Mr. Know-It-All

Members
  • Content count

    9,599
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

470 Excellent

About Mr. Know-It-All

  • Rank
    Booger Eatin' Moron
  • Birthday 08/12/1968

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://
  • ICQ
    0

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Ralston, NE
  • Interests
    Knowing Stuff

Recent Profile Visitors

13,524 profile views
  1. To play devil's advocate though, his argument was that his personal opinions have no bearing on his ability to perform his professional duties (which I tend to agree with). If he was fired because there was proof that his personal beliefs interfered with his ability to impartially do his job that is one thing - but if he was fired because it was a convenient diversionary tactic then it is a pretty bad deal.
  2. Hell yes. Not likely I will ever travel to Flint, let them eat cake.
  3. Yes - but the point being to give students a common ground you would want some common understanding of the core expectations on these nationalized tests which would be supplemented in the curriculum provided through local control.
  4. Probably not the demographic you are looking for, but I am somewhat conservative. I am all for local control of public education for the most part - but in the current climate where many universities require test scores from national tests (ACT/SAT) - then we are doing a disservice to our students by pretending that strictly local control will suffice. Now, the good news is that many universities are turning away from these tests and relying more on character, interviews, individual assessment, etc. In a global economy, there needs to be a broader focus than just what is deemed appropriate regionally if we hope to equip our future generations to compete. Part of me WANTS to support vouchers, but at the end of the day using something other than public education is a choice that bears with it a financial consequence. Just because you want your child to get a better education than what is provided through local schools does not mean that your decision should be funded at the expense of marginalized students.
  5. Yes, prof at UN-Omaha - but has done yeoman work on several statewide committees in addition to the great work he is doing on the local board.
  6. I serve on a local school board with the first openly transgender elected official in the state of Nebraska*. However, in a conservative state like Nebraska, the only way he got elected was through the qualified write in process as this state is not exactly progressive and he won with 25 votes. There were 3 sears up for election (two 4 year seats, and one 2 year seat due to a retirement). 8 candidates filed for the two 4 years seats and none filed for the 2 year seat. Realizing this, the local party had this person file as a qualified write in. The 8 person race for the two seats wound up like 6,500/4,000/3,980 - so the third place finisher didn't win a seat despite almost 4,000 votes and this candidate ran unopposed as a qualified write in and got the third seat with 25 votes. Savvy in this climate, but we are grateful to have his voice on the board. Smart dude with a passion for education. Here's hoping by the time he has to run again next year, that people will now be able to judge him on his experience and passion - as opposed to voting against him for the bigoted icky factor. * have not verified that fact, but that was what was reported when he was elected last year.
  7. Pick 12 is where I have the most "luck". Three years ago everything went wrong and I wound up with the #1 pick. Having the #1 pick I won the championship which meant LAST year I had the #12 pick - well I won it again last year meaning this year I have the #12 again. Why 12? In our league in the first 7 rounds you have to pick one each of QB/RB/WR-TE/K,DL/LB/DB so you cannot get your #2 at any position until round 8. By having Pick 12 you get the first pick in round 8 - which I think is FAR more critical than the first pick in Round 1.
  8. When there was a hue and cry for voter id, the response was "where is the proof that ANY voter fraud is happening". Sure it can be stipulated that voter fraud could be occurring in a myriad of ways and frankly voter fraud through misrepresentation with a little bit of risk would be extremely easy to accomplish. But there is no proof that it is occurring so those against voter identification claim that without proof there is no need to possibly disenfranchise certain classes of voters. Flash forward to the specter of Russian election meddling and those same people lose the need for burden of proof. Simply because the Russian hackers had the ability meddle, then it had to have occurred and the election results are tainted. In both cases, using the same standard, it would be wise to protect our election process from potential threats before they occur - not waiting for evidence after they occurred to attempt to unexplode the bomb. That can't always happen so we need to attempt to make things right when we do find issues after the fact (hence the probe into the collusion). Why are we falling for the shell game in either case? It sure feels like I should be losing faith in our election process.
