So our 'MS in CURRICULUM etc.' thinks studying nothing but reading and math all day is a waste of time. If he knew his beans, he would know that the best public schools in the history of public education in this country - the one-room rural school - followed exactly that curriculum. Although the 'reading and math' took place under various course titles, believe me, we either read or calculated from 9 to 4. The result, 'MS', is measurable in the tests given to draftees in WWII (remember that one? it has dropped out of the 'currculum' in most cases), which demonstrated (they called them IQ tests, but we knew and know that they were achievement tests in fact) a 20 point plus differential from the rural midwestern - i.e. one room school - states as against the draftees from the urban areas. Put that in your statistical analyses and smoke it, unless you are (probably) smoking something else.
By the way, our one room school spelling bees taught us how to spell 'foreign'. You should have had that experience. My email is email@example.com.
Nintz ... I wrote the following to the Esquire editors after that leaky article:
'Chris Jones’ May comment on ‘outside leak’ was astonishingly parallel to a passage from Icelander Halldor Laxness’ Nobel Prize winning novel, ‘Independent People’.
Bjartur, the farmhand, who has managed to purchase a part of the farm where he had been working, walks with his dog over the land:
“Standing on the highest point of the knoll, like a Viking pioneer who has found his high-seat posts, he looked about him, then made water, first to the north in the direction of the mountain, then to the east, towards the marshy tracts and the lake and the river flowing smoothly from the lake through the marshes; then towards the moors in the south, where the Blue Mountains, still coated with snow, closed the horizon in meditation. And the sun shone from a cloudless sky.
“... “This land is mine now,” he said.”
The 'outside leak' is a much more universal feeling than non-land-owners can possibly appreciate! It’s wonderful of Jones to discover it anew.'
3229 East Seneca
Tucson, AZ 85716
There are two documented urinations in public by Kozachik. First is when he peed on his Republican supporters when he first endorsed a D against a credible R, and second is when he not only failed to apologize for taking R support under obviously false credentials but then became a D openly in an attempt to have a shot at re-election. Hope the Ds put up a good candidate in his primary - he'll see that Ds vote for a loyal D rather than a turncoat.
So peeing in public is really a habit with him, isn't it.
(By the way, some months ago Esquire ran a brief article on the joys of peeing outdoors. It's a time-honored satisfaction that, practiced discreetly, satisfies greatly, spreads nourishment properly and saves waste treatment facilities. The worst thing about the phoney Kozachik story is to have him use a WALL as the recipient of his largesse. What a waste.)
The mayor keeps tossing the 250-400 number around. Let's see. The sequester reduces budgets by 2 percent, but half of that is DOD, so only 1 percent is for the rest of the bureaucracy. If 250-400 represents 1 percent of the Section 8 occupants, that means we have between 25000 and 40000 people in Section 8 housing. WOW! Right or wrong, Mr. Mayor? If wrong, how many do we have in TOTO, and don't you really believe that 250-400 of the present users just might be phonying their status just a bit??????
More could be said about John Scott's lasting contributions to this community. He was instrumental in founding the Tucson Business Coalition in the early 90s, which has morphed into the Tucson Small Business Committee, an influential arm of Mayor and Council for a couple of decades. His coverage of local elections brings up to the minute returns and candidates comments on election night. And, although his general purview is political, he has been remarkably even handed in giving voice to all comers. In a sense, John Scott is Tucson's Bill O'Reilly!
Michael, I read this after posting comments on Danehy's column and Gibson's editor notes. You might check them out!
Mr. Gibson, you might check my comment on Tom Danehy's piece. One thing you seem to require of writers for the weekly is that they include plenty of ad hominem arguments when mentioning policies of conservatives or Republicans. That is your style, and I find it less than satisfying, although it is a common aspect of writing for the 'alternative' newspapers. I wonder what the Weekly would look like if it treated its 'opposition' as if they were sincere believers in their positions and were people who actually had intellects that suggested their positions are intended for the best for the country (city, state, county, etc.).
All Comments »
Tucson Weekly |
3280 E. Hemisphere Loop, Suite 180, Tucson AZ 85706 |
P.O. Box 27087, Tucson AZ 85726-7087 |
(520) 294-1200 |
Powered by Foundation