Conan & the Emmys - Just for fun

Hey Folks,

I don't watch much TV, but there was a lot of talk about Conan's schtick at the Emmys; so I sought it out.

If you missed it (as I did), or if you want to see it again , here you go (there are two parts, a video and a stage bit):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qwCOUgjECtI&NR

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SmUVKjbCcVM&NR

- Uke Man

Just say "No"

 

Did the Jews Do It????

Hey Folks,

Greg Palast is an American who couldn't get the truth he found here published here. Now he works out of the UK and reports on the USA. He's the one who uncovered the Florida "name dropping" (from the voter lists) during W's coup in 2000.

He's always interesting and instructive!!

- Uke Man

Greg Palast

There are kooks and cranks and conspiracy nuts out there who think George Bush, from the moment he took office, had some kind of secret plan to invade Iraq and grab control of its oil. They’re wrong. There were two plans. I’ve got them both. One is 323 pages long, the other 101 pages. How I got them, I’ll explain later.

But first, let’s try to answer a more pressing question. Did the Jews do it? I mean, after killing Jesus, did the Elders of Zion manipulate the government of the United States into invading Babylon as part of a scheme to abet the expansion of Greater Israel?

The question was first posed to me in 2004 when I was speaking at a meeting of Mobilization for Peace in San Jose. A member of the audience asked, "Put it together—Who’s behind this war? Paul Wolfowitz and Elliott Abrams and the Project for a "Jew" American Century and, and, why don’t you talk about that, huh? And …."

But the questioner never had the full opportunity to complete his query because, flushed and red, he began to charge the stage. The peace activists attempted to detain the gentleman—whose confederates then grabbed some chairs to swing. As the Peace Center was taking on a somewhat warlike character, I chose to call in the authorities and slip out the back.

Still, his question intrigued me. As an investigative reporter, "Who’s behind this war?" seemed like a reasonable challenge—and if it were a plot of Christ-killers and Illuminati, so be it. I just report the facts, ma’am.

And frankly, at first, it seemed like the gent had a point, twisted though his spin might be. There was Paul Wolfowitz, before Congress, offering Americans the bargain of the century: a free Iraq—not "free" as in "freedom and democracy" but free in the sense of this won’t cost us a penny. Wolfowitz testified in March 2003: "There’s a lot of money to pay for this that doesn’t have to be U.S. taxpayer money."

And where would these billions come from? Wolfowitz tells us:

"It starts with the assets of the Iraqi people....The oil revenues of that country could bring between $50 and $100 billion over the next two or three years."

This was no small matter. The vulpine Deputy Defense Secretary knew that the number one question on the minds of Americans was not, "Does Saddam really have the bomb?" but "What’s this little war going to cost us?"

However, Wolfowitz left something out of his testimony: the truth. I hunted for weeks for the source of the Pentagon’s oil revenue projections—and found them. They were wildly different from the Wolfowitz testimony. But this was not perjury. Ever since the conviction of Elliott Abrams for perjury before Congress, neither Wolfowitz nor the other Bush factotums swear an oath before testifying. If you don’t raise your hand and promise to tell the truth, "so help me, God," you’re off the hook with federal prosecutors. How the Lord will judge that little ploy, we cannot say.

But Wolfowitz’s little numbers game can hardly count as a Great Zionist conspiracy.

That seemed to come, at first glance, in the form of the secret 101-page document, the plan for the occupation of Iraq, devised, I later learned, in late 2001. Notably, it wasn’t written by Iraqis; rather, it was promoted by the neoconservatives of the Defense Department, home of Abrams, Wolfowitz, Harold Rhode and other desktop Napoleons unafraid of moving toy tanks around the Pentagon war room. And the godfather of the plan? Ariel Cohen of the Heritage Foundation.

Nose-Twist’s Hidden Hand

The neocons’ 101-page confidential document, which came to me in February 2001, just before the tanks rolled, goes boldly where no U.S. invasion plan had gone before: the complete rewrite of the conquered state’s "policies, law and regulations." A flat-tax cap on the incomes of Iraq’s wealthiest was included as a matter of course. And this was undoubtedly history’s first military assault plan appended to a program for toughening the target nation’s copyright laws. Once the 82nd Airborne liberated Iraq, never again would the Ba’athist dictatorship threaten America with bootleg dubs of Britney Spears’s "...Baby One More Time."

It was more like a corporate takeover, except with Abrams tanks instead of junk bonds. It didn’t strike me as the work of a Kosher Cabal for an Imperial Israel. In fact, it smelled of pork—Pig Heaven for corporate America looking for a slice of Iraq, and I suspected its porcine source. I gave it a big sniff and, sure enough, I smelled Grover Norquist.

Norquist is the capo di capi of right-wing, big-money influence peddlers in Washington. The devout Christian Norquist channeled a million dollars to the Christian Coalition to fight the devil’s tool, legalized gambling. He didn’t tell the Coalition that the loot came from an Indian tribe represented by Norquist’s associate, Jack Abramoff. The tribe didn’t want competition for its own casino operations.

I took a chance and dropped in on Norquist’s L Street office, and under a poster of his idol ["Nixon—now more than ever"], Norquist took a look at the confidential 101-page plan for Iraq and practically jumped over my desk to sign it, filled with pride at seeing his baby. Yes, he promoted the privatizations, the flat tax, and the change in "intellectual" property rights law, all concerns close to the hearts and wallets of his clients.

"The Oil" on Page 73

But there was, without doubt, one notable item in the 101-page plan for Iraq which clearly had the mark of Zion on it. On page seventy-three the plan called for the "privatization....[of] the oil and supporting industries," the sell-off of every ounce of Iraq’s oil fields and reserves. Its mastermind, I learned, was Ariel Cohen of the Heritage Foundation.

For the neocons, this was The Big One. Behind it, no less a goal than to bring down the lynchpin of Arab power, Saudi Arabia.

It would work like this: the Saudi’s power rests on control of OPEC, the oil cartel which, as any good cartel, withholds oil from the market, kicking up prices. Sell-off Iraq’s oil fields and private companies will pump oil in their little Iraqi patches to the max. Iraq will crank out six million barrels of oil a day, bust its OPEC quota, flood the world market, demolish OPEC and, as the price of oil fell off a cliff, Saudi Arabia would fall to its knees.

"It’s a no-brainer," Cohen told me, at his office at Heritage. It was a dim little cubby, in which, in our hour or two together, the phone rang only once. For a guy who was supposed to be the mastermind of a globe-spanning Zionist scheme to destroy the Arab oil monopoly, he seemed kind of, well...pathetic.

