Narrow Search

  • Show Only

  • Category

  • Narrow by Date

    • All
    • Today
    • Last 7 Days
    • Last 30 Days
    • Select a Date Range
    • From:

      To:


Re: “The Skinny

DHIM: Thanks for the correction on the year Steve K. first won the Ward 6 seat. I've fixed it. I miss Dan Huff, too.

7 likes, 4 dislikes
Posted by Nintz on 05/25/2017 at 9:12 AM

Re: “Noise Annoys

Not bad, it sounds like an attempt at early 90's hip-hop like Guru's Jazzmatazz

Posted by HumanBean on 05/25/2017 at 9:07 AM

Re: “Nearly Mythical

These advertisements masquerading as reviews are getting sad and tired.

How much were the meals you ate?

Mr. Wong has been helping to launch restaurant start ups in Tucson for 20 years? What restaurants?

You quote them as saying they source their food locally and in the same sentence she says she flew in Lobster from Maine? Where are they sourcing their food locally? What are they sourcing?

Is this an advertisement? A review? A fluff piece? It is definitely not journalism, I hope they paid you for the blow job.

5 likes, 6 dislikes
Posted by HumanBean on 05/25/2017 at 8:58 AM

Re: “Danehy

Thanks for another liberal rant, maybe next time we can have a non political, tired, Trump bashing column.

4 likes, 18 dislikes
Posted by Mark Robert Heywood on 05/25/2017 at 8:38 AM

Re: “The Skinny

Kozachik beat Nina Trasoff in 2009 not 2011. The third contest this year is in Ward 5, which the Weekly failed to even reference again in an article. Nintzel should get an F in his journalism class at the U of A for such errors.

9 likes, 4 dislikes
Posted by Dan Huff is Missed on 05/25/2017 at 7:28 AM

Re: “Crop Conundrum

"it's that they don't want to work, or at least work for us" -- raise wages. Improve working conditions, etc. You'll then find plenty of workers. Americans will work, but not in godawful conditions for slave wages.

If you give illegals a "path to citizenship" then they aren't going to want to work at the stinky chicken farm and you'll have to import another 12 million illegal aliens to work for your slave wages.

1 like, 5 dislikes
Posted by bslap on 05/25/2017 at 7:13 AM

Re: “The Skinny

What a bunch of clowns. Mariano Rodriguez is too busy to talk to the Tucson Weekly and doesn't call them back. Republican Party chairman David Eppihimer says Watson isn't a true "Republican" because he supported a sales tax hike to pay for cops, fire and road repair. So much for the large tent the republicans keep saying they have. I guess keeping Tucson shitty and cheap is more important than protecting its citizens. For some people I guess $3/month per person is too much for proper police and fire protection. But hey, if the bonds had passed last year all this would be moot.

9 likes, 6 dislikes
Posted by RobG on 05/25/2017 at 6:53 AM

Re: “Danehy

If they were it wouldn't match the hate and ignorance portrayed in the article. Is it not enough to realize Clinton is a flawed candidate? That's why they torpedoed Sanders.

Too bad Lent doesn't last longer.

4 likes, 22 dislikes
Posted by Foreign Affairs Genius on 05/25/2017 at 5:59 AM

Re: “Danehy

I'm sure the comments will be civil and well-reasoned.

8 likes, 0 dislikes
Posted by Gonzo Sorcrachi on 05/25/2017 at 5:38 AM

Re: “Because of Results-Based Funding, 15 to 17 Percent of Schools Will Get "A" Grades, Down From 30 Percent. Here's Why That's Important

Two different visions:

1. Ensuring that the worst teacher in the worst school in the worst school district has a full classroom.

2. Providing so many choices for so long that every full classroom is evidence of a world class teacher.

0 likes, 3 dislikes
Posted by jhuppent@hotmail.com on 05/24/2017 at 8:25 PM

Re: “Need Child Care So You Can Hang Onto Your Job? Don't Expect Help in Arizona

first thing first program will help with a scholarship for day care low as a 25 a week

Posted by Mildrene Moutry on 05/24/2017 at 8:13 PM

Re: “Need Child Care So You Can Hang Onto Your Job? Don't Expect Help in Arizona

first things first is a program that will help they have scholarship if you qualify

Posted by Mildrene Moutry on 05/24/2017 at 8:12 PM

Re: “What We Miss

My husband and I loved the Haunted Bookshop and miss it very much.

