White Supremecy and Joe Biden's Shaky Future

Concerning White Supremacy as being reported by the media: The news media has taken the position to viciously goad "white men" ultimately making all of us into racist demons. If white men respond on any level other than agreement, it is labelled as White Supremacy by politicians and the news media.

The absolute racist thing going on is white people denouncing all white people like we are all alike. "You people!" is not tolerated on any level of the PC spectrum, so why does the news media ignore it?

Why are old white men being grouped together by the Left? Mark my words, it will be old white women next. Don't believe the hyperbolic nonsense.

All that I've written so far is what is being "reported" on a daily basis by the news publishers. It is all baloney. Don't take the bait folks. Look at your friends, we are all different colors and customs and yet, we are friends.

Judge others by their code of conduct, not by their skin color, religion, or culture. If they are peaceful and law-abiding, then we should be good neighbors. There are those among us who delight in spreading discord. Ignore all this stupid rhetoric the talking heads spread and go with your gut. Live in harmony.


Concerning Jo Biden's future announcement to run for President of the United States:  Just an observation here and I may be wrong, but it looks like Joe Biden is going to be systematically removed as a viable candidate by his own party even before he formerly announces he's running. Take note that I'm not saying if he is guilty or not and it may be too early to be obvious. Let's wait and see who else screams foul and I'm sure we won't have to wait long. My take on it is it must have been okay with every Democrat while he was VP, so what's the issue now?

The sad thing is, Joe Biden is a conservative/moderate Democrat and would probably make a good president. However, the current hard Left bent of his party are going to make him look like a Republican to those who want to steer the Democratic party into hard core socialism. I figure Joe will seek out a female for his VP, preferably one who is not openly white, as this would appear to be racist. His safest bet right now is Kamala Harris. She is most likely less than 15% black heritage, but it is enough for her to be the 1st black female VP!

Joe will have a hard time shaking his "old white man" image, regardless of how many female minority candidates he embraces. Then there is all the stuff he said working for Obama that is just not hardcore left enough now warranted by the outspoken stump-standers in the Democratic Party. 

Speaker Pelosi is like a tenderfoot trying to steer a 4 mule team wagon smelling water for the first time in 2 years. She has lost all semblance of strategy and is reactionary toward the fresh-women congress-women who are microphone hungry. Poor Nancy is one step behind every announcement they make, desperately trying to plaster over unplanned holes.

With all the Democratic politicians announcing their candidacy and claiming to have a better plan for the future of the country , it will be interesting to watch them systematically rip each other to pieces to prove they are the golden child.
.

Why does Reefer madness still exist?

BB's take: Doesn't anyone else find it odd that so many seniors who smoked pot by the bushels in the 60's and 70's are now returning to it for medicinal and/or also "recreational" use (which is a way of saying they smoke it to relax or sleep better)? AFAIK, none of these people are currently against its use.

The naysayers are those who have never really indulged in it other than a toke after getting drunk in their teens or attending HS/college parties? The issue has become septic to Republicans because the Democrats are voting for it. This automatically demonizes it to many Conservatives. Add in religious folks who are against it along with alcohol and tobacco and you have a block of resistance that is unjustified.

Education is key here. Please look into it for yourself and forget what you have been fed. Hemp and marijuana were considered the same by our government until recently. The next step is to decriminalize the plant so it can be openly researched. Heck, it might cure the very health problem you are struggling against and in most cases you won't even feel it in your system. It might stop the pain you live with even when taking your prescription opioids.

Dr. Oz claims in the States that have legalized it, there has been a 25% decrease in opioid deaths.

Just say NO to extending the school year

BB's take: I agree with the professor's assessment of the problem and his solution of stopping the standardized testing and have raised these concerns in the Baytown Sun for years. We do not need more hours of school. What we need is to clip the wing of state mandated testing and allow school management to dictate a more robust approach, where school boards are allowed to set curriculum and be competitive with other institutions. Reading, writing, and arithmetic should be taught as a strong foundation and by junior school students should be allowed to take courses that massage their propensities and aptitude instead of passing state standardized testing.  Listen to Professor Showalter:

Steve Showalter is a government professor at Lee College in Baytown.

"Two weeks ago, the legislature discussed a proposal to add up to 30 days of instruction to the school year.   The online reader poll showed no interest in it, but the idea raises an important issue for discussion. Currently, the state of Texas requires 180 days of instruction every year. Nations that are kicking our butts in the worldwide education rankings generally require over 200 days of instruction per year. 

Well over half of public school students in Texas live below the federal poverty line. Advocates for these at-risk students feel that low income students and English language learners need far more than 180 days of instruction to catch up to their middle and upper class peers. The advocates also claim that the extended summer break harms low income students. Over the course of a three-month summer hiatus, at risk students lose ground because they do not have access to enrichment activities available to children in financially stable families.

Middle and upper income parents send their children to summer camps, enroll them in summer reading activities, and can afford to take their kids to museums, science exhibits, and historical sites.  Because of this, the gap between stable and poor students gets wider and wider each year. By the time they reach high school, low income kids could be two to three years behind in reading, writing, and math, and it is highly unlikely that they will ever catch up.

The problem is more complex than simply adding 15 instructional days in August and 15 instructional days in June. It would require a complete re-working of the school calendar, which would generate howls of opposition from all quarters.

A 210 day school calendar would require classes to be held almost year round with quarterly breaks of two to three weeks. From an educational standpoint, that would be better for students.  Periodic breaks give them enough time off to re-charge their batteries, but not so much time off that their knowledge and skills deteriorate.

Let the howling begin. Politicians do not want to increase taxes to pay for the additional six weeks of instruction. The Legislature estimates the cost to be $50 million for each extra day of instruction. Teachers might protest. No doubt they would appreciate the additional compensation, but they really need the time off.  The job is very stressful and demanding, and the long summer break keeps them from losing what is left of their marbles.

The tourism and hospitality industry would immediately mobilize against it. Summer is their bread and butter, and their business models are built around three months of sun and fun. Some readers supported a longer school day. Additional daily hours of instruction would negate the need to add days in August or June, but that would interfere with sacred cows, namely sports and extracurricular activities. 

There is a much simpler solution.  Cut back on standardized testing. 

School districts already spend up to one quarter of their instructional days (45 days) each year on test preparation, practice tests, test taking, and remediation for students who fail the silly tests. Those 45 days could be used for much meaningful activities. If the Legislature backed away from its peculiar obsession with standardized tests, the schools could use their existing time and money much more efficiently."