Thursday, March 05, 2009

Insanity everywhere

Things are getting crazy everywhere. In the news just in the last couple days:

Anti-bullying legislation, HB2599, will be heard next week. The bill will require school districts to have policies defining harrasment, intimidation, bullying and cyberbullying, and procedures and staff in place for investigating complaints and disciplining the offenders.

What is wrong with that? Plenty. Why don't we just issue all the boys pink panties in kindergarten and make them wear them for 12 years?

Kill Connections Academy legislation, SB767 is sponsored by Senator Devlin and Rep. Buckley, at the request of the Oregon Education Association. It would remove the State Board of Education's authority to waive the "50% provision" that requires virtual charter schools to get half their kids from inside the sponsoring district. It wouin ld absolutely, positively result in shutting the doors on the state's largest public school because the teachers union doesn't like the school. THANKS, TEACHERS!

The greenest building ever built is being planned with your tax dollars. This thing will be so green it will manufacture all its own power, and reprocess all its own water. The only problem is it is very, very, very, very expensive. So what? Sam Adams wants Portland to be the green center of the universe, and what better way to show the world our commitment to being green when we will spend, say $1 million to save $10,000 worth of sewage fees. This thing they guess will cost between 12% and 52% more than the highest LEED certification building. What do they care? It's YOUR money!

The Beaverton Round goes round and round again. This is a black hole for money. A disaster from the get go. Response? Expand the project! Widen the urban renewal district around the failure so they can capture a bigger tax increment from the already developed properties, and use the dough to throw into the black hole after the millions already wasted. So typical!

Meanwhile, the stock market was down another 4% today, as anyone with remaining wealth runs and hides from our new president's most recent scheme.

19 comments:

Troutdale Canfield said...

Free speech, someone's chance for a better education, and more tax money down the rabbit hole. Alice isn't in Wonderland anymore.

Anonymous said...

That's the answer to the G.O.P.'s woes: Remake themselves into the Pro-Bullying Party.

Oh, wait, with Rush and O'Reilly and Lars, they already are.

Rob, equating bullying with masculinity is a losing proposition. But if you want to continue down that road, be my guest.

Rob Kremer said...

Anon - do you have a boy? The way that bullying bill is written, there could be a complaint filed every 20 seconds in my son's HS.

Do we want our kids to be running to the authorities every time someone says something untoward?

Razzing each other is a rite of passage. At times it is even very rough. Part of growing up is learning to deal with it.

I am so glad he is a senior and won't have to deal with this madness. I swear we seem like we want to bring up a nation of pansies.

Anonymous said...

So now they want to punish boys for being boys by law?

What does the cyberbullying encompass? Text messages, Myspace, etc? Cause if it does, they can save themselves alot of trouble by simply converting all the schools into mass detention facilities.

It's going to be so easy for a squeaky wheel kid to cause serious grief for another kid who was simply being a young man. Kids shouldn't have to fear the consequences of standing up for something. Are we outlawing young men who have something to defend?

I can't imagine a world where men have to be afraid of appearing masculine.

Anon 7:07:
I'm very curious. What is your definition of masculinity?

Nevermind. I probably don't want to know.

Anonymous said...

So, the alternative is to do nothing? Good answer. My guess is you were on the giving end, not on the receiving end. I don't think you have an idea of how relentless it can be. Not that you care. But what about at the extreme end, Rob? Think that's OK? We're not just talking about a snide comment here or there.. but there are some kids, evidently raised by parents who believe in social darwinism, that make it a point to go out of their way to make their target's life pure hell. And you know who they pick? Usually the most vulnerable. So your answer is: sorry kid... you're just gonna have to suck it up and take it 'cause that's just the way it is and the way it's always gonna be. I mean, someone has to be at the bottom of the pecking order so that others can feel good about themselves, right? What if the person being bullied is developmentally delayed, having emotional problems, suffers from depression already, or is having serious problems at home. Oh wait, we can't coddle them. Nope... not doing them any favors, the pansies, by making it stop.