Posted by Gail Senkovich Daniels on 05/24/2017 at 3:13 PM

Re: “Because of Results-Based Funding, 15 to 17 Percent of Schools Will Get "A" Grades, Down From 30 Percent. Here's Why That's Important

If we are concerned about the generally dismal state of our System of Public Education, we would not hesitate to supports efforts at improvement. We cannot continue with our heads in the sand, and, under the shibboleth, local control of Education watch passively as our System of Public Education becomes, internationally, at best, Second Rate!! The viability of our Democracy and National Security are in jeopardy.

Given the wide classroom instructional heterogeneity within Public Schools/Districts, it is necessary to have some State objective measure so as to determine if Students are being taught properly and/or effectively learning the required body of information per Subject Area. This is the sole purpose of Standardized Assessment Examinations. AzMerit is such an Assessment Examination and will indicate the effectiveness of the Schools/Districts Academic Program, so that, if necessary, remedial action can be taken; so as to ensure Teacher/Administrator Academic Accountability.

4 likes, 3 dislikes
Posted by Francis Saitta on 05/24/2017 at 11:33 AM

Re: “Because of Results-Based Funding, 15 to 17 Percent of Schools Will Get "A" Grades, Down From 30 Percent. Here's Why That's Important

Marilyn Tucson:

What are you on?

The fact that you're calling liberals selfish is name calling.

Quit being a hypocrite.

7 likes, 8 dislikes
Posted by Tarilyn Mucson on 05/24/2017 at 11:20 AM

Re: “Because of Results-Based Funding, 15 to 17 Percent of Schools Will Get "A" Grades, Down From 30 Percent. Here's Why That's Important

Students have been exiting TUSD by the thousands for well over a decade, Betts Putnam-Hidalgo, not just during the Sanchez administration. The reason is because it has been, is being, and will be mismanaged. It has deeply imbedded problems with its middle management, its Board, and its institutional culture that seem to be reform-proof at this point. Talk to a few of the hapless former Superintendents (other than Sanchez) who tried to take the helm during the last decade some time and draw your own conclusions. When I have heard them, they've sounded a lot like another CEO of a Tucson public institution who has spoken honestly in public forums about the difficulties of trying to administer a massive underfunded public institution where the workers in the trenches are in shell shock over ongoing budget cuts and forced reorganizations and the long-term players within the bureaucracy have become accustomed to going their own way and ignoring the latest figure head installed atop the dysfunctional hierarchy.

Were you surprised when the new and improved Board majority filed, inappropriately, prematurely, for partial Unitary Status? I wasn't. All any of the elected leaders in this district seem to want is to get out from under court oversight so they can go their own way with initiatives that have nothing to do with the kind of social justice concerns at the heart of the desegregation case. They want to grant UHS a separate site with a co-located middle school, establish a Fruchthendler to Sabino direct-feed pipeline, etc. Why would those concerned with social justice want increased enrollment in this district, i.e. to add more students to experience inequitable conditions? What reason, based on the management of the desegregation case for the past 40 years and more, do you have to believe the district's way of responding to these concerns will ever change?