And he failed. While the Norquist-promoted sell-offs, flat taxes, and copyright laws were dictated into Iraqi law by occupation chief Paul Bremer, the Cohen neo-con oil privatization died an unhappy death. What happened, Ari?

"Arab economists," he hissed, "hired by the State Department...the witches brew of the Saudi Royal family and Soviet Ostblock."

Well, the Soviet Ostblock does not exist, but the Arab economists do. I spoke with them in Riyadh, in London, in California, in confident, wry accents mixing desert and Oxford. But their authority only reflects the royal families of Houston petroleum.

Wolfowitz Dammerung: Twilight of the Neocon Gods

After two mad years of hunting, I discovered the real plan for Iraq, the one that keeps our troops in Fallujah. Some 323 pages long and deeply

Confidential, it was drafted at the James A. Baker III Institute under the strict guidance of Big Oil’s minions, the culmination of a committee including Ken Lay, key players from the Council on Foreign Relations (who began their work in December 2000), a State Department invasion-planning session in Walnut Creek, California, in February 2001, and the gathering of oil chiefs with Dick Cheney in March 2003, where the map of the oil fields of Iraq was carefully reviewed.

Once discovered, several of the players agreed to speak with me (not, to the chagrin of a couple, realizing that I rarely hold such conversions without a wire). Most forthright was Philip Carroll, former CEO of Shell Oil USA, who was flown into Baghdad on a C-17 to make sure there would be no neocon monkey business in our newest oil fields. It had been a very good war for Big Oil, with tripled oil prices meaning tripled profits. In Houston, I asked Carroll, a commanding, steel-straight chief executive, about Cohen’s oil privatization plan, the anti-Saudi "no-brainer."

"I would agree with that statement" Caroll told me, " privatization is a no-brainer. It would only be thought about by someone with no brains."

Bush world is divided in two: neocons on one side, and the Establishment (which includes the oil companies and the Saudis) on the other. The plan the Establishment created, crafted by Houston oil men, called for locking up Iraq’s oil with agreements between a new state oil company under "profit-sharing agreements" with "IOCs" (International Oil Companies). The combine could "enhance [Iraq’s] government’s relationship with OPEC," it read, by holding the line on quotas and thereby upholding high prices.

So there you have it. Wolfowitz and his neocon clique—bookish, foolish, vainglorious—had their asses kicked utterly, finally, and convincingly by the powers of petroleum, the Houston-Riyadh Big Oil axis.

Between the neocons and Big Oil, it wasn’t much of a contest. The end-game was crushing, final. The Israelites had lost again in the land of Babylon.

And to make certain the arriviste neocons got the point, public punishment was exacted, from exile to demotion to banishment. In January 2005, neocon pointman Douglas Feith resigned from the Defense Department; his assistant Larry Franklin later was busted for passing documents to pro-Israel lobbyists. The State Department’s knuckle-dragging enforcer of neocon orthodoxies, John Bolton, was booted from Washington to New York to the powerless post of U.N. Ambassador.

Finally, on March 16, 2005, second anniversary of the invasion, neocon leader of the pack Wolfowitz was cast out of the Pentagon war room and tossed into the World Bank, moving from the testosterone-powered, war-making decision center to the lending office for Bangladeshi chicken farmers.

"The realists," crowed the triumphant editor of the journal of the Council on Foreign Relations, "have defeated the fantasists!"

So much for the Big Zionist Conspiracy that supposedly directed this war. A half- dozen confused Jews, wandering in the policy desert a long distance from mainstream Jewish views, armed only with Leo Strauss’ silly aphorisms, were no match for Texas oil majors and OPEC potentates with a throw weight of half a trillion barrels of oil.

Investigative Reporter Greg Palast is the author of the bestseller, The Best Democracy Money Can Buy. This essay is adapted from his new book, Armed Madhouse: Who’s Afraid of Osama Wolf?, China Floats, Bush Sinks, the Scheme to Steal ’08, No Child’s Behind Left and other Dispatches from the Front Lines of the Class War (Dutton, 2006).

A Respectable Man on TV

At last!!! 

Olbermann Right on!!!

Hey Folks,

If you missed Countdown with Keith Olberman last night, you MUST see this:

http://video.msn.com/v/us/msnbc.htm?f=00&g=75f357f0-029f-4699-9171-d4431f8386f9&p=News_Comment%20-%20Analysis&t=c1149&rf=http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036677/&fg=

Check it out now. I don't know how long the video will be "up."

In case it "dies," I've posted a transcript below.

- Uke Man


Feeling morally, intellectually confused?

The man who sees absolutes, where all other men see nuances and shades of meaning, is either a prophet, or a quack.

Donald H. Rumsfeld is not a prophet.

Mr. Rumsfeld’s remarkable speech to the American Legion yesterday demands the deep analysis—and the sober contemplation—of every American.

For it did not merely serve to impugn the morality or intelligence -- indeed, the loyalty -- of the majority of Americans who oppose the transient occupants of the highest offices in the land. Worse, still, it credits those same transient occupants -- our employees -- with a total omniscience; a total omniscience which neither common sense, nor this administration’s track record at home or abroad, suggests they deserve.

Dissent and disagreement with government is the life’s blood of human freedom; and not merely because it is the first roadblock against the kind of tyranny the men Mr. Rumsfeld likes to think of as “his” troops still fight, this very evening, in Iraq.

It is also essential. Because just every once in awhile it is right and the power to which it speaks, is wrong.

In a small irony, however, Mr. Rumsfeld’s speechwriter was adroit in invoking the memory of the appeasement of the Nazis. For in their time, there was another government faced with true peril—with a growing evil—powerful and remorseless.

That government, like Mr. Rumsfeld’s, had a monopoly on all the facts. It, too, had the “secret information.” It alone had the true picture of the threat. It too dismissed and insulted its critics in terms like Mr. Rumsfeld’s -- questioning their intellect and their morality.

That government was England’s, in the 1930’s.

It knew Hitler posed no true threat to Europe, let alone England.

It knew Germany was not re-arming, in violation of all treaties and accords.

It knew that the hard evidence it received, which contradicted its own policies, its own conclusions — its own omniscience -- needed to be dismissed.

The English government of Neville Chamberlain already knew the truth.

Most relevant of all — it “knew” that its staunchest critics needed to be marginalized and isolated. In fact, it portrayed the foremost of them as a blood-thirsty war-monger who was, if not truly senile, at best morally or intellectually confused.

