Random Diatribe

Let start off by burning some sacred cows, shall we? For starters, let us look at what passes for news these days. I will list it out for you:

O.J. Simpson -- A man blessed with great athletic skills, who managed to cull his fame into a decent movie career. A truly lucky individual that managed to stand in a court of his "peers" and claim victory from what was truly insurmountable odds against him. A man destined to leave behind a legacy of shame, which his children have to carry for the rest of their lives. A man who somehow managed to become the poster-boy for black people backing a losing horse.

Seriously people. This is not news, this is merely tabloid material posing as something worthwhile. I can say this about the tabloids though -- It appears that they all remain true to themselves. At the very least they do not pretend to be anything more than what they are. They also know that in you, the populace at large, they have an absolutely guaranteed readership. Consequently they are just fine with that.

Some might argue that it is this way because nobody wants to hear the truth. I think that is truly incorrect thinking. I believe that most people place their attention and an emphasis on things that should not and do not matter. When stupidity like the current O.J. Simpson issue occur and it is given almost no credence then chances are, things like this would not happen. When they do occasionally arise, they are able to be better handled and the supposed "playing field" becomes a bit more level.

Here is a "hot-button" topic:
The War in Iraq -- Alright people, let us get one thing straight. There is a small contingent of people out there that I believe have a viable perspective on this. Here it is, in a slightly, oversimplified nutshell.

First off, you have politicians who are running the "war". Since the only thing they truly care about is obtaining another term in office, there is no motivation for them to move forward on any issue related to the war because in doing so it would show progress and they would have to actually put in some work once an issue like this was solved. Now, if you really and truly looked at the situation as a whole instead of the individual parts, then you would notice a recurring pattern that has seemingly developed. What is shown to you is an entire system broken down into sound and video clips. Each of the politicians that you see are busy shifting the burden of responsibility over to someone else or some other entity. Subsequently keeping you, as the people they are supposed to represent, thoroughly confused. As long as these "representatives" know that the people can be distracted, you will be treated like sheep. Oh sure, there are those who will say that they are not sheep. But look at who you align yourselves with.

To prove this point, all one will have to do is view the recent presidential candidate debates. When you view it, ask yourselves this simple question. Were any of the questions posed on the "issues of the day" truly answered. Or were you treated to a well choreographed verbal ballet of the shell game. There appeared to be a lot of indications from each of the candidates that when asked a direct question eluded to simply pawning the burden of actually answering the question off on one of their "esteemed" colleagues supposed "plans" on how to deal with the issue. Therefore it appeared as though the candidate was merely hinting at the fact that their "plan" was better. Mind you now, this was all done with a wink and a nod. The end result? The sheeple, that is the general public bought into it whole-heartedly. Basically, you were given a "wait and see" statement that took several hours to make. Go ahead and look through the transcripts of the debates. I will wait...

Good. By now one of two things have occurred. One: You decided to stick to your thoughts and follow blindly, like lemmings to the cliff. Two: You took the time to attempt to read through the Q&A and found there to be more fluff than real content. Does that mean that you were wrong? Of course not. If you took the time to do the latter versus the former then you have taken a step into questioning those people that are supposed to represent you instead of themselves. It is not that hard to do. Chew on that for a while and see what you can do with it. Possibly those with more resources will do the same and then things will get mighty interesting.

Katrina -- This is an issue that I wish would just die and not linger on painfully as it has been. History has shown time and time again that by not learning from our past mistakes, we doomed to repeat them. Katrina, if nothing else, should serve as a reminder. A reminder for lessons not learned. You hear a lot of outcry from the same people. They have been around forever. The people, in question, are those of whom have placed all their faith in the wrong people. People who gave their absolute faith and trust to the village idiots. Consequently, the village idiots are smart enough to know that the village they oversee and are entrusted to protect will believe anything that is brought before them so that the real cause of the supposed "crisis" will not be seen by the "poor, dumb, villagers". That is done so somebody has something to complain about.

I pray thee all, a moment to query. When you see the news and hear the reports of the damage done after the the hurricane actually hit, it looks bad. But now it is over two years later and we are seeing the same two or three areas affected by the hurricane. It appears as though nothing has been done. Then every once in a while you see or hear a story of how other communities in nearby areas have come together to fix homes, streets and their immediate environments. So the question here is what is the difference between the the communities that have regained some semblance of normalcy and the "still ravaged" areas?

The difference is the communities that have seemingly "snapped" back, have done so because the felt that they did not have the time to Whine and cry and stand still looking for handouts from a group of untrustworthy individuals and their minions who oversee their fiefdoms. Those communities have made a comeback because they decided as a group to find a way to become more than what they were and not wait around for handouts that will never come. Someone, somewhere realized early on that help from afar was not going to come in a timely manner, if at all. Upon realizing this the communities, as a group, pulled their collective heads out of their own asses and got down to the business of finding alternate ways to rebuild on their own. They did this with not a lot of help from the outside. Most of the help, it seems, came from the local houses of worship and other smaller private means.

