Please do EVERYONE a favor, CLICK HERE and email this page to a friend!
Sunday 22 June 2008, by admin
Starting next year the value of an Oregon High School diploma is zero.
Students will be given a choice of taking a national or State exit exam. Or they can put together a "portfolio" showing what they learned. Of course if they learned very little, can not use the English language or can’t add, that will no longer matter. If they are unable to tell which century the US Civil War was fought, no big deal.
If they confuse the the First Ten Amendments to the Constitution with the Ten Commandants, no big deal.
A few pictures, telling a story and "caring" about the earth, and you will get a diploma in Oregon. This is the State that allows assisted suicide—looks like the state is assisting in the education suicide of it students.
What do you think. Should an objective test be given to students or a subjective "portfolio" be enough for graduation? Can you fail a portfolio? Of course not.
Pass this along, you can be sure O’Connell and the unions will be promoting portfolio in California.
Oregon gives teens options on exit exams
By Julia Silverman, Associated Press, 6/21/08
PORTLAND, Ore. - When Oregon education officials set out to devise a graduation testing requirement for high school students, they looked to other states for inspiration - on what not to do.
In neighboring California, dropout rates soared the first year the state required high schoolers to pass a test to get their diploma. And in Washington state, lawmakers simply canceled plans to require exiting students to pass a single, comprehensive math test, after fears surfaced that thousands wouldn’t measure up.
"We didn’t think any one test should determine whether someone gets a diploma," said Duncan Wyse, vice-chairman of the Oregon Board of Education.
So board members chose a different route. This past week, they approved a plan that lets students pick from three options: a national test, state assessments or a local version, such as a student portfolio, to show colleges and employers they have mastered reading, writing, applied math and speaking skills. Passage on any one of the three, along with fulfilling course requirements, would guarantee a diploma.
The plan makes Oregon one of several states moving past the "one-size-fits-all" high-stakes testing that became commonplace in many U.S. high schools in the 1990s. In Pennsylvania, the Board of Education is considering a three-pronged approach similar to Oregon’s plan, while in Maryland, students who can’t pass the state tests could be allowed to do a senior project instead.
But some say such choices allow some students - and states - to take the easy way out.
Daria Hall, assistant director for K-12 policy at Education Trust, a Washington, D.C.-based nonprofit that advocates for poor and minority children, said the exit exams test skills students learned in ninth and tenth grades.
How else can the liberals get elected - only with stupid followers. I drove through Oregon recently, when reaching Ashland the state’s IQ went up 10 points, sadly when I reached Vancouver it dropped 10 points.
Not to worry, all states are going this way. It is easier than being accountable.
Question is who wwill eventually rule the US, the muslims, or China?
I’d put my money on China. We’re mortgaging our future to them just to service our debt.
Heckuva job, Shrub!
This is not surprising at all. I saw a great documentary last night on Discovery channel about super genetics. There are several people in the world who have superhuman gifts, such as a man with the ability to withstand extreme cold, a bling man being able to paint incredible pictures, a man who can calculate math faster than a computer, and a woman who can see and hear colors (no, she is not on LSD).
Geneticists are studying their codes to see if they can create more superhumans. Not surprising is that all these superhumans are of the Nordic race.
There is also research being done that will prolong life. I don’t know why anyone would want to be trapped on this earth plane when there are such better places in the universe to hang out.
In case anyone doubts this study of superhuman genetics, you can see this website:
http://www.geneticsandsociety.org/article.php?id=2607
This world is changing rapidly. What we once thought was science fiction is now science. The other thing is that science and religion are forming a bond. Did you know that the Vatican now says it is acceptable to believe in UFOs and aliens? http://www.universetoday.com/2008/05/14/vatican-astronomer-says-its-ok-to-believe-in-et/
Yes, there are many genetic and biological similarities between species, but are these similarities because of common biological ancestry (macroevolution) or because of a common Designer who designed similar functions for similar purposes in all of the various forms of life on earth from the simplest to the most complex. Neither position can be scientifically proved.
Dogs must breathe the same air as humans. The creationists, therefore, believe that the Creator designed similar lungs for both dogs and humans. The evolutionists believe that dogs and humans have similar lungs because they are related from millions of years ago.
It has been said that the eye of an octopus is more similar to the human eye than any other animal. Are we to assume from this that humans are more closely related to octopus than other animals?
