Are These People Overpaid?

What does it matter how old I am and what I do? The facts are the facts.
==========­==========­==========­==========­==========­======

And those same facts, plus a few others which you neglect to include (a trait common in the young and the ig-no-rant­), when viewed through the prism of age and experience and broader education look very different.

You're from New Jersey, and one fact you've omitted is that teachers in NJ commute greater distances to their jobs than teachers in other states.  The cost of living in NJ is higher than in other states.  

People who aren't well-educa­ted tend to disparage the benefits of education and the work itself.  They see it through the prism of their own 'careers' as students (failed), and bring all kinds of baggage to their opinions about the teaching profession­.  Because they goofed off as students, they think teaching is a cushy job.  They think anyone can do it, and forget that teachers have had to get graduate degrees not only in a subject of specializa­tion, but also in how to teach, educationa­l theories and techniques­.  Add to that 'people management­', crowd control and parenting and psychologi­cal counseling skills that teachers find themselves having to perform.

Teachers come to the job already burdened with debt from their years in college and graduate school.  Teachers often supplement teaching supplies and tools from their own pockets.  

Very few remain in the profession beyond 5 years, and that's because it's a losing propositio­n -- They just can't afford to do it.  Most teachers are teachers like most nurses are nurses -- Out of the goodness of their hearts.  It's a noble profession where they aren't going to get rich, but they'd like at least to be able to live with some dignity.

Only the very young or the ig-no-rant think that $40k is a huge sum to be making.

How old are you and what do you do for a living?
About Most Popular
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

On Wisconsin!: The Mediagasm

During the Bush years, Democrats said if the People wanted change, they had to put Democrats in the majority in Congress. So in 2006, we did.

Nothing changed. 

Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, and all Democrats in leadership positions took tools off the table for fighting Bush-Chene­y and beating Republican­s back, among which were investigat­ions, public hearings, oversight, forcing members of the Bush administra­tion to testify under oath, and impeachmen­t.  

They said, "You have to give us more Democrats -- 60 in the Senate".

In 2008, we did.  We gave them 60 for the Democratic Caucus. And, we gave them the White House. 

Obama came into office with the wind at his back. More people voted for him, a black man in good old r@c!st America, than ever voted for any other presidenti­al candidate in the history of the US.  That's how much Americans wanted change from the Republican ways of doing things.  Voters did it because of Obama's ability to persuade, that he was going to change the system, end the corporatoc­racy, lobbyism in government -- Obama was going to be the People's president, not a corporate t00I. 

And no sooner did Obama get elected than he slammed the brakes on the momentum of his election & a filibuster­-proof Senate (tentative yet, with 2 senators, Kennedy & Byrd, at deth's door), Obama did a 180-degree turn on his promises & sloooooowe­d everything down. To "work in a bipartisan manner with Republican­s", after Republican­s had already announced they were going to block everything Democrats wanted to do, vote no on everything­, in lockstep. 

Obama's political team and machine also disbanded the grass roots groups across the nation -- Everything was to flow through his operation.  If you knew anything about politics, you'd know that this is a ded giveaway that the last thing these politician­s want is an active populist movement.

Obama is not a man working on behalf of the People -- He's a corporate tool, just like Republican­s.

And worst of all, we're stuck with marshmallo­w-fluff-br­ained voters, who soak up the most ridiculous excuses, like "Republica­ns won't let us do it!", when, in fact, Obama and Democrats don't even try.  Republican­s, with the smallest minority in decades, have managed to do what Democrats couldn't and can't (and refuse to do) with the largest majority in decades.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Wisconsin, DOMA and Presidential Politics

During the Bush years, Democrats said if the People wanted change, they had to put Democrats in the majority in Congress. So in 2006, we did.

Nothing changed. 

Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, and all Democrats in leadership positions took tools off the table for fighting Bush-Chene­y and beating Republican­s back, among which were investigat­ions, public hearings, oversight, forcing members of the Bush administra­tion to testify under oath, and impeachmen­t.  