That critic’s name was Winston Churchill.

Sadly, we have no Winston Churchills evident among us this evening. We have only Donald Rumsfelds, demonizing disagreement, the way Neville Chamberlain demonized Winston Churchill.

History — and 163 million pounds of Luftwaffe bombs over England — have taught us that all Mr. Chamberlain had was his certainty — and his own confusion. A confusion that suggested that the office can not only make the man, but that the office can also make the facts.

Thus, did Mr. Rumsfeld make an apt historical analogy.

Excepting the fact, that he has the battery plugged in backwards.

His government, absolute -- and exclusive -- in its knowledge, is not the modern version of the one which stood up to the Nazis.

It is the modern version of the government of Neville Chamberlain.

But back to today’s Omniscient ones.

That, about which Mr. Rumsfeld is confused is simply this: This is a Democracy. Still. Sometimes just barely.

And, as such, all voices count -- not just his.

Had he or his president perhaps proven any of their prior claims of omniscience — about Osama Bin Laden’s plans five years ago, about Saddam Hussein’s weapons four years ago, about Hurricane Katrina’s impact one year ago — we all might be able to swallow hard, and accept their “omniscience” as a bearable, even useful recipe, of fact, plus ego.

But, to date, this government has proved little besides its own arrogance, and its own hubris.

Mr. Rumsfeld is also personally confused, morally or intellectually, about his own standing in this matter. From Iraq to Katrina, to the entire “Fog of Fear” which continues to envelop this nation, he, Mr. Bush, Mr. Cheney, and their cronies have — inadvertently or intentionally — profited and benefited, both personally, and politically.

And yet he can stand up, in public, and question the morality and the intellect of those of us who dare ask just for the receipt for the Emporer’s New Clothes?

In what country was Mr. Rumsfeld raised? As a child, of whose heroism did he read? On what side of the battle for freedom did he dream one day to fight? With what country has he confused the United States of America?

The confusion we -- as its citizens— must now address, is stark and forbidding.

But variations of it have faced our forefathers, when men like Nixon and McCarthy and Curtis LeMay have darkened our skies and obscured our flag. Note -- with hope in your heart — that those earlier Americans always found their way to the light, and we can, too.

The confusion is about whether this Secretary of Defense, and this administration, are in fact now accomplishing what they claim the terrorists seek: The destruction of our freedoms, the very ones for which the same veterans Mr. Rumsfeld addressed yesterday in Salt Lake City, so valiantly fought.

And about Mr. Rumsfeld’s other main assertion, that this country faces a “new type of fascism.”

As he was correct to remind us how a government that knew everything could get everything wrong, so too was he right when he said that -- though probably not in the way he thought he meant it.

This country faces a new type of fascism - indeed.

Although I presumptuously use his sign-off each night, in feeble tribute, I have utterly no claim to the words of the exemplary journalist Edward R. Murrow.

But never in the trial of a thousand years of writing could I come close to matching how he phrased a warning to an earlier generation of us, at a time when other politicians thought they (and they alone) knew everything, and branded those who disagreed: “confused” or “immoral.”

Thus, forgive me, for reading Murrow, in full:

“We must not confuse dissent with disloyalty,” he said, in 1954. “We must remember always that accusation is not proof, and that conviction depends upon evidence and due process of law.

“We will not walk in fear, one of another. We will not be driven by fear into an age of unreason, if we dig deep in our history and our doctrine, and remember that we are not descended from fearful men, not from men who feared to write, to speak, to associate, and to defend causes that were for the moment unpopular.”

And so good night, and good luck.

Education!!

Just like down on the farm. 

Oh yeah, can't besmirch the privileged !!

Hey Folks,

It's the same old shit!!! The old double standard!!!

Ever since the Republicans started their insane Proficiency Testing scheme and right through Dubya's nutcase Child Behind testing, the Media Masters (such as the Columbus Dispatch) have NEVER said an unkind word about the boondoggle - because it did what it was supposed to do:

1. Make Republican state officials (and now federal ones) look like they were doing something, but without increasing taxes (that was handed to the local districts - who often had to cut program to make ends meet).

2. Disparaged big city teacher unions since it was clear from the start that these economically/racially segregated schools would do "poorly," and that could be blamed on the union as well as be used to generally disparage public education.

3. Give impetus to privatizing schools (i.e. de-public-izing education) so that entremanures could rake off the goodies in their new and "better" schools.

Everything was fine - UNTIL an upscale suburb got caught in the intracacies of the shenanigans!! Oh, my god!!!! No!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Well, the Dispatch saddled up and charged into editorial battle (below).

They made it clear that the testing was just A-number 1, hunky-dory, fine - EXCEPT - if a suburban district gets screwed. Then it needs some "tweaking."

Damned hypocrites. At long last, have they no shame?

- Uke Man


Not there yet
State report-card system for schools is working but should be tweaked
Friday, August 18, 2006

Rising rankings for Ohio schools and districts on the state’s educational report cards show that this program can improve performance.

Ohio’s system of holding schools accountable and giving them data to track their success needs some tinkering to more fairly represent the performance of some districts. Nevertheless, the experience of the past six years shows that the program has been effective.

Statewide, 200 districts moved up at least one mark on the five-step rating scale, roughly equivalent to grades of A through F. None of the state’s 610 districts remains at the F level of academic emergency, and only seven remain at the D level of academic watch. Regrettably, Columbus Public Schools is one of those seven, but the district improved over the previous year and missed the continuous improvement, or C level, by only a hair.

Schools and districts can point to a variety of new approaches they’ve employed to help students master the material covered in standardized tests. Most have adapted their curricula to ensure that the most important material is covered, and many have offered study sessions and extra preparation for the tests.

A key point: Armed with the information contained in previous years’ test results, districts know what areas need work and can target their efforts for better results.

Penalties embedded in the accountability program motivate districts to improve, and data from the program help them figure out how to do it.

One element of Ohio’s program should be revisited.

Under Ohio rules, districts must break out and report the performance of several subgroups of students, including those who are disabled, speak limited English or belong to certain racial and ethnic groups.

Any district in which two or more subgroups fail to improve enough from the year before is barred from any rating higher than continuous improvement, regardless of how well it performed on every other measure. Conversely, if a district’s subgroups show a strong enough performance, it will receive an overall ranking of at least continuous improvement, regardless of overall performance.

This rule has the laudable purpose of forcing districts to pay attention to students with special needs, but it results in inaccurate ratings.