Genetic similarities can only be used to prove relationship within a biological "kind" but not between biological "kinds". Since members within a biological kind can interbreed and reproduce the genetic similarities must be evidence of relationship.
If DNA can happen by chance then it is logical to believe in macro-evolution. But, the scientific evidence shows that DNA cannot happen by chance. This means it is more logical to believe that DNA similarities between species are due to a common genetic Engineer or Designer (God!).
The evidence from science shows that only microevolution (variations within a biological "kind" such as the varieties of dogs, cats, horses, cows, etc.) is possible but not macroevolution (variations across biological "kinds", especially from simpler kinds to more complex ones). The only evolution that occurs in Nature is microevolution (or horizontal evolution) but not macroevolution (vertical evolution).
The genetic ability for microevolution exists in Nature but not the genetic ability for macroevolution. The genes (chemical and genetic instructions or programs) for microevolution exist in every species but not the genes for macroevolution. Unless Nature has the intelligence and ability to perform genetic engineering (to construct entirely new genes and not just to produce variations and new combinations of already existing genes) then macroevolution will never be possible in Nature.
We have varieties of dogs today that we didn’t have a couple of hundred years ago. All of this is just another example of microevolution (horizontal evolution) in Nature. No matter how many varieties of dogs come into being they will always remain dogs and not change or evolve into some other kind of animal. Even the formation of an entirely new species of plant or animal from hybridization will not support Darwinian evolution since such hybridization does not involve any production of new genetic information but merely the recombination of already existing genes.
Modifications and new combinations of already existing genes for already existing traits have been shown to occur in Nature but never the production of entirely new genes or new traits. This is true even with genetic mutations. For example, mutations in the genes for human hair may change the genes so that another type of human hair develops, but the mutations won’t change the genes for human hair so that feathers, wings, or entirely new traits develop. Mutations may even cause duplication of already existing traits (i.e. an extra finger, toe, etc. even in another part of the body!), but none of these things qualify as new traits.
Evolutionists believe that, if given enough time, random or chance mutations in the genetic code caused by random environmental forces such as radiation will produce entirely new genes for entirely new traits which natural selection can act upon or preserve.
However, there is no scientific evidence whatsoever that random mutations have the ability to generate entirely new genes which would program for the development of entirely new traits in species. It would require genetic engineering to accomplish such a feat. Random genetic mutations caused by the environment will never qualify as genetic engineering!
Mutations are accidents in the sequential molecular structure of the genetic code and they are almost always harmful, as would be expected from accidents. Of course, just like some earthquakes that don’t do any damage to buildings, there are also mutations that don’t do any biological harm. But, even if a good mutation does occur for every good mutation there will be hundreds of harmful ones with the net result over time being disastrous for the species.
Furthermore, only those mutations produced in the genes of reproductive cells, such as sperm in the male and ovum (or egg cell) in the female, are passed on to offspring. Mutations and any changes produced in other body cells are not transmitted. For example, if a woman were to lose a finger it would not result in her baby being born with a missing finger. Similarly, even if an ape ever learned to walk upright, it could not pass this characteristic on to its descendants. Thus, modern biology has disproved the once-held theory that acquired characteristics from the environment can be transmitted into the genetic code of offspring.
Most biological variations within a biological kind (i.e. varieties of humans, dogs, cats, horses, mice, etc.) are the result of new combinations of already existing genes and not because of mutations.
For those who are not read-up on their biology, a little information on genes would be helpful here. What we call "genes" are actually segments of the DNA molecule. DNA, or the genetic code, is composed of a molecular string of various nucleic acids (chemical letters) which are arranged in a sequence just like the letters found in the words and sentences of a book. It is this sequence of nucleic acids in DNA that tells the cells of our body how to construct (or build) various proteins, tissues, and organs such as nose, eyes, brain, etc. If the nucleic acids in the genetic code are not in the correct sequence then malfunctioning, or even worse, harmful proteins may form causing serious health problems and even death.
There is no law in science that nucleic acids have to come together in a particular sequence. Any nucleic acid can just as easily bond with any other. The only reason for why nucleic acids are found in a particular sequence in the DNA of the cells of our bodies is because they are directed to do so by previously existing DNA. When new cells form in our bodies the DNA of the old cells direct the formation of the DNA in the new cells.