  9. I just read the entire transcript of Putin and Trump's remarks. I was expecting the entire transcript to be an "abject humiliation" of the United States based on comments I have read to this point on this forum and in the media. Frankly, the only smoking gun I saw was the lines around who do you trust your military intelligence or Mr. Putin. The rest of the entire transcript sounded more like Trump attempting to be diplomatic and Putin speaking from a position of apparent power. Based on that transcript alone I would not characterize this as an abject humiliation, nor do I see it being the darkest hour in US history. Add in the tweets and comments President Trump has made leading up to the meeting and I can see where it would paint a much darker picture. Frankly I do not trust the Russians - but much of that is born out of growing up during the Cold War and having an innate sense of distrust for Russian government. It just seems to me that a large group of people had written the narrative for how this meeting would go down - and regardless of what was said there would be no going back from that narrative. This HAD to be the darkest day for US diplomacy with Russia because that is what was prescribed. Don't take this to mean that I think Trump is an incredible statesman or that he somehow "won" in this encounter. I just don't see how at this point this has been made out to be the epic disaster that his opposition was hoping for. Maybe I am missing something contextually. Maybe the fallout from this meeting will sway my opinion much more negatively - but from what I have seen so far it was pretty soft, not substantive, all around.
  10. Jesus I hope you are wrong on 3, 4, 5. 1, 2 I am not too hung up on - especially #2 if it means withdrawing troops that are serving the military industrial complex NOT the sovereignity of the United States. And #1 is a given.
  11. I am somewhat conservative - 1. I want federal government to handle those things required to be handled by the federal government - those things needed to sustain the conglomerate of individual states in a rational balance. 2. I want local government to handle those things that are unique to their local populace. 3. I want the legislative branch to write laws that are good for the population, modify laws as warranted when situations change. 4. I want the executive branch to enforce said laws. 5. I want the judicial branch to adjudicate, not legislate. 6. I want our military to support and defend the constitution of the United States of America, not become a surrogate of the military-industrial complex. 7. I want education to be controlled at the local level, but with input from the federal government where necessary to ensure all students have access to the quality education and students from across the country are on an even playing field when it comes to assessment. 8. I want taxation to be representative of what we need to contribute to overall necessary expenses to maintain and advance our society - not boondoggles for political favor or lining the pockets of the oligarchy or corporate citizens. To that I don't want corporations viewed as citizens. 9. I want term limits at every level of government. 10. I want fair immigration laws - fair to those seeking citizenship as well as protections for current citizens as merited. 11. I would LOVE to eliminate the infiltration of special interest control of our government. 12. I want Chicago Cubs and New York Yankees to be disbanded and all records stricken from the record books.
  12. Agreed and it is just further testament to how EVERYTHING is politicized and no one can do anything without offending or bringing on the righteous indignation of anyone who disagrees with them. Dems announce cure for cancer, Reps demonize them for making oncologists children starve. Reps end world hunger, Dems demonize them because the food used to end world hunger is not tasty enough.
  13. A persons private political views should not be an impediment to doing their job. The whole "We'll make sure he doesn't get elected" tweet, could easily be read that we (the democrat voters) will not allow that to happen as opposed to the nefarious we (the members of an investigative team) will do illegal things to make sure this does not happen. So to me that whole line of questioning was a non-starter. That said, I wonder what the democrats will say when Kavanaugh shows up to his confirmation hearings wearing his I HEART PRESIDENT TRUMP t-shirt and shows off his I HATE ROE V WADE membership card. Surely his personal biases should not be held against him as a jurist because everyone knows that you set aside personal biases when executing your professional responsibilities.
  14. Nebraska is overwhelmingly conservative, however of the few large metropolitan areas they are split and in some cases liberal. The town I live in is becoming more liberal leaning due in part to shifting demographics - lower average income, higher incidence of free/reduced lunch (which is indicative of the lower average income), falling real estate values and a majority of commercial property under TIF. This place would be foolish to vote Republican in the current state of affairs.
  15. So, did Trump name Kavanaugh knowing that he would be shot down - and Trump is holding even more conservative judges in his hand to play when Kavanaugh is eliminated...or did he really feel Kavanaugh was the best pick and named him based on that? Always wonder what gamesmanship is being worked.