the senate voted to pass a bill that gives the governor the “emergency power” to fire the elected mayor, city council, or school board in any town in michigan and turn it over to a corporation to run the town. Or appoint a corporate…
They removed the “budget-repair” part. The reason the Democrats left the state to begin with is because Wisconsin’s upper chamber can’t pass any fiscal bills without 3/5 of the members present, according to Senate rules. With the Democrats missing, Republicans lacked that…
If we decide to disqualify every American politician who, in the past, has supported either a group or individual that used intimidation & murder for political means, we would probably have to hold most of these hearings in an empty room.
Let’s not forget that President Obama would have warmly welcomed Mubarak to the White House 90 days ago.
Have we learned nothing? Time to reread The Crucible.
Does anyone agree? How do you feel about Modern Art?
How do you feel when you walk into a Modern Art Exhibit?
I had the unfortunate experience of moving from what felt like quiet (but enjoyable) enjoyment of more “old” pieces (12th century to early 20th century or so), things that were not too Modern and then towards a Modern gallery that was all white, and very quiet. People seemed afraid to whisper or talk. I had stopped by the children’s section before moving to the Modern Art section, and suddenly, no one talked, or smiled! But some of the art was funny, and absurd - I wished other people had reacted.
I must say: it’s much harder for me to look at something painted by Van Gogh, or El Greco and assume I could replicate it than some Modern Artworks I’ve seen. But does that make it any less artistic to you?
I think that this should become an interesting call to modern art museums - why do we feel disconnected from modern art? Why do people disparage it as not “real” art? We could argue that people felt the same way about Impressionism and that has now entered “mainstream” but there still seems to be a disconnect between Modern & Contemporary Art and hoi polloi, even though Modern has really been around for some time (arguably late 19th C?)
At any rate, can museums change this? Can they make art more accessible? I know I was boggled by Yves Klein (see Anthropomorphie below and there’s further info here) but then I saw a film that showed him at his work, directing his models in poses, and I fell in love with it. So strange -but that humanizing made a connection between me and Klein (and his blue).
I think an enormous part of the problem has been the hermeticism of Modern art. In the early 20th century there was a big push towards abstraction as a form of spiritual and emotional purity, and then there were critics in the middle of the century like Clement Greenberg calling for truth to media (i.e. paint should represent nothing other than paint) continuing that same push for a purified form of art. The art discourse for a very long time has focused on formal qualities to the exclusion of the cultural circumstances that gave rise to works of art. For a good chunk of the 20th century, art was sanitized of its human connections in favor of appearances, and as a result, I think a lot of people have been alienated.
By insisting that any facility that performs 5 or more first trimester abortions a month be subject to the same structural requirements of hospitals.
17 clinics in one, fucking. day. 17 clinics. All part of the Targeted Regulation of Abortion Providers (T.R.A.P.) plan, to make abortions so impossible to get that they are de facto illegal for all but the richest Americans.
I can’t take all the credit for that, I saw a picture of a woman holding a sign that reads “Keep Your Boehner Away From My Planned Parenthood” rallying for PP back home in PDX on the Mercury’s blog (sister paper of The Stranger, btw, my Seattleite internet friend).
Teachers’ hefty salaries are driving up taxes, and they only work 9 or10 months a year! It’s time we put things in perspective and pay them for what they do - babysit!
We can get that for less than minimum wage.
That’s right. Let’s give them $3.00 an hour and only the hours they worked; not any of that silly planning time, or any time they spend before or after school. That would be $19.50 a day (7:45 to 3:00 PM with 45 min. off for lunch and plan— that equals 6 1/2 hours).
Each parent should pay $19.50 a day for these teachers to baby-sit their children. Now how many students do they teach in a day…maybe 30? So that’s $19.50 x 30 = $585.00 a day.
However, remember they only work 180 days a year!!! I am not going to pay them for any vacations.
That’s $585 X 180= $105,300
per year. (Hold on! My calculator needs new batteries).
What about those special
education teachers and the ones with Master’s degrees? Well, we could pay them minimum wage ($7.75), and just to be fair, round it off to $8.00 an
hour. That would be $8 X 6 1/2 hours X 30 children X 180 days = $280,800 per year.
Wait a minute — there’s
something wrong here! There sure is!
The average teacher’s salary
(nation wide) is $50,000. $50,000/180 days
= $277.77/per day/30
students=$9.25/6.5 hours = $1.42 per hour per student—a very inexpensive baby-sitter and they even EDUCATE your kids!) WHAT A DEAL!!!!
Make a teacher smile; repost this to show appreciation for all educators.
and this assuming that teachers make 50k a year. most people i know who are teachers make closer to 30k.
This has got to be the most idiotic math I have ever seen. Flat. Out. Idiotic. And it comes from one of the most troglodytic weltanschauungs out there as well- yeah, let’s treat the people educating our children like second-class citizens, no way do we need to pay for these leaches to make lesson plans. No where else in the First World are teachers treated with such contempt.
A law under consideration in South Dakota would expand the definition of “justifiable homicide” to include killings that are intended to prevent harm to a fetus—a move that could make it legal to kill doctors who perform abortions. The Republican-backed legislation, House Bill 1171, has passed out of committee on a nine-to-three party-line vote, and is expected to face a floor vote in the state’s GOP-dominated House of Representatives soon.
“The bill in South Dakota is an invitation to murder abortion providers.”
The bill, sponsored by state Rep. Phil Jensen, a committed foe of abortion rights, alters the state’s legal definition of justifiable homicide by adding language stating that a homicide is permissible if committed by a person “while resisting an attempt to harm” that person’s unborn child or the unborn child of that person’s spouse, partner, parent, or child. If the bill passes, it could in theory allow a woman’s father, mother, son, daughter, or husband to kill anyone who tried to provide that woman an abortion—even if she wanted one.
Jensen did not return calls to his home or his office requesting comment on the bill, which is cosponsored by 22 other state representatives and four state senators.
“The bill in South Dakota is an invitation to murder abortion providers,” says Vicki Saporta, the president of the National Abortion Federation, the professional association of abortion providers. Since 1993, eight doctors have been assassinated at the hands of anti-abortion extremists, and another 17 have been the victims of murder attempts. Some of the perpetrators of those crimes have tried to use the justifiable homicide defense at their trials. “This is not an abstract bill,” Saporta says. The measure could have major implications if a “misguided extremist invokes this ‘self-defense’ statute to justify the murder of a doctor, nurse or volunteer,” the South Dakota Campaign for Healthy Families warned in a message to supporters last week.
The original version of the bill did not include the language regarding the “unborn child”; it was pitched as a simple clarification of South Dakota’s justifiable homicide law. Last week, however, the bill was “hoghoused”—a term used in South Dakota for heavily amending legislation in committee—in a little-noticed hearing. A parade of right-wing groups—the Family Heritage Alliance, Concerned Women for America, the South Dakota branch of Phyllis Schlafly’s Eagle Forum, and a political action committee called Family Matters in South Dakota—all testified in favor of the amended version of the law.
Oh my god. Oh my god. This is absolutely terrifying. This is literally one of the most horrifying pieces of law I have heard of in the US.