The common belief among evolutionists is that, if given millions of years, radiation and other environmental forces will cause enough random changes (mutations) to occur in the sequential structure of the genetic code of a species so that entirely new sequences for entirely new genes will develop which in turn will program for the formation of entirely new biological traits, organs, and structures that natural selection can then act upon.
Would it be rational to believe that by randomly changing the sequence of letters in a cookbook that you will eventually get a book on astronomy? Of course not! And if the book were a living being it would have died in the process of such random changes.
Such changes, as transforming one book into another or the DNA of one species into the DNA of another, especially one more complex, simply cannot occur by random or chance alterations. It would require intelligent planning and design to change one book into another or to change the DNA of a simpler species into the DNA of a more complex one.
Yes, it is true that the raw biological materials and chemicals to make entirely new genes exist in every species, but the problem is that the random forces of nature (i.e. radiation, etc.) simply have no ability to rearrange those chemicals and biological materials into entirely new genes programming for entirely new traits. Again, mutations only have the ability to produce variations of already existing traits. It would require intelligent manipulation of genetic material (genetic engineering) to turn a fish into a human being. The random forces of the environment cannot perform such genetic engineering!
If the environment doesn’t possess the ability to perform genetic engineering and if macro-evolution really did not occur then how else can one explain the genetic and biological similarities which exist between various species and, indeed, all of life. Although it cannot be scientifically proven, creationists believe that the only rational explanation for the genetic and biological similarities between all forms of life is due to a common Designer who designed and created similar functions for similar purposes and different functions for different purposes in all of the various forms of life from the simplest to the most complex. Even humans employ this principle of common design in planning the varied architecture of buildings!
If humans must use intelligence to perform genetic engineering, to meaningfully manipulate the genetic code, then what does that say about the origin of the genetic code itself!
Many have confused natural selection with evolution itself. Yes, Charles Darwin did show that natural selection occurs in nature, but what many don’t understand is that natural selection itself does not produce biological traits or variations.
Natural selection can only "select" from biological variations that are produced and which have survival value. The real issue is what biological variations can be naturally produced. What biological variations are naturally possible? When a biological change or variation occurs within a species and this new variation (such as a change in skin color, etc.) helps that species to survive in its environment then that variation will be preserved ("selected") and be passed on to offspring. That is called "natural selection" or "survival of the fittest". But, neither "natural selection" nor "survival of the fittest" has anything to do with producing biological traits and variations.
The term "natural selection" is simply a figure of speech. Nature, of course, does not do any active or conscious selecting. It is an entirely passive process. Darwin did not realize what produced biological variations. Darwin simply assumed that any kind of biological change or variation was possible in life. However, we now know that biological traits and variations are determined by the genetic code.
Natural selection works with evolution but it is not evolution itself. Again, since natural selection can only "select" from biological variations that are possible, the real question to be asking is what kind of biological variations are naturally possible. How much biological variation (or how much evolution) is naturally possible in Nature? As we have seen all biological variation or evolution is limited to within plant and animal kinds.
Another reason for why macroevolution is not possible in Nature is because a half-evolved and useless organ waiting millions of years to be completed by random mutations would be a liability and hindrance to a species - not exactly a prime candidate for natural selection. In fact, how could species have survived over, supposedly, millions of years while their vital (or necessary) organs were still in the process of evolving!
How, for example, were animals breathing, eating, and reproducing if their respiratory, digestive, and reproductive organs were still incomplete and evolving? How were species fighting off possibly life-threatening germs if their immune system hadn’t fully evolved yet?
Scientist and creationist Dr. Walt Brown, in his fantastic book "In The Beginning", makes this point by saying, "All species appear fully developed, not partially developed. They show design. There are no examples of half-developed feathers, eyes, skin, tubes (arteries, veins, intestines, etc.), or any of thousands of other vital organs. Tubes that are not 100% complete are a liability; so are partially developed organs and some body parts. For example, if a leg of a reptile were to evolve into a wing of a bird, it would become a bad leg long before it became a good wing."
Usually what is meant by the term "biological kind" is a natural species but this may not always be the case. The key to keep in mind here is that in order for evolution in nature to occur from one biological "kind" to another biological "kind" entirely new genes would have to be generated and not just merely modifications and/or recombination of already existing genes. If, for example, offspring are produced which cannot be crossed back with the original stock then there is, indeed, a new species but if no new genes or traits developed then there is no macro-evolution (variation across biological kinds) and the two distinct species would continue to belong to the same "kind".