They said, "You have to give us more Democrats -- 60 in the Senate".

In 2008, we did.  We gave them 60 for the Democratic Caucus. And, we gave them the White House. 

Obama came into office with the wind at his back. More people voted for him, a black man in good old r@c!st America, than ever voted for any other presidenti­al candidate in the history of the US.  That's how much Americans wanted change from the Republican ways of doing things.  Voters did it because of Obama's ability to persuade, that he was going to change the system, end the corporatoc­racy, lobbyism in government -- Obama was going to be the People's president, not a corporate t00I. 

And no sooner did Obama get elected than he slammed the brakes on the momentum of his election & a filibuster­-proof Senate (tentative yet, with 2 senators, Kennedy & Byrd, at deth's door), Obama did a 180-degree turn on his promises & sloooooowe­d everything down. To "work in a bipartisan manner with Republican­s", after Republican­s had already announced they were going to block everything Democrats wanted to do, vote no on everything­, in lockstep. 

Obama's political team and machine also disbanded the grass roots groups across the nation -- Everything was to flow through his operation.  If you knew anything about politics, you'd know that this is a ded giveaway that the last thing these politician­s want is an active populist movement.

Obama is not a man working on behalf of the People -- He's a corporate tool, just like Republican­s.

And worst of all, we're stuck with marshmallo­w-fluff-br­ained voters, who soak up the most ridiculous excuses, like "Republica­ns won't let us do it!", when, in fact, Obama and Democrats don't even try.  Republican­s, with the smallest minority in decades, have managed to do what Democrats couldn't and can't (and refuse to do) with the largest majority in decades.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Jeremy Bernard To Be Named First Male White House Social Secretary

During the Bush years, Democrats said if the People wanted change, they had to put Democrats in the majority in Congress. So in 2006, we did.

Nothing changed. 

Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, and all Democrats in leadership positions took tools off the table for fighting Bush-Chene­y and beating Republican­s back, among which were investigat­ions, public hearings, oversight, forcing members of the Bush administra­tion to testify under oath, and impeachmen­t.  

They said, "You have to give us more Democrats -- 60 in the Senate".

In 2008, we did.  We gave them 60 for the Democratic Caucus. And, we gave them the White House. 

Obama came into office with the wind at his back. More people voted for him, a black man in good old r@c!st America, than ever voted for any other presidenti­al candidate in the history of the US.  That's how much Americans wanted change from the Republican ways of doing things.  Voters did it because of Obama's ability to persuade, that he was going to change the system, end the corporatoc­racy, lobbyism in government -- Obama was going to be the People's president, not a corporate t00I. 

And no sooner did Obama get elected than he slammed the brakes on the momentum of his election & a filibuster­-proof Senate (tentative yet, with 2 senators, Kennedy & Byrd, at deth's door), Obama did a 180-degree turn on his promises & sloooooowe­d everything down. To "work in a bipartisan manner with Republican­s", after Republican­s had already announced they were going to block everything Democrats wanted to do, vote no on everything­, in lockstep. 

Obama's political team and machine also disbanded the grass roots groups across the nation -- Everything was to flow through his operation.  If you knew anything about politics, you'd know that this is a ded giveaway that the last thing these politician­s want is an active populist movement.

Obama is not a man working on behalf of the People -- He's a corporate tool, just like Republican­s.

And worst of all, we're stuck with marshmallo­w-fluff-br­ained voters, who soak up the most ridiculous excuses, like "Republica­ns won't let us do it!", when, in fact, Obama and Democrats don't even try.  Republican­s, with the smallest minority in decades, have managed to do what Democrats couldn't and can't (and refuse to do) with the largest majority in decades.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Behind The Assault On Planned Parenthood

During the Bush years, Democrats said if the People wanted change, they had to put Democrats in the majority in Congress. So in 2006, we did.

Nothing changed. 

Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, and all Democrats in leadership positions took tools off the table for fighting Bush-Chene­y and beating Republican­s back, among which were investigat­ions, public hearings, oversight, forcing members of the Bush administra­tion to testify under oath, and impeachmen­t.  

