PDJT has been acquitted for life of the bogus House
article of impeachment.
In the past Lex had equated the Demo-Dopes to Wile E.
Coyote. That’s a pretty accurate picture
of how things have worked out for the Dopes tilting at PDJT. It always blows up in their faces.
Mark Steyn has another apt comparison. Steyn compares Dopes to Yosemite Sam. You know the high strung mustachioed cartoon character
most often depicted as a cowboy or miner.
Sam’s antagonist was Bugs Bunny.
Sam’s last lament when the dynamite he planted under Bug Bunny’s feet
ends up going off in Sam’s pants is, “Dad blame rabbit.” So now Dopes, who just
had their collective hats handed to them on impeachment by PDJT, are stammering
again and again, “Dad blame Trump!”
For impeachment we can go with Wile E. Coyote being
played by Schitffy Schiff and Yosemite Sam being played by Fat Jerry
Nadler. Two F-ing losers are being
bested time and again by PDJT.
Speaking of losers, how about Pete Derelict-O, AKA
Willard Mittens Romney. Isn’t it always
one of our guys turning turn coat when the going gets tough. Pete Derelict-O is
a petty sore loser. He’s a rotten
weasel. Mittens is a bigger double D-bag
than any of the Dopes.
The entire thing was political, Pete. As such it should have been disposed of in a
political way. Mitt you are a coward and
a loser. You couldn’t finish off Barry O
when you had him on the ropes, instead you folded like a piece of colored paper
at an origami convention. Weak and
stupid is not a good look, Mittens, but sadly that’s you. I’d still vote for your sorry cowardly azz
against just about any Dope though. I’d
just consider it a vote against any communist.
So it ain't saying much.
Today's JG Rant
Mark Beck’s letter “Pay is just one way teachers are
devalued” of January 25, 2020 is cautionary tale for young people. Someone once told me young people have to
make two of the most consequential decisions of their lives early in their
lives when they are least prepared to make them – choosing a career and
choosing a life partner.
When choosing a career the two big questions are, do
I follow my heart and do what I love or follow the bucks and make a good
living.
In 1978 I left a high wage union job for a career in
the Marine Corps. When filed my first
income tax as a second lieutenant, I discovered that I’d have been a bit better
off if I’d stayed with the union. But
the union job wouldn’t have me traveling cross country doing exciting things
with highly motivated and skilled people in every clime and place. I was doing something I thought was
worthwhile, important and satisfying. In the Marine Corps, I liked what I was
doing. In the union job, I liked the
money. So I stayed in the Marine Corps
for 20 years.
Today the average second lieutenant earns a base of
pay of about $38,256. For that sum
America gets an educated highly trained individual sworn to support the
constitution, ready to leave their home and family for world-wide deployment at
an instant, required to maintain a healthy height weight ratio, subject to
mandatory drug and physical fitness testing, required to maintain thousands of
dollars of uniforms, subject to civil justice as well justice under the UCMJ
and willing to risk life and limb engaging in serious and deadly combat at the
behest of their government. All of those
conditions exist 24/7 365, not just nine months out of the year
7am-4:30pm. That’s not a bad deal for
American taxpayers.
Now I’m pretty sure if lieutenants, like most
seasonal workers, found themselves with three months off every year, they’d go
about finding ways to supplement their income with other work rather than
begging Uncle Sam to pay them for not working for three months.
Teaching is a tough job. I know.
I tried it. I couldn’t do
it. The very best teachers like the very
best Marines aren’t in it for the money. As Gunny H once put it when a Marine
complained about pay, “Well, if you joined the Marine Corps for the money, you
fouled up.”
Saturday, January 25, 2020 1:00 am
Letters
Pay is just one way
teachers are devalued
In 1976, as a
first-year teacher whose own child was entering school, and for a few years
thereafter, my child qualified for reduced-price lunches based upon my meager
salary in an Indiana public school. I also had significant repayments of
student loans. We got by, partly by my taking on 17 years of half-time,
year-round outside employment, which also detracted from giving full attention
to my chosen profession.
Reading “Signs of
struggle” about free and reduced-priced school lunches (Jan. 19) prompted me to
look at the current salaries in the northern Indiana school district where I
began my career. If I were to do it all over again, as a beginning teacher with
a spouse and one child on the 2019-20 salary in that same district, I would
earn $37,000. The income to qualify for reduced-price lunches for a
household of three is $38,443 or less, so my child would still qualify for reduced-price
lunches – probably for several years.
Indiana expects, as it
should, teachers to educate students to the highest standards while denying the
financial benefits of professional achievement to our teachers and their own
children. Indiana legislators and governors past and present have talked about
improving schools by helping teachers and improving salaries – nothing but
promises, empty and delayed, at least for the past 44 years.
We need bright,
multitalented individuals to take on the diverse challenges of teaching, but as
a state and culture, through low salaries, social and political attacks on the
profession, and continued erosion of public school funding by privatization, we
do little to incentivize talented young people to consider the profession. As a
state, we need to reevaluate our priorities and take action to improve public
schools by respecting teaching as a profession and teachers as skilled
professionals.
Mark Beck
Fort Wayne
No comments:
Post a Comment