Young people, and even adults, often wonder how all the varieties or "races" of people could come from the same human ancestors. Well, in principle, that’s no different than asking how children with different color hair (i.e., blond, brunette, brown, red) can come from the same parents who both have black hair.
Just as some individuals today carry genes to produce descendants with different color hair and eyes, humanity’s first parents possessed genes to produce all the variety and races of men. You and I today may not carry the genes to produce every variety or race of humans, but humanity’s first parents did possess such genes.
All varieties of humans carry genes for the same basic traits, but not all humans carry every possible variation of those genes. For example, one person may be carrying several variations of the gene for eye color (i.e., brown, green, and blue), but someone else may be carrying only one variation of the gene for eye color (i.e., brown). Thus, both will have different abilities to affect the eye color of their offspring.
Some parents with black hair, for example, are capable of producing children with blond hair, but their blond children (because they inherit only recessive genes) will not have the ability to produce children with black hair unless they mate with someone else who has black hair. If the blond descendants only mate with other blondes then the entire line and population will only be blond even though the original ancestor was black-haired.
Science cannot prove we’re here by creation, but neither can science prove we’re here by chance or macroevolution. No one has observed either. They are both accepted on faith. The issue is which faith, Darwinian macro-evolutionary theory or creation, has better scientific support.
If some astronauts from Earth discovered figures of persons similar to Mt. Rushmore on an uninhabited planet there would be no way to scientifically prove the carved figures originated by design or by chance processes of erosion. Neither position is science, but scientific arguments may be made to support one or the other.
What we believe about life’s origins does influence our philosophy and value of life as well as our view of others and ourselves. This is no small issue!
Just because the laws of science can explain how life and the universe operate and work doesn’t mean there is no Maker. Would it be rational to believe that there’s no designer behind airplanes because the laws of science can explain how airplanes operate and work?
Natural laws are adequate to explain how the order in life, the universe, and even a microwave oven operates, but mere undirected natural laws can never fully explain the origin of such order.
Of course, once there is a complete and living cell then the genetic program and biological mechanisms exist to direct and organize molecules to form into more cells. The question is how did life come into being when there was no directing mechanism in Nature. An excellent article to read by scientist and biochemist Dr. Duane T. Gish is "A Few Reasons An Evolutionary Origin of Life Is Impossible" (http://icr.org/article/3140/).
There is, of course, much more to be said on this subject. Scientist, creationist, debater, writer, and lecturer, Dr. Walt Brown covers various scientific issues (i.e. fossils, so-called transitional links, biological variation and diversity, the origin of life, comparative anatomy and embryology, the issue of vestigial organs, the age of the Earth, etc.) at greater depth on his website at http://www.creationscience.com.
On his website, Dr. Brown even discusses the possibility of any remains of life on Mars as having originated from the Earth due to great geological disturbances in the Earth’s past which easily could have spewed thousands of tons of rock and dirt containing microbes into space. In fact, A Newsweek article of September 21, 1998, p.12 mentions exactly this possibility.
An excellent source of information from highly qualified scientists who are creationists is the Institute for Creation Research (http://www.icr.org) in San Diego, California. Also, the reader may find answers to many difficult questions concerning the Bible (including questions on creation and evolution, Noah’s Ark, how dinosaurs fit into the Bible, etc.)at http://www.ChristianAnswers.net.
It is only fair that evidence supporting intelligent design or creation be presented to students alongside of evolutionary theory, especially in public schools which receive funding from taxpayers who are on both sides of the issue. Also, no one is being forced to believe in God or adopt a particular religion so there is no true violation of separation of church and state. As a religion and science writer, I encourage all to read my Internet article "The Natural Limits of Evolution" at my website http://www.religionscience.com for more in-depth study of the issue.
*
The subject of blood type is also very interesting. It has been discovered that AB+ blood type was found on the Shroud of Turin and the face cloth of Jesus Christ. This blood type is extremely rare and occurs in only 3% of the world’s population.
The Vatican has agreed to put the Shroud of Turin on display again in the year 2010. Scientists may also get another change to do testing on it.
