.  And I agree, if you say unions are outdated and will be the death of us all.  I've heard stories at Angie's work that makes me sick (rewarding the dumb and lazy at the expense of the rest).  But are postal workers worse than other unions?  Eh.

Regarding competition:  While it is true that the USPS has a monopoly on letter delivery, I hardly think opening it up to competition would make it cheaper.  Are there really  entrepreneurs out there just dying to get into the business of delivering letters for 41 cents each?  Shit ninja!  We get charged 75 cents for information on the phone!  41 cents (or cheaper?) ain't gonna buy you shit!

As for packages: There is competition (a lot!) from UPS, FedEx, etc, but you know what?  It's damn hard to beat Priority Mail with Delivery Confirmation from USPS.  So I shit on that notion.

Sure enough e-mail is cheaper than mail (although my $50 internet access at home, $30 at work is hardly free).   Damn post office - Charging me 41 cents to deliver a letter!  

 


 
From: Ross Entered on: October 16, 2007 10:17 PM

Well I think we've digressed from the relative merits of postal employees to postal services, which was not my intention (or interest).  I will say that I usually use the USPS for shipping packages instead of UPS or FedEx but this is really out of convenience more than anything else.  They're still assholes about shipping correspondence from inside packages and whatnot and it's only because of their state-sanctioned monopoly that such absurd rules could possibly exist in the marketplace.

My core point was that postal workers, by and large, tend to be lazy SOBs.  Are they worse than others that belong to labor unions?  Some, for sure.  My wife (and both parents, for that matter) belongs to a teacher's union and works her ass off, as do many of her peers.  

I agree that most unions do not provide incentive for their workers to reach elite status - that only comes with fierce competition (something that the postal guy behind the desk - sorry - just doesn't have).  It's most complaint worthy when that unionized worker happens to have a very public-facing job, like a postal worker - thus them being the target of my ire more often.

By the way, it's also possible that your hometown postal workers are of higher caliber than the inner-city half-retarded gimps they have working around here.  Believe me, I watch closely just who to blame as I simmer in line, and you can't toss nearly all the trouble in the customers' laps.  Most of the guys behind the desks here are slow, rude, and completely lack any pride in a job well done. 


 
From: BigFatty Entered on: October 17, 2007 3:21 AM

Ross - you almost hit the nail on the head when thinking that Lowell's Post Office is of a higher caliber.  But you can't think of it as Lowell, think of it as 'Jack's World'  There is a big difference that I've experienced first hand.

You can compare the experience to 'The Truman Show', or to the old Disney movies.  When Jack goes out into Lowell, it is no longer Lowell as we would know it, it becomes 'Jack's World' for a short period.

The events described here come my direct participation.  Each day, Jack needs to run his errands for Rookies - bank and post office. As soon as he walks out the door, the world changes.  The clouds part, the sun shines brightly, and bluebirds flutter by and land on Jack's shoulder has he happily walks through town. 'Hi Jack!' shouts EVERY frickin person we pass.  When we get to the post office, of course everyone is happy to see Jack and the office erupts in hearty - 'Hi Jack's!'  It is a fun and lively place and everyone is joking and having a good time.  That is, until I step up to the window.  As soon as I step up, the sun went behind the clouds and the fun, flirty postal worker becomes the Ice Queen.  It didn't last for long.  As soon as we left, the chorus of 'Bye Jack!' followed us out and the bluebirds returned.

So thats what Jack's only experience with Postal Workers is.  So please discount it heavily.  He doesn't know what life is like outside his aquarium.   I have been to many offices in GR and I can say that results vary by office.  I found one that gives me great service, so I return to that branch, even though it is out of my way (but it is the secret post office at the airport that nobody knows about and is always empty).  I think you are right - big city post offices have more crappy employees.  The reputation is there for a reason.


 
From: Jackzilla Entered on: October 17, 2007 6:15 AM
Fatty - What about the economies of scale?  Surely we could work that into our discussions!

 
From: BigFatty Entered on: October 17, 2007 7:33 AM
I think you mean The Law of Diminishing Returns ...... again!

 
From: Radmobile Entered on: October 17, 2007 7:38 AM
I do like this notion of "Jack's World." It seems to only apply in Lowell though. When I travel with Jack in GR and such he just ends up getting funny looks a lot.
 
From: Jackzilla Entered on: October 17, 2007 8:31 AM
BigFatty said:
I think you mean The Law of Diminishing Returns ...... again!

D'oh!!!

Wink


 

[Log In to Add Comment]


a division of

© 2003 Ross Johnson
RSS Feed