Hilliard City Schools languishes at the C level for the second year in a row, despite having met 21 of 23 standards in 2004-05 and every one of the 25 standards considered in 2005-06. The indignity has prompted the district to launch an ambitious program this year to raise the English proficiency of its growing immigrant population.

That’s a happy result, but the C rating in no way reflects the higher quality of education most families can expect from the Hilliard district.

Consideration of subgroups shouldn’t be dropped, because working toward all students’ success is the very essence of the No Child Left Behind law.

Districts with struggling subgroups should be required to help them and not be able to hide deficiencies under an overall good rating.

But the state Department of Education should find some way to do this without slapping the whole district with a label that understates overall quality.

Cute,huh!!!! 

Up-coming Uke Man Gigs

Hey Folks,

In case you are beginning to think that I’m all politics, I thought I should post my up-coming gigs.

This Thursday (Aug. 31st) and next Thursday (Sept. 7) I’ll be doing a few songs with a bunch of other good folks at the Stagecoach BBQ & Blues open stage – 6:00 to 9:00 (http://www.stagecoachbbq.com/ ) run by my good friend John Locke. The 7th will be an anniversary celebration of the weekly event.

Friday, Sept. 8 I’ll be playing the Hot Times Festival (http://www.hottimesfestival.com/program2006.pdf ) – 6:30 p.m. on the Parsons Avenue Stage. This festival is very soulful, jazzy, blue, and hip. I might have to do some spoken word to keep up.

Monday, Sept. 11 it's solo at Andyman’s Treehouse (http://www.andymanstreehouse.com/) and Sept.23 at Tommy Keegan’s ( http://www.tommykeegans.com/ ).

Saturday, Sept. 30 I’ll open for my friends the Moops at Larry’s (http://www.larrysbar.com/ ).

Tuesday, Oct. 10 I’ll be in McKinleyville, California playing the Six Rivers Brewery (http://www.sixriversbrewery.com/).

Thursday, Oct. 12 I’ts off to Santa Cruz playing for the Santa Cruz Ukulele Club, one of the largest such organizations in the world (http://www.ukuleleclub.com/) . You can hear an NPR story on the club at:

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5584525

Back in Ohio, the Prodigal Sons and I will Play the Pumpkin Show (in its 100th Celebration Year) on Friday, Oct. 20, at 1:30 p.m. on the Main Street Stage (http://www.pumpkinshow.com/).

That's it for now - that's plenty for an old guy; we'll cross the next bridge when we come to it. Hope to see you somewhere along the way.

- Uke Man

The Wisdom of Solomon

(He should work on his voice, though - tone & pacing, mainly) 

The World's Greatest Card Trick Revealed!!! *

Well Folks,

Guess what I found!!

Check it out:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fKXL9PtSHZ0&NR

- Uke Man

* Explains the card trick posted earlier at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2KrdBUFeFtY

Charter Schools - Pimpin' the Kids

 

How "Democracy" works

Hey Folks,

Democracy is supposed to serve the people, ALL the people, the voters. With that in mind you'd think that what our elected officials do would be intended to serve the people, all the people.

Well, think again.

The Charter School scheme was sold as a way to "improve education" especially for minorities being "left behind" by the "soft racism of low expectations."

Yeah, Republicans really care about minorities - that should have been the insurmountable tip-off that the scheme was crap. Actually it was hatched up to reduce spending on schools, produce profits for entremanures, weaken teachers unions, and con minorities into good thoughts about the kindly, white Republicans. There was nothing educational about it.

Check out the article below and see what the story is turning out to be - eight years down the road from the date of purchase.

- Uke Man



Ohio’s charter schools are failing to perform as well as its public schools
Monday, August 28, 2006
RICHARD GUNTHER

How well are charter schools meeting the needs of Ohio’s children and taxpayers?

When charter schools were first established eight years ago, state legislators argued that by allowing the private sector to compete with public schools, free of regulation by local school boards and the state board of education, charter schools would provide higher quality education more efficiently than traditional public schools. These privately owned and managed schools enrolled more than 70,000 students and received nearly a half-billion tax dollars last year, and it is high time that we look at the evidence to see if this policy has been successful.

Data released by the Ohio Department of Education on Aug. 14 demonstrated that most public schools are performing very well. Seventy percent of public schools statewide were categorized as excellent or effective, up from the 58 percent in those two top categories last year. These same data make clear that most charter schools have failed to achieve the quality promised by proponents. Only 17 percent were rated excellent or effective.

The most shocking finding is that 49 percent of charter schools statewide were given failing grades: 18 percent were placed on academic watch, while 31 percent were declared to be under academic emergency. This compares with just 6 percent in each category for public schools.

In central Ohio, the situation is even worse: Two-thirds of charter schools in Franklin County received failing grades, with an astonishing 52 percent of them placed on academic emergency, the lowest ranking. All 10 of the highestrated schools in central Ohio were traditional public schools. Conversely, seven of the 10 lowest-rated schools in central Ohio were charter schools.

Proponents of charter schools often claim that their performance suffers from the disproportionate enrollment of at-risk pupils in urban areas. In fact, data for public and charter schools in Ohio’s eight largest cities do not reveal a consistent difference with regard to composition of student populations. There are somewhat more blacks in charter schools (73 percent vs. 61 percent), but public schools in these urban areas have higher percentages of special-education and disabled students, members of other minority ethnic groups, percentages of pupils for whom English is a second language and children from economically disadvantaged families.

A study by the Ohio Education Association, the state’s largest teachers’ union, took these factors into account by comparing public schools with charter schools within the same neighborhood in Ohio’s eight largest cities. It found that, by a wide margin, public schools perform much better on state-mandated standardized tests than charter schools in the same neighborhood.

In a world of unlimited money, the charter-school experiment might be justifiable. But the diversion of state funding has deprived public schools of badly needed money. In the Columbus school district, the fiscal crisis has led to the elimination of more than 900 teaching positions over the past four years, with several hundred more slated for elimination. In short, the costs of this failed experiment have undermined public education’s ability to place enough teachers in the classroom.

The basic design of the charter system is flawed and unfair to public education. Public schools are held accountable to the Ohio Department of Education. Why did charter schools receive $487 million in taxpayer dollars last year, but with no ODE oversight? Why should charter-school students be exempt from the testing requirements established by the No Child Left Behind law? Why should business executives, some of whom have made millions dollars in campaign contributions to politicians, be allowed to make enormous profits from managing charter schools at the taxpayers’ expense? And when will our elected officials demand that private institutions deliver a high-quality education in exchange for receiving hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars a year?