This is a once in a lifetime occurrence, and I plan to make a trip over to Italy in 2010 to see this most incredible sight!
http://www.thetech.org/genetics/ask.php?id=71
Is there a universal acceptor blood type? Yes, it is AB+. These people are lucky because their bodies are used to seeing both the A and B versions of the protein, and they are used to seeing the Rh+ factor. So no matter what kind of blood they receive, their bodies won’t see it as a foreign attacker. Only about 3% of the population is this lucky (http://chapters.redcross.org/br/northernohio/INFO/bloodtype.html).
THE BEST KEPT SECRET OF OUR GENERATION:
Some parents with black hair, for example, are capable of producing children with blond hair, but their blond children (because they inherit only recessive genes) will not have the ability to produce children with black hair unless they mate with someone else who has black hair. If the blond descendants only mate with other blondes then the entire line and population will only be blond even though the original ancestor was black-haired.
I believe that so many blonde/blue children are being apprehended by the government because they are doing genetic research on them. They are also using psychotropic drugs to enhance their research and the brains of these children. Could these children be the future SUPERHUMANS with genetic supremacy that will someday rule the world?
Remember that the nazis may have lost WWII, but the nazi scientists were welcomed with open arms to the United States and have passed down their research to American universities, including places like Stanford, etc.
SWeetheart, long time no see!
As for your math and english skills...
Figured out percentage yet?
And who JFK junior called traitors?
"Sweetheart huh? Spoken like a professional ATTENTION WHORE"
And who is giving the attention??
My sweetheart!!!
Lol!
Why not have a goal that all students completing a course of study in hi school, have a marketable skill.
If the young people dropping out are doing so after middle school, then perhaps there is a place for a portfolio in middle school for all students. This course offerings would be what it takes to maintain the basic needs of an individual or family...food, shelter, clothing, transportation, and phone. It could also include communication skills, listening skills, conflict resolution etc. It could include planning a healthy menu for a month and the budget for it. It could include the fact that lack of dental hygiene can contribute to illnesses. It could include how to care for first aide, and the common cold. It could include what is required of a parent. It could include what extras each would like to have in their lives...eating out, going to a show, CD’s etc..things which today’s youth would include in basics.
Electives...an introduction to possibilities...would be next.
Those clearly interested in a higher education would then take college entrance requirements. Those students not motivated in that direction would then focus on acquiring a marketable skill...being punctual...finishing what they start...etc. in whatever area they find a possibility.
When the objectives have been met, a certificate stating what was accomplished would be offered. One might say Completed Course in Life Skills Portfolio Passed Excel course - emphasis Passed Cashier skills..
Punctual____ Observant_____ Etc.____ Legible Writing___
University Bound would have a certificate stating completed college entrance requirements. Might also have Portfolio Certificate included with specific skills which could qualify one for an internship.
I support the standards established in the elementary grades. Elementary school provides the foundation.
One could determine which of the math strands are basic and which could lead to more advanced persuits later on.
I’d rather read possible solutions .
The problem you have Lance is obvious, you suffer from a severe case of Cranial Rectal Prolapse. This is caused by liberalism, due to the lack of not enough oxygen to the brain due to the condition. This leads to bad judgment, bouts of delusion and depression when your views are disputed and shown to be wrong by those who do not suffer your problem.
Now to the subject on the board.
Oregon is showing the fruits of liberalism, which is a reduction in academic aptitude. Liberals hate any one 3 points smarter then they are. So they want to have people as dumb as a fence post in order to get them to believe they are victims, not the other way around.
To me liberalism is a victimizer, a robber of intellect and draws the real losers of life. So when I hear a liberal I see a whiny loser. Now I want our children to be winners, not codependents on the government. The liberals want dependency to the government to give themselves a mistaken sense of superiority.
More logic from Wiccanwolf. Thank you! Great post!
Isn’t it Oregon that just last year opened bars that offered "Live Sex Acts" on stages? And in Oregon, these places can be located right down the street from the local elementary school. Talk about a bunch of liberal dopes. Lets see, if you don’t have any religion, or hold vlaues and morals important in your life, then move to Oregon or San Francisco. Lets just hope these dopes don’t have children. Oh I forgot, that is where the other 50% of welfare cases come from besides Mexico.
Com´ment`er n. 1. One who makes or writes comments; a commentator; an annotator.
Webster’s Revised Unabridged Dictionary, published 1913 by C. & G. Merriam Co.
This is typical of the biggest problem in here. If someone is shown to be wrong, a rational person would own up to it. Something along the lines of, "I was mistaken" or "you got me there", or "live and learn".