Why don't we see what they have in mind first instead of pretending that it really isn't a problem. What's even more sad? You'd think that someone who focuses so much on education would know better. How very sad.

But, lets just pretend that nothing needs to be done. Maybe after a few more Columbines you, and the other uber-macho thugs, might come around to realizing that it can be a serious problem. In fact, you know what, I think it would be a good idea for students to be allowed to carry concealed weapons. THAT would certainly put an end to it, don't you think?

And, while I realize that it would take some serious thought on your part, it's not just boys. You are truly clueless, and seem quite happy being that way.

Anonymous said...

What is wrong with that? Plenty. Why don't we just issue all the boys pink panties in kindergarten and make them wear them for 12 years?

How very clever, but why don't we go for a little more substance? You ask the question, but you don't answer it. So I'll ask you directly: what is wrong with it Rob?

Anonymous said...

Anon 404,

There's also the implied misogyny in Rob's bit about pink panties. Wonderful.

Rob, perhaps there are problems with the bill, but instead of working to improve it, you attack it and dismiss it out of hand. And you use ugly, sexist language to boot.

Anonymous said...

Oh yeah.. but you know, they're tough guys. They probably don't even wear underwear - real men go commando.

That does raise a question - why are you glad that the law won't take effect until after your son graduates Rob? Would the law have been a problem for him?

Anonymous said...

Anon 3:54

I'm Anon 12:51 and I am a female.

I didn't have to be on the giving or the receiving end, which in your mind, might disqualify me from this discussion, but that's ok. I can still be frank. (no pun intended)

I do care about kids who are at each end of bullying. I also think there are extremes kids sometimes reach which can end very badly. It is almost impossible to be preventitive in such situations and schools already handle the situations at those extremes when possible. I wish more parents would step up, but that's out of our control and none of my business. However, laying the 'extremes' aside, most kids fall somewhere in the middle; a little push and shove, some offensive remarks, and that's all the farther it goes.

I think what Rob is trying to communicate is this; This policy is not going to protect anyone. What it's more likly to do, is catch kids in everyday push-shove situations and that are turned into a juvenile investigation based on a simple complaint. It's going to effect kids it shouldn't - probably your average boy; like Rob's son.

I think there are awful, selfish kids out there who don't care who they hurt. I personally know some one who was beat in school to the point of retardation. Do you really think a "district policy" is going to prevent that? He turned to a local charter school which shares alot of traits with Connections Academy and he's simply thriving.

I'm so thankful my husband has brothers. The only fight he was ever in was in the defense of a socially challenged buddy. He's able to defend who and what he wants to defend without fear of being punished for it. He can talk freely without fear of being punished for it. If we were living under the proposed policy it wouldn't feel American.

Ok Anon, I do want to know; What's your definition of Masculine?

I'll be back on Monday.

Anonymous said...

Yes.. I think I might help prevent it.. especially if they catch the bullying early. Again, lets see what the bill does, and how they address it. But assuming that nothing more can be done is defeatism. Maybe, just maybe, if bullies know it's gonna be a huge hassle, they might just lay off a little. I don't think we're talking about tempers flaring. We're talking about a more systematic and conscious set of actions. We have laws against all sorts of assault even though it continues to happen. Should we repeal those and just throw our hands in the air? I mean, really, have those laws EVER prevented assaults from happening in our entire history?

However, if Rob wants to discuss the issue seriously, then perhaps he needs to drop the condescending attitude - and not simply dismiss it with "Why don't we just issue all the boys pink panties in kindergarten and make them wear them for 12 years?" That just shows his complete contempt and lack of understanding about what some students have to go through. I would never, ever, allow any of my children to attend any charter school he was involved with. His lack of compassion and understanding should disqualify him from working with kids in an educational setting.

What is anti-American about defending people from others? We do it all the time. And we pass laws to do it.

Charley B said...

Rob,

Legislation such as an anti-bullying proposal could backfire. For one thing there are already solid laws in place to cover these concerns. Intimidation, harrassment, assault, and menacing laws (just to name a few), already exist.