Competition among schools might be a good thing over the long term. But that competition must be conducted with the same standards of performance and accountability imposed on all.

Richard Gunther is a professor of political science at Ohio State University and is the 2006 recipient of the university’s Distinguished Scholar Award.
Richardgunther1 @netscape.net

 

Bush 10 Years Ago and Now

Hey Folks,

Judge for yourself:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NvVilAlCBYc

- Uke Man

"Wonderous!!!!"

 

Kathleen Parker is at it again!! (she Loves Zombies)

Hey Folks,

There are always two sides to every story, and Kathleen Parker will give you both of them. It just depends on whose ox is getting gored.

Invariably if someone to the left is in question, she trots out the authoritarian, hard-line, fire-and-brimstone, accountability, crime and punishment rhetoric. If the focus is on a Righty – as with the George Allen’s “macaca” incident – she breaks out the violins and plays the give-him-a-break, oh-come-on, that’s-not-what-he-said/meant, it’s-no-big-deal, do-you-want-to-hurt-America medley.

Having perceived – after much study – that Allen had a long history as a Righty (as well as a racist), she rosined up her bow.

Her discord is reproduced below – with my comments in red.

- Uke Man



Society makes great sacrifices in this age of unending, often raw information (Yeah, we have to think for ourselves, what a pain!! What a "sacrifice"!!!)
Monday, August 28, 2006
KATHLEEN PARKER

The age of YouTube, iPod, blogs, Technorati and Digg — combined with 24-7 insta-everything — has created both a wondrous and horrifying (she's not talking about interminable Mentos & Diet Pop videos) world.

Wondrous belongs to the spectators, who are free to google, oogle and giggle (passive oogling giggling SPECTATORS - entertainment - is "wonderous" [check John Lennon's line in "Working Class Hero"] ) . Horrifying is the realm of actors (not "passive-ors"- not SPECTATORS like us). Not actors of the Tom Cruise variety, though Maverick’s meltdown surely is as much a function of the relentless Eye as of his odd behavior.

I’m talking more about real people (people not like us who "google, oogle, and giggle" - "real" people) who mount life’s stage in good faith to do things that matter (unlike googling, oogling, and giggling - which IS "wonderful" and quite suitable for regular folks - just not "real people" ). To shape events, to mold policy, to advance civilization (on what basis? according to whom? certainly not according to us; we just need to keep busy googling, oogling, and giggling while REAL people act). Not everyone is qualified for the job, clearly, but neither is every critic a worthy adversary (especially not those severely affected by the "actors").

What passes for acceptable criticism today was unimaginable a generation ago (she must be unaware of Nixon's campaign tactics in his 1950 Senate campaign against Helen Gahagan Douglas). So, too, are the mechanisms for capturing and distributing our every public — or private — moment.

Where once you made a gaffe in front of 100 people, today you do it in front of millions. Not once, but forevermore. YouTube, the Web site where anyone can post a video, has become a favorite hitching post for riders of the blogosphere. And what about tapping any citizens' phones "whenever" and without oversight and without notice? No tears there?

Count me in. I love it. I watch TV segments I missed. Today, I watched a wrenching homage to the Lebanese people. Yesterday it was the amazing wardrobe-changing act from an episode of America’s Got Talent. Not long ago, I watched a tape of Jerry Garcia and the Grateful Dead singing the national anthem in 1993 at San Francisco’s Candlestick Park. Spectacular.

And then there was Sen. George Allen, R-Va. Will he ever survive the macaca tape (should he?)? Probably not, because no one will ever forget (should they?). It’s there, captured for all time, rewound and replayed a thousand times, archived in the ethers of the World Wide Web, forever and beyond.

Likewise, if you give a speech to, say, 500 people in Ohio, you’re talking to them, those people, those faces, those eyes. You direct your remarks, your jokes, your expressions, to them (and if they are racists or homophobes or sexists - damn it! - real people who want to shape events, mold policy, and advance civilization ought to be able to play to their prejudices without worrying about some macaca with a video cam putting it up for happy, oogling-giggling Americans to get upset over).

But then you’re on the Web, podcasted, excerpted, spliced, inserted, critiqued by strangers (googlers and gigglers) and reviled by . . . whom? Anonymous. They — the googlers, ooglers and gigglers — are Everyone and No One In Particular. Which is it, Kathleen? Is everyone reviling Allen or is it no one?

I’ve been on the receiving end of Anonymous enough times to glimpse what higher-profile actors (oh, she considers herself someone who shapes events, molds policy, and advances civilization - an actor, although at a lower level than Allen) get to enjoy (she deserves it - that's why it hurts so much). Imagine being president of the United States. No thanks.

It’s not about having thick-enough skin to withstand the pressure and constant scrutiny. You can grow it over time. It’s whether you want to. Is anything worth that kind of self-sacrifice? Who will run for public office in such an environment? (this old bullshit!! Who runs for office now? Who always has? Only hacks that follow the party line which is determined by the big boys who as John Jay used to say "own this country") Only the exhibitionist? Only the hardest-nosed, thickest-skinned among us? What kind of people will they be? What kind of nation will we become? Not to worry - Bush & Co. will have it already totally fucked by 2008. And there's always Katherine Harris and Coach Dave to step into the void.

Something about our new anonymous world (as to that, who IS "Foxxx News"? everyone and no one?) has brought out the worst in all of us. We neither impose nor honor limits (e.g. Dubya, the Commander in Chief, contends he is not limited by either law or the Constitution - [you won't hear Kathleen complaining about that] ). The raunchy fare of late-night TV is now commonplace at prime time. The scatological has become pathological.

Wednesday night, I caught Keith Olbermann on MSNBC talking about President Bush’s reported fondness for bathroom jokes. I’m no prude when it comes to jokes (I bet she'd love the "Aristocrats"!!), but I’m way past potty humor. Olbermann apologized to viewers who might be offended (can you spell: I-R-O-N-Y ??), saying that he was merely repeating what already had been reported by U.S. News & World Report. (Ok, Kathleen, you want to beat up on Olbermann for reporting farts; where's your censure of the Farter in Chief? or is that flatulence of a different odor?)

Two thoughts: He didn’t have to relay it; he didn’t have to then expand the report to show Bush wearing expressions in photographs that could be suggestive of a potty joke’s punch line. Olbermann and a comedic sidekick provided captions and commentary. Oh, I see. It was a schtick of choice, a preemptive strike. He didn't have to do it, but our safety came first.