Instead, people making false statements here get to hide behind their anonymity as they have the nerve to accuse Chiara and myself of being the same people (yet another incorrect assertion). One could easily claim that all the anons are the same dimwit because...well....they are all so pathetic.
Do the regulars of Frank’s site ever wonder why so many of the most vocal commenters post anonymously? I think because it is easier to spew sh*t at random and not be linked to it when it is shown to be bilge (less embarrassing). Also, the ability to ’attack’ like a pack of wild dogs with everyone trying to get in a lick but still remaining non-identified (less chance of being singled out as clueless). Most of you on the whole fight like the proverbial retard. All spazmodic fury but nothing that could be considered the least bit coordinated.
If I were you I’d be ashamed to reveal my identity as well. Maybe you have got a point.
I was wrong.
Live and learn.
Yes Lance, you do sometimes sound like a perverbial retard. I hope you learn someday NOT TO COME OFF AS AN ASSHOLE because that is what you are and have been to others in this blog. Just because you don’t share the same viewpoints as most, that you already know comming in here, that you won’t agree with. It is you that is the problem with this blog! Iditos that want to just disrupt. If maybe this blog had some rules and registration, maybe you wouldn’t act and talk to others like such an asshole. And get of your ’posting annoymously’ garbage. You can be posting as the rightwing nutjob and everybody wouldn’t have a clue. You can say all you want, but your full of crap. When is the last time you "lived and learned" in here. Obviously you always think that everybody else’s view points, typing and writting skills have a lot less to be desired than yours. You and Chiara always come of as the two assholes that are ’above’ everybody else in this blog, then you resort to insults like little children. GO TAKE YOUR WORTHLESS COMMPLAINTS TO THIS BLOG’S ADMINISTRATORS ASSHOLE! All you and Chiara EVER bring into this blog IS NEGATIVE, NEGATIVE, NEGATIVE. Along with INSULTS to others. GO CRY TO YOUR MOMMY LANCE! You lost any respect a longtime ago in here and you know it.
Tell you what Lance, why don’t you get a brain like a NORMAL ADULT, and go find a blog that suits you better. Where you can actually offer up something constructive rather than insults to others and compliaining about Bush & BAD America bulls—t? When one goes into places to insult others and into blogs where it is against his or hers’ own ideology, that would be mostly considered as a TROLL.
Maybe if you get OFF YOUR HIGH HORSE LANCE, maybe you can actually read other ideologies other than your own, and actually "Live and Learn".
I all ready complimented Stephen Frank for allowing open discussion. The rest of your rant isn’t worth addressing. Just more histrionics and name calling. I am a Californian so I happened across Mr. Frank’s site. The comments are open so I speak my mind when I am motivated to do so. You obviously have the same privilege. So many of you in here seem ready to bust a blood vessel. You equate intensity with the actual ’strength’ of a given argument. You say the same thing (poorly) over and over again.
If YOU have a problem with me, YOU write the siteowner to ask me to stop contributing. I’ll respect his wishes.
What You Need To Believe To Be A Republican
1. Jesus loves you, and shares your hatred of homosexuals and Hillary Clinton.
2. Saddam was a good guy when Reagan armed him, a bad guy when Bush’s daddy made war on him, a good guy when Cheney did business with him, and a bad guy when Bush needed a "we can’t find Bin Laden" diversion.
3. Trade with Cuba is wrong because the country is Communist, but trade with China and Vietnam is vital to a spirit of international harmony.
4. The United States should get out of the United Nations, and our highest national priority is enforcing U.N. resolutions against Iraq.
5 A woman can’t be trusted with decisions about her own body, but multi-national corporations can make decisions affecting all mankind without regulation.
6. The best way to improve military morale is to praise the troops in speeches, while slashing veterans’ benefits and combat pay.
7. If condoms are kept out of schools, adolescents won’t have sex.
8. A good way to fight terrorism is to belittle our long-time allies, then demand their cooperation and money.
9. Providing health care to all Iraqis is sound policy, but providing health care to all Americans is socialism. HMOs and insurance companies have the best interests of the public at heart.
10. Global warming and tobacco’s link to cancer are junk science, but creationism should be taught in schools.
11. A president lying about an extramarital affair is a impeachable offense, but a president lying to enlist support for a war in which thousands die is solid defense policy.
12. Government should limit itself to the powers named in the Constitution, which include banning gay marriages and censoring the Internet.
