Message
Anonymous wrote:Speaking as an ardent Democrat, I would take the Bush dynasty any day over the current crop of political dynasties in DC: the Browns, the Thomases and, God forbid, the Barrys.
Humm, can you remind me which unnecessary war a Brown, Thomas, or Barry has lied to get us into? I think your perspective is a little off. BTW, Ron Brown was not involved in local politics. That's not really a dynasty. I agree that Thomas junior is not working out. As for Barry, I'll worry about it when there is a little more evidence that is is more than a campaign opponent's fantasy.
Anonymous wrote:jsteele wrote:Anonymous wrote:What happens to the highly effective teacher once she/he doesn't get those high remarks/scores that she received before....what will the outcome be then.
I believe the bill includes stipulations that teachers that take this deal get to maintain their rating.
If so, what about the teachers already at those schools -- is the assumption that they are inherently inferior to the ward 3 teachers and therefore should be rated according to a different standard.
Maybe K Brown should switch some of the effective teachers in ward 8 to ward three and see what happens.
Have ever noticed that when the cable company offers a cut-rate deal, it's only for new customers? Existing customers don't get the price break. I guess this is the same sort of deal. If you are already a highly effective teacher in an east of the river school, your reward is that you get to continue being a highly effective teacher in an east of the river school. But, if you are a highly effective teacher west of the river, you can choose to get bonuses and protection from IMPACT in exchange for teaching east of the river.
It will be interesting to see how west of the river parents react to the migration of their best teachers to east of the river.
Dorrie wrote:
Jeff, do you have documentation of Gray saying that it was accomplished?
There are lots of sources, but this was the first one I found:
http://georgetown.patch.com/articles/mayor-gray-addresses-district-wide-and-community-level-concerns-at-anc2e-meeting
On education the mayor touted the District's pre-K program and said he intends to roll out a plan for infant and toddler care services before year's end. "We are the only city in America that has universal pre-k services," said Gray.
Anonymous wrote:In that case will we now see it's not just the teachers teaching that will get his or her scores up but the assistance of an active parent. Then again some parents aren't able to help their children with homework etc. so what happens then. I myself remember a little Algebra etc. but still pay for a tutor for my child. What I'm trying to say is that it's more to just getting a highly effective teacher in a low perfoming neighborhood, who knows what goes on in a child home, which could effect their learning.
I agree with you that externalities play a critical role. At the same time, I wouldn't just write these kids off. Giving them good teachers is better than not giving them good teachers. But, if you are waiting for Kwame Brown to start blaming voters for their children's poor educations, I wouldn't hold your breadth.
Anonymous wrote:What happens to the highly effective teacher once she/he doesn't get those high remarks/scores that she received before....what will the outcome be then.
I believe the bill includes stipulations that teachers that take this deal get to maintain their rating.
The sourcing on this story is very slim -- relying on the word of an admitted forger who is running against Barry. Barry denies it.
But, among the dynasties that can serve as cautionary tales, you left out the Bush father and son combo.
But, among the dynasties that can serve as cautionary tales, you left out the Bush father and son combo.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Technically it is universal. There are empty seats right now. Chances are though, you don't want your child at the schools that have a slot.
No, you are wrong. "Technically" would mean that the pre-K children have the same rights as a Kindergarten.
According to the legislation, you are actually incorrect. As defined by law, "universal pre-k" in DC means free pre-k slots for all 3 and 4-year-olds. Those slots don't necessarily have to be in DCPS schools. Gray considers this goal to have been accomplished. So, as far as he is concerned, we have universal pre-k now.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:One thing about medications is that it is not permanent, you can always stop them. Maybe you and your husband could agree to a trial period of about 3 months. You have to give the meds enough time to work. Make a plan that at 3 months you will re-evaluate, and either continue or stop. A couple may need to be tapered down, but should not be a big deal after only three months.
The drug industry is just that....an industry. It is driven by profits. It is not a good business practice to have part-time clientele. It is more than likely that your children will be life-time clients of this industry.
I really appreciate your offering a counterpoint to pharmaceutical industry marketing. However, the original poster of this thread is not asking about whether or not to medicate. Rather, she is asking about how others have dealt with their spouses regarding this issue. As such, your posts are not relevant to the topic. If you would like to continue discussing pharmaceutical industry practices and/or the effectiveness of medication, please start another thread.
Because Paul accepts that the government has a role in policing and defending the state, he is actually a libertarian rather than an anarchist. But, you are correct that his resort to name-calling suggests an inability to provide a rational counter-argument.
Anonymous wrote:tThis does have all the elements--Dark Black man (clarence Thomas--"who has left this pubic hair on my Coke can...?") And Cain shoves his hand up a white woman. Or is that Clarence? You know, I can't keep my Uncle Toms straight.
Based on your displayed intellect, I'm surprised that you can tie your shoes in the morning.
Anonymous wrote:
Allegedly involved. The woman didn't tell anyone about this in 14 years! With such a long lag time she needs to have some evidence for me to take her seriously. Like everyone else who is commenting online and in the media I don't know what happened with this woman or who is telling the truth. But to keep quiet about something like this For 14 years then come out with it and a celebrity lawyer when it suits is highly suspicious. Even though she isn't suing Cain I will be stunned if she is not trying to gain from this financially: book deal, paid interviews or just 15 minutes of fame. I will choose to ignore anything this woman says. The other accusers went on the record with their claims whether true or false.
Apparently Fox News failed to report accurately. The woman has two statements that are signed under oath by individuals to whom she told about this incident just after it happened. So, she did tell people about it back then.
Anonymous wrote:jsteele wrote:Anonymous wrote:If the president can get a rim job from an intern in the Oval Office and not lose his job then I don't see why Cain can't keep his job of being a candidate. He is only a candidate.
Are you not capable of understanding the difference between consensual and non-consensual, or do you simply refuse to recognize the difference?
I can only go by what I have read about. I understand consensual and non-consensual but I am not sure that doing an intern as her superior means it was consensual. I do know that when she said no to Cain he stopped.
I think both women involved have been very clear about whether they consented or not. But, apparently you don't understand consent. Generally, consent is something that is required prior to placing your hand up a woman's skirt.
Anonymous wrote:If the president can get a rim job from an intern in the Oval Office and not lose his job then I don't see why Cain can't keep his job of being a candidate. He is only a candidate.
Are you not capable of understanding the difference between consensual and non-consensual, or do you simply refuse to recognize the difference?
According to the article, "Most D.C. workers do not make inflated salaries, and the pay for many is relatively low."
But, by all means, let's pick out one guy and turn him into a deceptive headline.
Also, would you mind providing your salary and profession so that we can determine whether or not it is worthy of discussing on DCUM?
But, by all means, let's pick out one guy and turn him into a deceptive headline.
Also, would you mind providing your salary and profession so that we can determine whether or not it is worthy of discussing on DCUM?
Anonymous wrote:
All of you pointing out all of this- REPORT HIM to DCUM and get him off these boards.. wtf- who with no kids is reading this -per subject line sexual molestation and children- and gets so defensive- PERVERT alert.
Somebody did report him, which I appreciate, and I do not believe the suspicions of him are well-founded. I would note that this is the "off-topic" forum and therefore one in which non-parents would find topics of interest. DCUM as a whole has a lot to interest non-parents. A teacher, in particular, might find the schools forums of interest. I also think it is obvious that molestation of children is an issue of concern even to non-parents.
I am by no means criticizing the person that reported the poster. As I said, I appreciate drawing my attention to such cases. I have no other way to show that I acted on the report and came to the conclusion that nothing is amiss.