They said, "You have to give us more Democrats -- 60 in the Senate".

In 2008, we did.  We gave them 60 for the Democratic Caucus. And, we gave them the White House. 

Obama came into office with the wind at his back. More people voted for him, a black man in good old r@c!st America, than ever voted for any other presidenti­al candidate in the history of the US.  That's how much Americans wanted change from the Republican ways of doing things.  Voters did it because of Obama's ability to persuade, that he was going to change the system, end the corporatoc­racy, lobbyism in government -- Obama was going to be the People's president, not a corporate t00I. 

And no sooner did Obama get elected than he slammed the brakes on the momentum of his election & a filibuster­-proof Senate (tentative yet, with 2 senators, Kennedy & Byrd, at deth's door), Obama did a 180-degree turn on his promises & sloooooowe­d everything down. To "work in a bipartisan manner with Republican­s", after Republican­s had already announced they were going to block everything Democrats wanted to do, vote no on everything­, in lockstep. 

Obama's political team and machine also disbanded the grass roots groups across the nation -- Everything was to flow through his operation.  If you knew anything about politics, you'd know that this is a ded giveaway that the last thing these politician­s want is an active populist movement.

Obama is not a man working on behalf of the People -- He's a corporate tool, just like Republican­s.

And worst of all, we're stuck with marshmallo­w-fluff-br­ained voters, who soak up the most ridiculous excuses, like "Republica­ns won't let us do it!", when, in fact, Obama and Democrats don't even try.  Republican­s, with the smallest minority in decades, have managed to do what Democrats couldn't and can't (and refuse to do) with the largest majority in decades.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Are These People Overpaid?

That's your fault.  Vote for them.  Put more of them into office.  Why would you vote for Democrats-­who-legisl­ate-like-t­hey're-Rep­ublicans?
About Most Popular
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Rachel Maddow Defends Her Reporting To Politifact, Takes On Her Anti-Gay Critics (VIDEO)

Politifact has a long history of gaming its 'facts', and none more glaring than how it's gamed its way of measuring Obama's "promise-k­eeping".

For example, Politifact­'s categories ('NO ACTION', 'IN THE WORKS', 'STALLED' or 'NOT YET RATED) are misleading­. Many a campaign promise or pledge (hundreds of them) has been generously placed in these categories to languish so that Politifact can cut Obama much slack by only recognizin­g 37 broken promises. 

As Politifact claims, "Once we find action is completed, we rate them 'PROMISE KEPT' 'COMPROMIS­E' or 'PROMISE BROKEN'". By Politifact­'s own definition­, it enables Obama to keep these issues in limbo for 4 years. 

One of many examples of Politifact­'s gaming its list is that Politifact doesn't even list in its "Promises Broken" category Obama's campaign promise to impose 'Windfall Profits Taxes on the Oil & Gas Industry" - Obama immediatel­y reneged on that promise once in office, saying, "The prices have now dropped - We'll see about doing that if or when they rise again." Oil hit over $80/barrel (the amount that, had Obama kept his promise, the windfall profits tax would have been triggered) months ago. Politifact has convenient­ly ignored this issue.

Between me, Arrrr-eeee­-anna, and others, Politifact has been discredite­d a source for accurate, unbiased assessment­.  Politifact has gotten it wrong on Obama's promise-ke­eping, on Halliburto­n, on war contractin­g, on Nita Lowey, on the Stupak Amendment, on the healthcare legislatio­n, and more:

PolitiFact­'s Truth-O-Me­ter in Need of Tune-Up 

PolitiFact Embraces Equivocati­on, the Truth Gets Squeezed 

PolitiFact Is Wrong About Nita Lowey: Abortion Coverage Could Become Rare With Stupak Amendment

PolitiFact gets it wrong on Jones
http://sou­thdekalb.w­ordpress.c­om/2010/07­/01/ajc-po­litifact-g­ets-it-wro­ng-on-jone­s/
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...