13. The public has a right to know about Hillary’s cattle trades, but George Bush’s driving record is none of our business.
14. Being a drug addict is a moral failing and a crime, unless you’re a conservative radio host. Then it’s an illness and you need our prayers for your recovery.
15. Supporting "Executive Privilege" for every Republican ever born, who will be born or who might be born (in perpetuity.)
16. What Bill Clinton did in the 1960s is of vital national interest, but what Bush did in the ’80s is irrelevant.
17. Support for hunters who shoot their friends and blame them for wearing orange vests similar to those worn by the quail.
18. Complain about ANWR not being developed while driving a 12 mpg SUV.
Friends don’t let friends vote Republican.
And a rose by any other name would be just as ignorant.
That was my post btw. (LanceThruster)
I’d be interested in how hard these tests hard. I think I’m a bit of nerd .. but I like to think that I can decide what is hard or not.
I’d like to know if the regular readers think these "4-year-collective" tests are worthwhile or not.
Ah yes, public schools. Lets see now, reading, writing and arithmetic. Well, there’s nothing there about doing them in English is there? Maybe that’s because we understood this was an English speaking nation. There was nothing in there about race, color or national origin. We understood that.
So where are we now?
Reading.................................no longer required
writing...................................no longer required
arithmetic..............................no longer required.
Physical Education.................no longer required
Political Science.....................no longer required
Pledge of Allegiance..............no longer permitted
Ten Commandments.............no longer permitted
Prayer...................................no longer permitted
Sexual deviation...................required
Socialism...............................required
Racism..................................required
Political Correctness.............required
Historical Correctness..........required
And they want me to vote FOR school bonds?
Surely they jest.
Well well, y’all have proven this to be correct!
I have tried for the longest time to teach the CONCEPT of percentage but it never stuck in your brain. Also I have tried to bring comprehension and reading skills to this blog. Also a waste of my time.
All that stuck was your ignorant hate for me, who pointed out the stupidity this blog is drowning in!
The total hypocrit BAD American "foreigner" Chiara said: "I have tried for the longest time to teach the CONCEPT of percentage but it never stuck in your brain. Also I have tried to bring comprehension and reading skills to this blog. Also a waste of my time.
All that stuck was your ignorant hate for me, who pointed out the stupidity this blog is drowning in!"
BooHoo.......blah, blah, blah
Good! And YES, you are wasting your own time and ours! F.O. and leave this blog like any other adult would have by now. You CONSTANTLY INSULT, ADD NEGATIVES ONLY to this blog, and hate us, WE hate you. GET LOST and stop acting like a crybaby little child.
The chance that Lance or Chiara, righwing nutjob, or whoever they want to be that day, OF LEAVING THIS BLOG, is below 10%. And that is because they are addicted to the neagtive and evil of DISRUPTING others. Plus the fact that little children can’t control themselves and STAY AWAY. These TROLL LOSERS use up about 95% of their brain just thinking negative hateful insulting things. The other 5% of their brain is, well, basically filled with propaganda and air.
Haha, I ’ll stick around just to get you all warped up again!
Love ya too!
Smooch!
Chiara unbeatable and outsmarting you like always? LOL..LOL
Your a Legend in YOUR OWN mind. You just keep thinking your smarter than everybody else. Helps raise your own self esteem to reconfirm that your not as delusional as you really are.