Teachers need to take control of their school and their students, then work cooperatively with police when crimes are committed. Prompt reporting to police of such incidents will get the attention of those who engage in criminal behavior and will send a strong message to others.

School policy should dictate controls for poor behavior. Teachers should be the ones who intervene and solve problems when no actual crime has occurred. Overall, I think teachers do a really good job, but this legislation is not the answer.

Students identified as suspects and treated as criminals for calling names or similar behaviors will react as such, exasperating the problem.

Bullying is something that should never be tolerated, but a good strong school policy can solve this, if properly enforced.

Me said...

This bill isn't about bullying. It's a complete farce.

Asinine in fact.

It extends bullying to include every conceivable form of teasing.
I heard (D) Sara Gelser describe her Bill on Victoria Taft the other night.

Her rhetoric was as stupid as it gets.

Even surpassing the idiocy that preceded the 24/7 school zone bill that passed and was later repealed by a legislature with only slightly more brains.

As I heard one caller point out, Gelser has obviously never driven a minivan full of boys anywhere and heard their routine exchanges in the back seats.

I'm sorry but Sara is a fool.

Anonymous said...

A few things.

It's interesting that Rob links to the other items, but not to anything about the anti-bullying legislation, and he hasn't said what it is he has a problem with.

Is it the inclusion of psychological harassment that bothers you, Rob?

If that goes on "every 20 seconds" at your son's high school, I'd say the school has big problems.

David Appell said...

Rob: what exactly is your problem with a green building. Your appear to have no facts -- your reaction is strictly emotional.

We know the premium this building requires to build as green. But how much money will it save? When will it pay for itself? Is that too many years? Is it worth it?

You have none of these facts and yet you spout off anyway. Typical conservative anti-intellectualism.

Anonymous said...

9:33
Pardon nme while I bully you.

You're an nit wit, pure an simple.

Unable to disquinguish between nonsense and common sense.
This idiotic bully bill bans anything percieved as teasing.

David,
If I didn't know you were one of the most full of BS people around I wouldn't even respond to your nonsense.

But since you are one of the most misrepresenting and dishonest hacks around I'll set you straight.
The problem with the green building is who it is promoting it and their track record.

I'm sure Kremer has that front and center.

You on the other hand are acting oblivious as you always do.

In this case it's the city of Portland who prior adventures have not been good or honest.

Do you know what Green means around here?
It means the Portland Office of Sustainable Developemnt fabricating a study showing reduced CO2 emissions for the city. Emissions they never measured.

The problem with this green building is it's the city and other tax credits funding a large chunk of it.
There's no basis for the claims it will help do anything productive.

It's nothing but another symbolic farce that feeds the strictly emotional support for the leftist agenda that includes every loony policy riding the global warming fraud train you also ride.

After the taxes and credits used the savings are meaningless.

What's the point of having this Green center?

You have no facts David.
You simply support it because you feel it is a good idea while you are extraordinarily ignorant on the inept officials and track record around here.

Typical liberal lunacy.

Wondering said...

Anon 1157, anon 933 was just asking for specifics.

And, speaking of which, what language in the bill outlaws anything perceived as teasing?

Rob Kremer said...

David:
My problem with this so called "green" building is that the money it saves won't come close to paying for the extra cost of all the "green" systems.

They didn't give many specifics in the article, but I would give very high odds that the payback for what they propose is around 50 years. And that assumes their cost projections are correct, which they NEVER are.

Another ridiculous waste of money.

OregonGuy said...

The insanity is getting worse.

Take a look at my latest post and tell me what you think, please.
.

rogerisright said...

There are already plenty of rules against bullying in the schools. We have to STOP passing laws that restrict and micro manage every single human interaction that can occur between two people. Especially ones that are open to such a wide interpretation as this ridiculous steaming pile of crap. zLeave it to "anon" no doubt another SAMBLA loving "progressive" in his/her final stages of Liberal Disease to weigh in with a hefty dose of stupid. Besides we have seen how absurdly misused and over prosecuted the adult version of this anti bullying law has become ...you know the "domestic violence restraining order" laws?