It’s hard to describe how bad it was. There’s a time and place for irreverent humor, but coming up with clever new ways to describe flatulence and relating it to the president (the president is the one who related fart jokes and even farted in front of new hires for "comic" effect, and YOU're going after the reporter?) isn’t, as my mother used to say, cute or funny.

It’s dumb. "Dumb" and "Dubya" - isn't that the title of an old fart-joke movie?

I don’t mean that fools shouldn’t be exposed, or that corrupt politicians or racists or what have you should be protected (just HER fools, corrupt politicians, racists, and what-have-you's). The vast array of media options also allows citizens greater access to useful information (to paraphrase Dylan: you can look up anything you want as long as it doesn't change anything). That goes in the "wondrous" column. But somewhere in this increasingly unprivate world, we (she means the Little People) have to develop a personal ethics that respects the privacy of others and, above all, their humanity. She means the privacy and humanity of the "real" people like her and Allen and the Pres - the ones who shape events, mold policy, and advance civilization - not us googlers, ooglers, and gigglers.

If not, our choices for future leaders will be either Mr. Narcissist or Ms. Perfect. One knows only what he wants; the other knows nothing at all. Well, we already have both, don't we? And all in one swaggering package. Our beloved President, No. 43, certainly knows what he wants, and - as he's left no doubt - he knows nothing at all.

Wee didn't need to Google to see that! And we're not giggling!

Kathleen Parker writes for The Orlando (Fla.) Sentinel.
kparker@kparker.com

"Problem!!???"

"No problem." 

Help the world; Wake up a Zombie Today!!!

Hey Folks!!!

Are we as fucking stupid as we seem? Are we so comfortable in the vat - "eating" our virtual steak, "drinking" our virtual wine, ogling the virtual girl in the hot, red virtual dress - that we are happy with the "Blue Pill"?

It's not that we don't know the truth!!! It's that we CHOOSE to deny the truth!!!

As Leonard Pitts says below, "Apparently, some of us don’t understand the stakes here."

Help the world, Folks. Wake up at least one Zombie every day.

- Uke Man



Bush administration’s penchant for secrecy goes beyond reason
Sunday, August 27, 2006
LEONARD PITTS JR .

The conventional wisdom has it that John F. Kennedy was the first television president.

Meaning not that he was president when the medium began to impact the nation — that distinction goes to Dwight D. Eisenhower — but that he was the first to understand its potential and exploit its power. The signature illustration is the famous debate with Richard M. Nixon. People who watched it on television felt the handsome, vigorous Democrat trounced the ailing, haggard Republican. Curiously enough, many of those who heard the debate only on radio gave the edge to Nixon.

Forty-six years later, I submit to you that we are undergoing a similarly seismic moment in presidential communication: George W. Bush is the first Information Age president.

Like Kennedy, he arrived a little late; he was not in office when information access became the currency of daily life. Yet, he was the first president to understand the potential and exploit the power of that development. Unfortunately, he does so to our detriment. While Kennedy used television to expand presidential influence, Bush has controlled information toward a more dubious end: the curtailment of that great threat to imperial power, the informed electorate.

Last week, The Washington Post ran a fascinating story based on a report from the National Security Archive, a research library at George Washington University. According to the report, the Bush administration has been blacking out of previously public documents information on the nation’s strategic military capabilities. They are doing this, they say, in the name of national security. Got a question on the Minuteman missile? Tough. Curious about the Titan II? Too bad.

Now maybe you wonder what the problem is. This is sensitive information we’re talking about, right? Can’t have that falling into just anybody’s hands, right?

The thing is, it’s already in "anybody’s" hands: It dates back half a century to the Cold War. We’re talking about memos, charts and papers that have over the years been cited in open congressional hearings, reported in newspapers, used in history books. We’re talking about information our government long ago deemed innocuous enough to provide even to its former enemy, the Soviet Union.

And now — now! — we’re supposed to believe it’s suddenly so sensitive it has to be classified top-secret? Please.

This is a classic case of locking the barn after the horse has escaped — and died of old age. More to the point, it is a classic and absurd example of the present regime’s mania for secrecy, its obsessive need to control what, when, how and why you and I learn about its activities.

Anyone who doesn’t see a pattern here has not been paying attention. From its 18-hour blackout of news that the vice president had shot a man, to its paying a newspaper columnist to write favorable pieces, to its habit of putting out video press releases disguised as TV news, to its penchant for stamping Top Secret on anything that doesn’t move fast enough, this administration has repeatedly shown contempt for the right of the people to know what’s going on. At a time when information is more readily available than ever, this government is working like 1952 to enforce ignorance.

And the people, too many of them, shrug. As if we learned nothing from Abscam, Iran-contra, Vietnam, Watergate. As if it’s OK for an arrogant and paternalistic government to decide for us what we get to know.

Well, it’s not. An informed electorate is the lifeblood of democracy, the ultimate check on despotic ambitions.

One wonders if most people get this. One suspects that most people do not. How can you get it and not be outraged? How can you get it and not feel fear? Apparently, some of us don’t understand the stakes here.

It’s not just information they’re trying to control.

Leonard Pitts Jr. is a columnist for the Miami Herald. lpitts@herald.com

World's Worst Card Trick 

"The World's Greatest Card Trick"

Hey Folks,

How does he do it?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2KrdBUFeFtY

- Uke Man

"Then, throw the bum out!!"

 

Some News Blurbs from CLG News

Hey Folks,

As Yogi Berra is said to have said, "You can see a lot by just looking."

**

Take a look.

**

- Uke Man

*

**

***

****

*****

Breaking News and Commentary from Citizens for Legitimate Government

28 August 2006http://www.legitgov.org/
All links to articles as summarized below are available here:
http://www.legitgov.org/index.html#breaking_news

US set to bypass UN over Iran 28 Aug 2006 The British Prime Minister, Tony Blair, faces the embarrassing prospect of once again being asked to back the US over the United Nations as Washington prepares to forge a diplomatic "coalition of the willing" [US, Israel] to pursue economic sanctions against Iran.

Israel air force chief to plan war on Iran 27 Aug 2006 Israel has appointed a top general to oversee a war against Iran, prompting speculation that it is preparing for possible military action against Teheran's nuclear programme. Maj Gen Elyezer Shkedy, Israel's air force chief, will be overall commander for the "Iran front", according to military sources spoken to by The Sunday Telegraph.

Russia blocks sanctions against Iran 26 Aug 2006 Russia ruled out imposing economic sanctions on Iran yesterday, delivering a blow to America's efforts to isolate Teheran's regime in protest over its nuclear programme.

