Why there is no future

I was working job number two today (substitute teacher). I was assigned for the morning to a fourth grade class. The lesson was probability.  After a half hour of explaining vocabulary, problem-solving strategies and examples, the students were assigned a few problems from their books.  Most did ok deciding if an outcome was certain, likely, unlikely or impossible. However, when it came to working with actual numbers, I realized it is no wonder so many people can't maintain a checking account or hold a job.  The economy is in trouble because apparently, kids today don't even know what a number is.

Here's the question in the book:

                                  Use numbers to describe the probability of choosing a cube that is not yellow.

 They had a few minutes to think about it and write down an answer. I started going around the room asking for responses.  The first kid said "10 out of 2". At least the format was right, but there are still two things wrong with this answer. One, there can't be ten desirable outcomes if there are only two possible outcomes. Secondly, the kid had answered the question for yellow, rather than anything except yellow. This shows not only a complete lack of understanding of the math topic, but also demonstrates poor reading comprehension skills.

The second kid who offered an answer said "2 out of 10". I made the mistake of feeling hopeful and optimistic at this point, thinking at least the math was on the right track even if the reading skills left something to be desired.  Oh , how foolish and naive I was.  

After suggestion they all carefully read the question again, FIVE individuals claimed to have figured out the answer:

Blue.

Huh. Who knew blue was a number. Maybe I should ask for a red% raise after dealing with this.

Is it November YET?

OK...I try really hard not to answer the question "Who are you voting for?" for three reasons:
1. It's none of anyone's fucking business.
2. The correct question is "For whom are you voting?"
3. This year, I honestly don't know.

I strongly believe that voting is not only a right, but also a responsibility. If those of us who are reasonable, moderate people willing to consider all sides of an issue don't vote, then the nation's future is left up to the wing-nuts.  With so many idiots running for office, leaving the voting to idiots doesn't seem wise.
However, I don't feel that I can, in good conscience, vote for either presidential candidate this time around. Romney would set civil rights back 50 years: women's rights and the LGBT community would suffer under his administration. He's too quick to cater to the tea-partiers. And he proved that he is a selfish twit when he immediately attacked the current administration before expressing genuine sympathy for the loss of American life at the embassy in Libya. On the other hand, Obama seems to be trying for less restriction on welfare rather than more: I feel almost ill at the sight of a woman pulling her food stamps out of a designer bag and typing on her smartphone with her acrylic nails while I'm feeling guilty about buying the lean ground beef instead of the cheap stuff even though I work three jobs. The Obama presidency has also left a lot to be desired when it comes to supporting and respecting military personnel. I just don't see a clear choice when the issues I care about most don't fit into either platform.
There is one thing I am certain about, however. This is the point I really want to make:
Whichever way I decide to vote, my choice will be based on issues and job performance.  I am truly appalled at the right-wing blowhards who insist that Romney is better for "Christian America" because Obama is a Muslim.  First and foremost...a candidate's religion should NEVER be considered because of a little thing called separation of church and state. Secondly, I was under the impression that the Obama family attends a Christian church (Christ Church in Chicago and a Baptist church in DC) while Romney is a Mormon. IF one was to take a candidate's religion into account, wouldn't an established world religion with similar core values AND a belief in Jesus (granted, only as a prophet) be desirable over what is, at best, a 'new' religion filled with magic and secrecy even stranger than the other religions in question?

preachers and pastries

This morning, I was enjoying a delightful danish with my husband in the local bakery.  This random guy walks up and asks if we're from the area.  Thinking he may want directions, we confirm.  He proceeds to explain that he is the minister at a nearby church and invited us to a service.  A thousand replies, none of which would have been nice or necessary, pop into my head.  The result of keeping those thoughts to myself is that I start laughing.  My more disciplined, military husband was able to keep a straight face and politely nod as the man finished his spiel.  After the man walked away, my husband scolded me for my response.  I asked him if he would have felt obligated to be polite if our breakfast had been interrupted by someone selling insurance or vacuums.  Of course not.  But he still didn't see why I was offended.  Here's why:
If I had interrupted his breakfast with an invitation to the upcoming Reason Rally , or a gay pride event, or a Planned Parenthood fundraiser, he would have been offended and outlined his convictions.  (While this is conjecture regarding this specific individual, I have found this to be the general reaction.)  Why should I be expected to keep quiet when someone imposes on my time and space?
It's like those Jehovah Witness people...who thought knocking on the doors of busy people, expecting them to drop everything and listen, was a good idea?  What would they think if I showed up on their doorstep while they were trying to make dinner and handed them a copy of a Richard Dawkins book?

 Bottom line: Don't bother me when I have a danish.                   

why our schools are to blame

I got a call from my daughter's school complaining that there were hurt feelings when not everyone got a birthday party invite. I told them I refused to force my kid to be friends with people who are mean to her. I thought about and realized that this "everyone is special" bull$h!t is what's wrong with America. The snotty girl can treat others like crap all year and still go to all the parties. The C-student gets the same gold star as the A-student. The fat kid is told they are perfect and pretty just the way they are. Fast forward to when they're 30... the mean girl has been divorced twice. The C-student wonders why he's been passed over for a promotion for the fifth time in a row. The fat kid is now diabetic and has arthritis in her knees. Our country can't compete globally because our schools are afraid competition will make kids feel bad about themselves. Oh, boo hoo.

Published with Blogger-droid v1.6.5

its a shame

Justices Rule for Protesters at Military Funerals - NYTimes.com

I am all about free speech. I mean, hey, I'm a blogger, right? Free speech means I can rant and rave about how much the world sucks & my government won't (probably) shoot me. But these protesters are stepping over the limits of human decency. If you don't agree with the war, protest at the pentagon or white house. If your issue is gays in the military, picket a military base. If you think your god hates America, get out and don't look back lest you turn into a pillar of salt. It's ok to have lost all respect for your government and its decisions. It's very much not ok to show disrespect to an individual who died trying to do their job, and worse, to add to the pain of those mourning the loss.

Published with Blogger-droid v1.6.5

The first iteration

So some scientists have extracted DNA from a woolly mammoth and plan to create a clone. (Have they not seen Jurassic Park?) This comes up in discussion with RR, who is all excited because he heard on Christian radio how scientists know DNA can only survive for thousands if years, so they must have been wrong about earth being millions of years old, proving scripture accurate. He fails to see some obvious flaws in that logic- 1) science may have misjudged when woolly mammoths went extinct 2) they may have underestimated the time DNA can survive in certain conditions. What's more likely: #1 and/or #2 are correct or God didn't put dinosaurs and such in the arc?

Published with Blogger-droid v1.6.5

thoughts from my daughter

After spending the day with her Pop-Pop (the churchy type), my seven year old daughter asked to be a guest writer for my blog. The following is therefore being dictated to me by Little One:

"In the movie "Fantasia," a ghost touched a rock and it turned into a volcano and then she cried when the forest was destroyed by fire from the eruption. Her tears made all the trees and flowers grow back. It doesn't make sense for people to believe things like that because volcanos explode because of pressure and things grow back after fire because of nutrients in the soil. I think those people who believe that spirits cause bad things like fires and storms are weird. Spirits don't cause good things either. Spirits are just silly. It's all science. Hey, has the precipitation started? There was a 100% chance snow-slash-sleet tonight."