So why has this not happened across the board? It is simple. The lesser minions of the greater hierarchy would then be seen for what they are. Monstrous screw-ups. The people will then, as an entire group will begin to realize that the people that they have placed their trust in have failed them and have only looked out for their own interests and not the people they were entrusted to protect, govern and oversee. They do not care about the people in New Orleans. After two years if you are still waiting for a hand out, you have lost the right to call yourselves "victims". You are victims nonetheless... But you are victims of your own ignorance. You are not to be pitied. It is wasted on you. When you begin to realize that you are better than what you are made out to be by others, then you will see the greatness and the potential you all can hold.

Coming Soon: More on education!!!

Part 2: The Gulag

So I decide that I am going to have lunch with my son at school. Seems innocuous enough does it not? I figure I will go there and have a good time talking and shootin' the breeze with my boy. So I run down to the closes fast food eatery and pick up some to-go vittles for me and my son. I arrive at the school and am allowed to meet him in the cafeteria. now I am beginning to notice a few things: For starters, the cafeteria itself is not all that big and the chairs and tables are small and low to the ground. then I see the stage off to my right and on the stage sits a traffic light... You got it folks... A traffic light. The meaning of this would soon become apparent to me.

So I am sitting in the cafeteria waiting for my son to arrive and the kids start filing in. Well I notice right away that the kids are unusually quiet and not at all exuberant as kids going to the lunchroom for lunch usually are. I begin to rethink this coming to the school to eat lunch with my boy idea.

I soon see my son and wave to him. His teacher allows him to leave the line to come with me to the table I found for the two of us in the back of the cafeteria. I show him the goodies I picked up for him at the local "greasy spoon" type place and he is happy about that. We begin to eat up and we get to talking amongst ourselves. I am listening to the din of the other students in the cafeteria, when to my surprise, I notice that the traffic light is turned on and is showing green. Thirty seconds later the light switches to yellow and the teachers who are roaming the cafeteria attempting to look important loudly tell the children that the light is yellow and to keep it down. Ten seconds after that announcement is made, the light turns red and it is at this point a rather quizzical look scurries across my face and I turn to my son and ask somewhat befuddled "Hey big man... What's with the light?". To which, he replied "Oh that? That is the light that tells us when we can talk...".

It is at this point where I being to feel nothing but abject pity for my son and his fellow classmates.

"So let me see if I am understanding this... You are at lunch. Right?"

"Yes." he replies.

"And you cannot speak most of the time during lunch. Right?"

"Yes." says he.

"So when did the lunch room become a gulag?" (It is at this point that I quickly explain what a gulag is to the boy and he seemed to fully understand the concept -- and agreed).

He then explains to me that this is the way it has always been. I was clearly shocked by what I saw and took this up with the Principal of the school.

I cornered her in the hallway and proceeded to inquire about the gulag type atmosphere and the teachers walking around like Spetsnaz. She seemed puzzled by what I was asking. I then realized that the vapid and lost look on her face was caused by her not knowing what "gulag" or "Spetsnaz" meant. So after using more simplistic terms, she informed me that this was so the children would eat all their food. I protested such silly behavior and reminded her that children of my son's age (5-11 years) are going to be loud. It is what they do and quickly reminded the principal that the kids would burn off excess energy and would be more apt to better receive information coming from the teachers. This statement caused the same vapid and lost look again. So it is my mission at this point to go to lunch with my son as much as possible and be as disruptive as possible to show the teacher that the children would be much better off if the would concentrate on teaching the children instead of trying to raise them. Raising my son is my job not theirs.

Coming soon: Can we skip it?

It has been a while, has it not? Part 1

Well I see that it has been a while since the last time I threw some thoughts together. So now I am trying to make a comeback by laying down opinions and attempting to make sense without having some knucklehead say something stupid... Which as I see happens often. Oh well what are you going to do?

My son started school recently and I am a bit peeved. It seems that I am noticing a pattern with quite a number of schools across the nation (especially n the south where I reside). It appears to me that the schools are attempting to create a group of graduating children who have the mental acuity of a grape. I spoke to my son's teachers and listened to them tell me about their "so-called" curriculum. I stared and listened in utter disbelief as I actually heard his math and science teacher tell me "Well we are going to start off with a review from the work done last year for those students who need remedial work or need to catch up...". After hearing this I asked about the time frame for this and was told that It would probably be for the first two months. That is right folks -- TWO MONTHS!

So let me get this straight: You go through an up to two month review for work that these kids should already know, for the purpose of helping the students who either did not or could not have the ability to do the work the previous year. If I am understanding this correctly the students who took the time to do the work and put forth an effort and the students who showed an ability to do the work are being penalized for the shortcomings of the few who cannot do the work. So effectively, by the time that the students start doing the real work they are already behind in basic academics? Would someone please explain this to me?

Of course school administrators are trying to figure out why more and more parents are having their children home-schooled during their primary school years. I think that more and more people are beginning to figure out that building a curriculum around a state mandated test and completely removing academic competition from the classroom was not such a bright idea. Clearly, these learning philosophies were put forth by people and administrators whose children were not up to snuff and decided to dumb down American academics to suit the failings and shortcomings of their academically, less than adequate children, so it gives the appearance of an even playing field.

To be Continued: Part 2: The Gulag