Ahmadinejad launches new nuclear project 26 Aug 2006 Iran's president launched a new phase in the Arak heavy-water reactor project on Saturday, saying Tehran would not give up its right to nuclear technology despite Western fears it is aimed at producing a bomb. [See: U.S. Cold War gift: Iran nuclear plant --Now cited as evidence of weapons activity, facility was provided to shah's government 24 Aug 2006]

Leading Iraq archaeologist flees --Archaeologist is well known internationally for his efforts to recover Iraq's looted antiquities [by Bush's barbarians]. 26 Aug 2006 Iraq's most prominent archaeologist, Donny George, has fled the country and is reported to have said poor security and political pressures forced him out.

Bush's corpora-terrorists continue to rape Iraq: Weary Iraqis Face New Foe: Rising Prices 26 Aug 2006 For Mehdi Dawood, Iraq’s failures have leached into the cucumbers, a staple of every meal that now devours a fifth of his monthly pension. Fuel and electricity prices are up more than 270 percent from last year’s, according to Iraqi government figures. Tea in some markets has quadrupled, egg prices have doubled...

Pay no attention to the Jerk behind the curtain !! 

What else is new????

Hey Folks,

This story is by a local Columbus man with a long history of establishment, right-of-center, knee-jerk support of authority in matters related to public education. That makes his Bush-damning story all the more credible.

It seems to me particularly indicative of the reality underlying our "democracy" in this "Christian" nation, this "shining city on the hill," this beacon of morality and altruism." Politicians can argue - and they always do - that war profiteering (they don't call it that) is necessary to protect us. They have a hard time, though, claiming that they have to shaft school kids to keep us safe.

Their hope is that no one will notice. This time it didn't work out, but then - as I said - this was a local story by an occasional writer. How many people saw it?

The juggernaut rolls on!!

- Uke Man



Book publisher’s ties to Bush a bit too cozy
Saturday, August 19, 2006
WILLIAM BAINBRIDGE

Critics of the Bush administration have been vocal about the Bush family ties to defense contractors at a time of war and, more recently, to their ties to the price of gasoline. Few, however, have noted the close and profitable relationship with the leadership of publishing giant McGraw-Hill, which, with sales of $6 billion in 2005, produced an annualized return of 19 percent last year.

President Bush has managed to keep his family’s relationship with the company alive and well — a relationship that, according to The Nation, began in the 1930s between the president’s grandfather, Prescott Bush, and James McGraw Jr., greatuncle of current McGraw-Hill Chairman Harold McGraw, III.

While it is generally accepted that exchanging favors among business friends in the private sector is common, the ethics of such practices between government officials and private business interests is another matter.

Consider:

• State governments will have spent as much as $5 billion with private companies in the next two years in direct costs to develop, score and report the Bush administration’s No Child Left Behind tests, which are designed to record student performance. This is the estimate from the federal Government Accountability Office. Only four companies tend to control test development: CTB, a testing division of McGraw-Hill, Texas-based Harcourt, Illinois-based-Riverside and London-based Pearson. McGraw-Hill’s CTB division appears to be dominating this lucrative new industry with contracts in nearly half the states. The test publishers have spent millions with government officials and at some foundations on reforms that produce more corporate profits rather than substantive benefits for students.

• The National Reading Panel adopted standards for a heavily scripted phonics program, favoring the Open Court series by the nation’s largest phonics publisher, McGraw-Hill. The company’s representatives dominated the panel and the same pubic-relations company worked on the federal plan that promoted Open Court in Texas, under then-Gov. George W. Bush. The findings were billed as "scientifically based" built on its "success" in the Houston Independent School District. This "success" has since been found to be predicated on an educationalstatistics scandal.

• U.S. government speakers at conferences have been accused by education leaders of crossing an ethical line by endorsing McGraw-Hill products, including Open Court and the SRA/McGraw Hill Direct Instruction program.

• The Association of American Publishers saw the need to send a letter to the secretary of education indicating concern that some programs were receiving explicit preference. "We request that you again clarify that there is no federally approved list, in this case for assessments, for which Reading First funds can be used," the letter said in part.

• It was announced that Standard & Poor’s, a McGraw-Hill company known for business credit ratings and risk analysis, would receive U.S. Department of Education and "nonprofit" foundation funding to build a "public-private collaboration" to report No Child Left Behind data.

• Harold McGraw III, whose companies are major beneficiaries of federal education funds to school systems, was appointed a member of the president’s transition advisory team. He also was appointed to the board of directors of ConocoPhillips, the chairmanship of the National Council on Economic Education and the Education Task Force of the Business Roundtable.

Meanwhile, two former secretaries of education received the Harold W. McGraw Prize in Education. When one considers the influence the Department of Education has over spending by school systems with educational publishers, accepting this award from a publisher raises certain ethical questions.

Some would consider these matters as examples of the help-myfriends and pay-to-play culture that has been widely reported as permeating the White House. It is difficult to see how such attitudes and practices benefit children and contribute to taxpayers’ efforts to support improved student performance.

William L. Bainbridge is distinguished research professor at the University of Dayton and president and chief executive officer of SchoolMatch, a Columbus-based educational auditing, research and data company.

bainbridge@schoolmatch.com

Steve Forbes says Fidel is worth $550,000,000 - Fidel says Forbes is a deranged pantywaist.

Who do You believe? 

What Mistake ??

Hey Folks,

I must say, Eugene Robinson comes at Fidel Castro with a lot fairer, less negative perspective than one usually sees in the "liberal press."

For example, unlike most of the capitalist scavengers circling Havana, he suggests: "All the hopes and fears invested in the advent of a post-Fidel era may have to be deferred." My thoughts exactly.

He says, "I’ve been to Cuba nine times, and not even the dissidents believe that Castro has done a Baby Doc or a Mobutu and stashed millions abroad in numbered bank accounts." Yep!!

He admits: "Castro reportedly was appalled by what he saw in modern [capitalist] China: a growing gap between rich and poor." Surprise, surprise.

He says: "I came to believe that Castro probably smiles when he sees the fortunate few who do have cars stopping to pick up the hitchhikers who gather at almost every major intersection. The scene brings the communist ideal to life: "From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs."

But then he says Castro made a mistake: "The mistake, of course, would be communism."

Well, I guess so. If he'd only chosen capitalism, he could have had "a growing gap between rich and poor," he could have "stashed millions abroad in numbered bank accounts," and the wealthy could just run over the stinking unemployed scum on the corners instead of giving their fellow Cubans a lift.

