Obama '08?

You are over-confident, Cyclo. I don't think you are actually doing the valid math for the election in question. The actual valid math is a function of opinion OVER time.

In other words, "it ain't over 'till it's over!"

Oh, I agree with that. But I think that if you actually do the math you will see just how improbable it is that the Republicans will win enough seats to take the House - and if you bother to read some of the pros like Stu Rothenberg or Charlie Cook or Nate Silver, who forecast this stuff for a living, they all agree that the GOP will come up short.

In the Senate, they don't even stand a chance of taking the place over.

Cycloptichorn

Do you know the derivation of the expression "come up short" Cyclo?

Does it have something to do with England?

Cycloptichorn

I thought you were talking about republicans. Sorry. Forget I spoke.

No, I don't know the derivation, Spendi. A quick google search didn't help.
Your speculation would be appreciated.

"come up short"

http://www.amazon.com/s?ie=UTF8&keywords=Coming+Up+Short&rh=i%3Aaps%2Ck%3AComing+Up+Short&page=1

ohmigod! Ican has, I guess, a sense of humor.

Since no one knows what this means, it can not be answered.

Putting government employees into the SS system is hardly a solution.

In re: government employees.

Teachers are government employees and I read that teachers pay proportionately more in taxes than other classes of workers do for their wage levels. No, I do not know where that came from. I read it about a year ago. I have tried to research it but was unable to come up with anything.

Let's continue with teachers. Are you aware that few new teachers remain in that line of work beyond the fifth year? That they begin paying into what may be either state or municipality retirement and then leave teaching.

okie never lets a fact get in his way.

This post, repeated and repeated and repeated, is childish, boring and incorrect.

Ooh! I was so tempted to supply a few names for coming up short.

You made an assertion, pom, and I asked you for evidence, and doubted that you would or could provide any. Sure enough, I was right about you again. Here was your assertion in case you won't or do not know how to find it again: And I highlighted in red the primary part of your assertion in case you can't find it otherwise. I even doubt whether you can find it in red?

"You know, of course, that support for federal administration of education is a mixed bag, don't you? You do know that more people on the right support it than people on the left, don't you? "

I don't remember the numbers, cyclops, but what I do remember is the demonizing of Bush's idea by Democrats and by their willing accomplices in the press.
It may surprise you to know that I also think there are other aspects of Social Security that could be tweaked first. I have already mentioned the idea that all citizens should be made to participate. Another idea of mine would be to alter slightly the way that cost of living increases are done.

Doubtful, pom, and again I challenge you to provide evidence for your statement besides some vague thing you supposedly read a year ago.

Now, if they were including higher paid teachers, such as professors in college, which would bring the overall average earned income up, of course they would pay more taxes proportionately, because pom if you have a clue you would already know that higher earners pay more in taxes percentage wise. That is the system as set up by liberal politicians. It is the rich and higher producers and achievers in this country that pay the vast majority in taxes.

One more comment, I notice your statement says:
"teachers pay proportionately more in taxes than other classes of workers do for their wage levels."
Just common sense would tell you, pom, that such a statement is probably in error, because at the same wage levels, tax tables and their tax rates apply to everyone the same regardless of who they work for. There would have to be a difference in other factors on the tax return, such as perhaps many teachers are second wage earners in families, which would of course mean that the families might make alot more money as joint tax returns, and of course they would then pay a higher percentage as all second wage earners / joint tax returns would also, whether they are teachers or whatever.

Thank you for letting all of us know which assertion you had in mind. Specificity matters. Asking someone who has made several assertions to explain an assertion is not going get you an answer.

I have read articles authored by the right or reporting on the right. Their messages show the right favoring the creation of a national curriculum as a way of improving this nation's education rather than the left.

Furthermore, there have been several discussions here on a2k and its spiritual predecessor abuzz about federal education standards and I have always opposed the right on this matter. The righties have always wanted federal control. I have been asking for years, what state would become the standard by which schools are measured? Alabama? Georgia? Massachusetts? Connecticut?

None of the righties here ever answer.


Here's a blog entry pointing out that neither the left nor the right wants a national curriculum:
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2008/04/06/nationalize-public-schools/

From a non-partisan Washington educator:
http://www.mynorthwest.com/?sid=296204&nid=11

The National Governors Association for BEst Practices, composed of govs from all 50 states, 3 territories and 2 commonwealths, supports a national curriculum. Obviously, this is a bi-partisan org.

The National Council of Chief State School Officers, which is nonpartisan, nationwide and non-profit, supports a national curriculum.

A confused right wing blogger who may be speaking out against nationalization:
http://citizentom.com/2009/06/23/nationalizing-the-public-school-system/

A report* on the process of developing national standards:
http://education-portal.com/articles/National_Academic_Standards_Program_Has_Launched.html

* This site is an umbrella site for disseminating information and does not subscribe to an ideology.

The right-leaning website www.schoolsmatter.info supports a national curriculum.

Georgia Governor Sonny Perdue, a Republican, favors a national curriculum. West VA supports a national curriculum. The liberal journal, The American Prospect, cites Republicans as favoring a national curriculum but notes that the president of the American Federation of Teachers recently advocated in favor of the same. The CATO Institute favors a national curriculum.

Although some find Diane Ravitch hard to characterize, and she has criticized both the left and right, she leans more to the right. She supports a national curriculum . . . for the time being. She changes her mind more frequently then most people change their socks.

Here is the 100-page ACT report: http://www.act.org/research/policymakers/pdf/NationalCurriculumSurvey2006.pdf