sell wow gold sell wow gold sell wow gold sell wow gold sell wow gold sell wow gold sell wow gold sell wow gold sell wow gold sell wow gold wow gold wow gold wow gold wow gold wow gold wow gold wow gold wow gold wow gold wow gold sell wow cd key sell wow cd key sell wow cd key sell wow cd key sell wow cd key sell wow cd key sell wow cd key sell wow cd key sell wow cd key sell wow cd key trade wow gold trade wow gold trade wow gold trade wow gold trade wow gold trade wow gold trade wow gold trade wow gold trade wow gold trade wow gold wow gold trade wow gold trade wow gold trade wow gold trade wow gold trade wow gold trade wow gold trade wow gold trade wow gold trade wow gold trade wow trade wow trade wow trade wow trade wow trade wow trade wow trade wow trade wow trade wow trade
sell maple story mesos sell maple story mesos sell maple story mesos sell maple story mesos sell maple story mesos sell maple story mesos sell maple story mesos
sell maplestory mesos sell maplestory mesos sell maplestory mesos sell maplestory mesos sell maplestory mesos sell maplestory mesos sell maplestory mesos
sell maple story gold sell maple story gold sell maple story gold sell maple story gold sell maple story gold sell maple story gold sell maple story gold
sell maple story money sell maple story money sell maple story money sell maple story money sell maple story money sell maple story money sell maple story money
sell maplestory gold sell maplestory gold sell maplestory gold sell maplestory gold sell maplestory gold sell maplestory gold sell maplestory gold
sell maplestory money sell maplestory money sell maplestory money sell maplestory money sell maplestory money sell maplestory money sell maplestory money
maplestory trade maplestory trade maplestory trade maplestory trade maplestory trade maplestory trade maplestory trade
maple story trade maple story trade maple story trade maple story trade maple story trade maple story trade maple story trade
See online : sell wow gold
See online : replica Handbags
See online : replica Handbag
See online : replica bags
See online : fake watch
See online : replica watch
See online : fake watch
See online : fake watch
See online : replica bags
See online : fake watch
See online : fake watch
See online : Replica Watches
See online : fake watches
See online : fashion watches
See online : fashion watches
See online : 烟囱拆除
See online : replica bags
See online : fashion watches
See online : luxury watches
See online : fake watch
情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,按摩棒,跳蛋,充氣娃娃,情境坊歡愉用品,情趣用品,情人節禮物,情惑用品性易購,A片,視訊聊天室,色情聊天室,聊天室
免費A片,AV女優,美女視訊,情色交友,免費AV,色情網站,辣妹視訊,美女交友,色情影片,成人影片,成人網站,A片,H漫,18成人,成人圖片,成人漫畫,情色網,日本A片,免費A片下載,性愛
A片,色情,成人,做愛,情色文學,A片下載,色情遊戲,色情影片,色情聊天室,情色電影,免費視訊,免費視訊聊天,免費視訊聊天室,一葉情貼圖片區,情色,情色視訊,免費成人影片,視訊交友,視訊聊天,視訊聊天室,言情小說,愛情小說,AIO,AV片,A漫,avdvd,聊天室,自拍,情色論壇,視訊美女,AV成人網,色情A片,SEX,成人論壇
情趣用品,A片,免費A片,AV女優,美女視訊,情色交友,色情網站,免費AV,辣妹視訊,美女交友,色情影片,成人網站,H漫,18成人,成人圖片,成人漫畫,成人影片,情色網
情趣用品,A片,免費A片,日本A片,A片下載,線上A片,成人電影,嘟嘟成人網,成人,成人貼圖,成人交友,成人圖片,18成人,成人小說,成人圖片區,微風成人區,成人文章,成人影城,情色,情色貼圖,色情聊天室,情色視訊,情色文學,色情小說,情色小說,臺灣情色網,色情,情色電影,色情遊戲,嘟嘟情人色網,麗的色遊戲,情色論壇,色情網站,一葉情貼圖片區,做愛,性愛,美女視訊,辣妹視訊,視訊聊天室,視訊交友網,免費視訊聊天,美女交友,做愛影片
av,情趣用品,a片,成人電影,微風成人,嘟嘟成人網,成人,成人貼圖,成人交友,成人圖片,18成人,成人小說,成人圖片區,成人文章,成人影城,愛情公寓,情色,情色貼圖,色情聊天室,情色視訊,情色文學,色情小說,情色小說,色情,寄情築園小遊戲,情色電影,aio,av女優,AV,免費A片,日本a片,美女視訊,辣妹視訊,聊天室,美女交友,成人光碟
情趣用品.A片,情色,情色貼圖,色情聊天室,情色視訊,情色文學,色情小說,情色小說,色情,寄情築園小遊戲,情色電影,色情遊戲,色情網站,聊天室,ut聊天室,豆豆聊天室,美女視訊,辣妹視訊,視訊聊天室,視訊交友網,免費視訊聊天,免費A片,日本a片,a片下載,線上a片,av女優,av,成人電影,成人,成人貼圖,成人交友,成人圖片,18成人,成人小說,成人圖片區,成人文章,成人影城,成人網站,自拍,尋夢園聊天室
See online : replica Handbags
See online : designer watches
See online : Anarcht credits
See online : discount watches
See online : replica watches
See online : replica Handbag
See online : http://www.sugudeai.com/
Advertisements