- Uke Man

Castro will go to his grave never knowing how wrong he was
Wednesday, August 16, 2006
EUGENE ROBINSON

Dressed not in his green fatigues but in a white Adidas track suit with red and blue stripes, Fidel Castro posed for photographs — apparently over the weekend, though it’s hard to be sure — holding up a copy of the official newspaper Granma to prove he had survived to his 80 th birthday. "Absolved by history," said the front-page headline, and it was hard to read the phrase as anything but the perfect, almost inevitable, exit line.

Castro’s first attempt at revolution was a raid on Santiago’s Moncada barracks on July 26, 1953. Bad planning and amateurish execution led to failure, and Castro was captured and put on trial. Before going to prison, he gave a famous courtroom speech in which he made what seemed a hopelessly quixotic prediction: "History will absolve me."

So now, half a century later, an old man claims his absolution. The invocation of that historical touchstone would be enough by itself to suggest that Castro believes his era is at an end, but his birthday message to the Cuban people left even less room for doubt. He confronts a long and risky recovery, he wrote, and Cubans should be "optimistic, and at the same time always ready to face any adverse news."

Hours after the photographs and message were published, Castro’s brother and designated successor, Raul, made his first public appearance as acting head of state, meeting Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez at Havana’s airport. Castro had been ailing for two weeks, but Sunday felt like transition day.

Even if Castro survives this crisis, it is hard to imagine he could ever reclaim the unquestioned dominion he has exercised over Cuba for the past 47 years as leader, micromanager, theorist of revolution and ultimate authority on everything. As long as he remains alive, though, it is hard to imagine anyone, even his brother, taking Cuba in a new direction. All the hopes and fears invested in the advent of a post-Fidel era may have to be deferred.

For now, we can examine the claim Castro made from his hospital room. Should that headline have read, "Absolved by himself"?

One theory is that he’s simply an old man who made a mistake a long time ago and is too stubborn to admit it. The mistake, of course, would be communism. My problem with this analysis is that it requires the old man to have at least the shadow of a doubt, and I don’t think Castro does. I think he may be the last of the true believers.

I’ve been to Cuba nine times, and not even the dissidents believe that Castro has done a Baby Doc or a Mobutu and stashed millions abroad in numbered bank accounts. People who see him socially have told me he lives far better than most Cubans (which isn’t saying much), but not at all lavishly. Forbes magazine claimed last year that Castro is worth $550 million, but based that on the value of "state-owned assets Castro is assumed to control." I thought that was tendentious. Controlling stateowned companies isn’t the same as robbing them.

I used to wonder why Castro, assuming he was never going to allow multiparty elections, didn’t at least follow the Chinese leadership’s example and open up the economy while retaining absolute political control. Despite the U.S. trade embargo, Cuba’s moribund economy could have blossomed. But Castro reportedly was appalled by what he saw in modern China: a growing gap between rich and poor. When the Cuban economy collapsed in the 1990s, Castro allowed just enough private enterprise so that people could survive. Once things got better, he took it all back.

It finally dawned on me that Castro likes Cuba the way it is, a glorious shambles with myriad inefficiencies and problems.

Reform-minded Cuban officials used to whisper to me that soon there would be a private market in real estate. But Castro would never allow it. I think he likes a system in which everyone has a roof, though it’s leaky, and surgeons live next to bricklayers in crumbling tenements.

Most Cubans aren’t allowed to buy new cars, even if they have the money. I used to think this was just a method of control, but I came to believe that Castro probably smiles when he sees the fortunate few who do have cars stopping to pick up the hitchhikers who gather at almost every major intersection. The scene brings the communist ideal to life: "From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs."

But the old man in the tracksuit made a mistake. I think he’ll die without ever believing that, let alone admitting it.

Eugene Robinson writes for the Washington Post Writers Group.
eugenerobinson@washpost.com

"An' then I said, 'Jesus, you go long, an' I'll drop the bomb on Iran!' "

"On four !!" 

Katherin Harris's Dream Candidate

Hey Folks,

I take no satisfaction from Zachary Daubenmire’s present jeopardy. It’s sad really.

But as “Coach Dave” might say, quoting the Holy Book, “"And the LORD passed by before him, and proclaimed, The LORD, The LORD God, merciful and gracious, longsuffering, and abundant in goodness and truth, Keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, and that will by no means clear the guilty; visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, and upon the children's children, unto the third and to the fourth generation." Exodus 34:6-7

Yep, ol’ Coach Dave is a Looney Tune on a good’ol’boy jihad (er . . . he calls it a Crusade), and he's nuttier than a fruitcake. He got canned from his coaching (preaching??) job at London High School because he wouldn’t stop leading prayers. Now he runs “all over creation” spouting his retro, Christian-fascist line.

He ran for Ohio’s State School Board (God didn’t help him “win this one for the Dauber”) as the Constitution Party candidate. Check out their zany platform at: http://ohiocp.org/platform.php .

It says, among other things:

“We reject the notion that sexual offenders are deserving of legal favor or special protection, and affirm the rights of states and localities to proscribe offensive sexual behavior [they clearly aim this at gays whom they find "offensive"– I bet it doesn’t apply to coaches’ kids].”

and

“We recognize that parents have the fundamental right and responsibility to nurture, educate, and discipline their children”

Sounds good on paper, but do you think Coach Dave WILL be held responsible? Or was it secular humanism and the lure of eventually collecting Socialistic Security that turned the boy to sin??

Dave taught him to love Football and Jesus!! What more could he have done?

Anyway, here’s the story.

- Uke Man





Crusader’s son faces child-porn charge
By Randy Ludlow
The Columbus Dispatch
Friday, August 25, 2006 12:08 AM

The son of conservative religious activist Dave Daubenmire has been charged with downloading child pornography onto a computer at the family's Licking County home.

Zachary Daubenmire, 24, was arrested Tuesday by sheriff's detectives and charged with pandering obscenity involving a minor, a felony punishable by two to eight years in prison.

A repair technician working on the Daubenmires' computer on Monday called authorities after finding digital videos showing girls having sex with men, said Capt. Chad Dennis.

The video files, marked "illegal," were found under Zachary Daubenmire's user profile on the computer and apparently were not viewed by anyone else, Dennis said.

The younger Daubenmire, who lives with his parents at their Thornville-area home, confessed during questioning that he downloaded the videos, according to a court affidavit. He was freed on bond after spending a night in jail.

After his arrest, Zachary Daubenmire was dismissed as a volunteer assistant football coach at Heath High School, said Ellis Booth, assistant principal