There are many families, who, with good reason, do not think it wise to entrust their children's "educations" to an institution with these kinds of entrenched problems. Should they be penalized financially by losing state support for their children's K-12 education when they decide to utilize well managed institutions that will deliver better education? Should the state be off the hook for providing support when families exit public districts or charters? That's what happens without vouchers or tax credits. Students leave the public district / charter system, and the state gets somewhere in the neighborhood of $5K savings per year on the cost of educating that child. Whom does that benefit? Children in public schools? No, not unless the financial disincentive of having to lose all state support for your child's K-12 education acts effectively to prevent families who want to exit the public system from exiting. If putting up financial obstacles to students leaving the public district and public charter systems is what is intended by anti-voucher advocacy, then there's no valid argument against the notion that anti-voucher campaigners "want to use the children of other families as economic hostages to the dubious goal of supposedly 'saving' troubled public school districts."

I'm sorry you find that offensive, but you have yet to provide a clear explanation of how exactly denying students attending certain (largely Roman Catholic) institutions any state support for their educations serves either the cause of social justice or the cause of delivering as excellent an education as possible to the young people in our communities, especially in a context where our largest local public school district is what it demonstrably and persistently is.

7 likes, 9 dislikes
Posted by Explain how eliminating vouchers serves social justice. on 05/24/2017 at 9:58 AM

Re: “Because of Results-Based Funding, 15 to 17 Percent of Schools Will Get "A" Grades, Down From 30 Percent. Here's Why That's Important

The left is getting very selfish. They neglect to tell you that even after the wealthy spend large amounts of tuition money to get their children in better schools, they still have to fund the masses that are stuck in the public school swirl. You can't discriminate based on income, if you want fairness. And hating the rich has never made them go away.

I guess all that you have left is name calling. Carry on.

7 likes, 10 dislikes
Posted by Marilyn Tucson on 05/24/2017 at 9:39 AM

Re: “Results-Based Funding Violates the Spirit (If Not the Letter) of Arizona's 1980 Funding Equalization Law

It's not like public school teachers are going to riot:

http://www.al.com/news/index.ssf/2017/05/classroom_fight_between_georgi.html

Don't try this at home, these are professionals.

3 likes, 10 dislikes
Posted by TUSD needs to rid itself of on 05/24/2017 at 9:27 AM

Re: “Because of Results-Based Funding, 15 to 17 Percent of Schools Will Get "A" Grades, Down From 30 Percent. Here's Why That's Important

Whenever the word "choice" comes out, buyer beware. That is not a choice for the many (the 80% that "choose" public education) but for the few (that have a good 1/2 or 3/4 of the tuition for their favorite private institution to begin with). Welfare for the rich, cloaked in the language of choice is what this administration has to offer. When previous Superintendent Sanchez championed the award the district received for offering the most "choice" some of us thought he was doing the same thing. Unfortunately the biggest "choice" that people utilized under his administration was to leave, en masse, for charters, especially at the middle school level. Despite the machinations he used to try to hide it, and despite the enrollment lies told by his biggest Board cheerleader during her campaign, this continued a tradition that has plagued TUSD for a long time. Now it will need to be resolved in a considerably more difficult educational landscape.

9 likes, 9 dislikes
Posted by Betts Putnam-Hidalgo on 05/24/2017 at 7:49 AM

Re: “Because of Results-Based Funding, 15 to 17 Percent of Schools Will Get "A" Grades, Down From 30 Percent. Here's Why That's Important

You are one long-winded fuck. Why is it every time that I decide against my better judgement to read your BS commentary that I read it anyway and Every time I Always regret that decision afterwards? I have figured out the answer. It is because you're a long-winded fuck!
WELFARE FOR THE RICH!!!
Yes, that's what the voucher system is All about. Maybe you don't get it because your head is buried in the sand. God Forbid that you want to actually help those in need, not those who already have access to private/Christian/Catholic schools because of their income.
It's definitely welfare for the rich, the rest of us will get the bone and no lube.

10 likes, 9 dislikes
Posted by You Are Simplistic on 05/24/2017 at 7:45 AM

© 2017 Tucson Weekly | 7225 Mona Lisa Rd. Ste. 125, Tucson AZ 85741 | (520) 797-4384 | Powered by Foundation